to just over 2,000 over that period) and - since the loss of membership seems to be heaviest amongst independents - in its plurality.
This is a serious problem. By the time it had existed for six months Respect had reached a membership figure of 5,000 and a target was set of 10,000. Since then the membership has declined, particularly over the past year.
Of course membership figures are not tne only criterla by which to judge the development of an organisation Ilke kespect - votes ana mobilisations are other obvious examples. But membership is pretty important, and if an organisation cannot win new members in the wake of two years of dranatic electoral success, when is it likely to do so? The weakness of the Respect office is a factor in this, but in the end the growth or decline of an organisation like Respect is a political issue.
Yet far from using the conference to discuss this sharp contradiction - between electoral success and membership decline - and work out how to tackle it, a carefully worded formula was found which gave the impression that the membership had gone up. The conference was in denial.
George Galloway in his opening speech claimed that everything was going great and that Respect had just recruited 10,000 students! Respect was he said "the fastest growing party Anti-war movement is still strong: but Respect is not recruiting large numbers from it. Britain". John Rees insisted that Respect was "bigger this year than last year".
It was smoke and mirrors. But there is a logic to it. If there is no problem no solution is needed and things can go on as before.
The Respect Party Platform (RPP), which Socialist Resistance supports, sought to draw attention of the conference to the decline in membership and discuss what was behind it.
We argued that the loose coalition model for Respect, so strongly defended by the SWP and George Galloway was at the root of the problem and that Respect needed to be organised properly as a party if it was to be successful.
Loose coalitions are normally Lemporary allanceWhy would people join such a coalition, what of their political activity?
George Galloway's disastrous appearance on Celebrity Big Brother no doubt lost Respect a lot of members but it was not the root cause of the problem.
Democracy is crucial in regenerating Respect, since there is a big section of the lett, particularly in unions, which should be in Respect but will not join because they do not see a democratic space inside in which they could function.
Some think that it is too dominated by the SWP or that George Galloway is unaccountable or both. To bring them InTO membership Respect has to be seen to be democratic at every level of its functioning.
The conference did adopt a new accountability clause fo1 elected representatives but only time will tell if George Galloway will function in this newiamework
The Respect trade union conference is a very good initiative to strengthen the links between and the trade union lett - but unless those who are impressed by the debates also feel that there is a space for them inside Respect then they will not
In the same vein the conference was right to support the John McDonnell campaign as a way of standing four-square with the Labour left in their fight against the Brownites. But unless conditions are would it offer them in terms right inside Respect it will not result in an influx of new members from the abour left.
Strong local branches are crucial to the development of Respect. The election strategy adopted - of selecting a small number of electoral targets and putting big resources into them - is effective in beating the first-past-the-post system, but it leaves a lot of branches, where there are no campaigns, out 1n the cold, under resourced, and out of touch with the organisation as a whole.
The RPP supported various resolutions that sought to strengthen and build Respect.
page 15 of the scan
We supported the call for the launching of a Respect newspaper which would provide a much needed enhanced national profile for the organIsanon, give extra resource the branches, help with recruitment, and get the message across more effectively.
We also supported the 20member resolution calling for the establishment of a delegate based National Council. This would help to reconnect the branches to the leading bodies by involving them more directly in the decisionmaking processes. It would also reconnect the leading bodies to the work of the branches.
The same resolution also proposed the introduction of an STV system of voting for elections at conference. This would get rid of the slate system - long been perceived as an unchallengeable bulldozer - and make Kespect look more attractive and democratic to those considering joining.
These proposals did not pretend to resolve all the problems of Respect but they would have been a step in the rignt alrechon.
The SWP were strongly against these resolutions and they were both lost. The proposal for a newspaper got about a third of the conference, the proposal for a delegate based National Council a lot less.
Voting these down, however, simply leaves the problems of Respect unresolved. It leaves a situation where there is a question Mark over Respect's longer-term future as a pluralist party.
The conference saw a number of very good debates on issue ranging from the trade unions, students and education, the public sector, the NHS and the environment.
But the way Respect is perceived by the bulk of the left outside its ranks is a serious problem.
It would be a disaster for the left and the workers' movement if Respect fails, since there is no other broad organisation of the left registering on the radar screen in England.
The fragments of the Socialist Alliance the Socialist Alliance and the Democratic Socialist Alliance are going nowhere.
The so-called 'Campaign for a New Workers Party' is simply a propaganda campaign by the Socialist Party and proposes an even looser and more federal structure for a future party than the SWP model for Respect.
The initiative from the RMT organised conference to launch a shop stewards network has its trade union LCrIS but it avoids the burning issue of working class political representanon.
The fight therefore has to continue to win Respect away from its current course of development and to develop towards being a piuransl party with a transparent and democratic structure along the lines of the SSP Scotland and similar parties in other parts of Europe.
This is not easy, since the SWP, this year even more the dominant force involved, is entrenched mus methods and in the limited way it sees Respect: but the fight has to be waged if Respect is to face up to the challenge facing it. time for a course Tami Peterson Alan Thornett's article (opposite) concludes with the argument that "The fight therefore has to continue to win Respect away from its current course of development and to develop towards being a pluralist party with a transparent and democratic structure along the lines of the SSP in Scotland and similar parties in other parts of Europe.
This is all well and good and would be a valid point if the article hadn't also spelled out the current disastrous state of the organisation.
While giving election figures from May to support his argument that there is something good in the broad sense about Respect, he fails to provide any substantial evidence that Respect is not in terminal decline as a project of the left.
In fact, the article is filled with examples of precisely why Respect is an utter failure. Membership figures have been skewed so that its own conference would think that numbers have gone up and not down.
Dissenting voices were shut down rapidly in the conference once again and the entire proceedings were dominated by the undemocratic functioning of the majority of its delegates who have been given a "line" to follow and dutifully bashed the dissenters. This is not how a healthy workers' movement functions.
The left in Britain has a proud tradition, dating back to the early pre-trade union societies of simple things like accountability, loyalty and majority rule based on democratic votes. Respect fails to live up to this tradition by having refused a motion that proposes the basic democratic concept of STV as opposed to change of voting on "slates" vetted by the self-appointed leadership.
Is it any wonder that the trade unions and class-conscious militants have avoided Respect like the rotting corpse that it is? They get enough of this rubbish from their own bureaucracies without needing "leaders" to tell them what to do within what is supposed to be their own organisation!
Luckily, most trade unionists have learned these lessons. Unfortunately the majority of Socialist Resistance's supporters and others who have put their all of their proverbial Alan is right in saying a left party in Britain doesn't exist, but in reality this includes Galloway: asset or liability? political eggs in the Respect basket have failed to do so, despite the fact that they are being taught daily - and what better teacher than Mr. Galloway.
He has shown time and again his disdain for being held accountable at any level. "Celebrity Big Brother" was the most dramatic in a line of personal decisions having a direct effect on the membership in which members had no democratic control over the man who was supposed to be publicly representing their organisation.
He appeared and continues to appear in interviews and on platforms making politically damaging statements - from his implied support for Blair's assassination to proclaiming Hassan Nusrallah a great leader of the people. His blatant sexism is evident in his numerous allusions to his insatiable sexual appetite and his relaying to the Guardian that his favourite things about Cuba include its "beautiful
He's already announced he is not standing again in Tower
amlets but tacitly supported
umour that he'd run in Scotla against an indicted Tommy Sheridan (another example of what happens when a leader puts himself above the organisation).
These are not the actions of a genuine working class leader These are the actions of a selfserving opportunist who cloaks himself in the language of the left and parasitically sucks the blood of the movement in order o promote himself in the for
book deals and T appearances. This is a man who would rather attend a commercial book promotion than be in the Commons voting on the vitally important question of time limits for detention.
Perhaps the most telling point Alan makes is regarding the decline in the membership of Respect. At a time when New Labour and Blair's popularity has plummeted to its lowest level ever, Respect has failed to capitalise on this.
For example in Tower Hamlets, Respect's main stronghold, over half of the membership has left the organisation since the last AGM.
Alan dismissively claims that all other initiatives besides Respect are of little relevance. Left initiatives for broader coalitions are "propaganda" and ironically the shop stewards movement doesn't deal with "working class political representation"!
Alan is right in saying a left party in Britain doesn't exist, but in reality this includes Respect.
It is not a party. It doesn't function as a party and gives no signs of doing so. Every indication is that it is in terminal decline.
SR should recognize this fact and get involved in the organic movements on the ground. It should make a turn away from Respect and towards positive initiatives on the left that are moving ahead like the John McDonnell campaign, Public Service Not Private Profit, the newly formed Shop Stewards' Movement and the mass movement around cuts in the
Any new organisation that will truly offer an alternative to New Labour will come out of these initiatives because it will be based in the class. Socialists in Britain need to fight for a new organisation by being in tune with what is happening.
It's time to make a change.