A tremendous fillip to the fight against the proposed amendments to +he rules of the Labour Party which would make ‘association with proscribed organisations! a crime punishable by expulsion was given by the action of five members of the N.&.C. in writing to the Guardian denounazing the move. We produce the text of the lettor below and ask all readers of the Bulletin to use this letter and the article by Dick Crossman to the full in the fight against this Mcirthyite move. Of course, the arguments of the five (or for that matter those of Crossman) are not a clear analysis, we should make that in our statements, but the action by the five will greatly facilitate our campaign, ospecially by making it easy to gain allies. The text reads:
"We agree with Dick Crossman's article in the "Guardian" of July 27th on the latest disciplinary diktat in the Labour Party, but we do not think he has ful oxplained the motivation which, consciously or subconsciously, lies behind it. Such an explanation is not simple, because the action represents a diametric roversal of the attitudes of threo years ago. it the 1959 party conference Hugh Gaitskell himself spoke of the damage inflicted on the party's roputation by some Labour councils who are guilty of "excessively rigid standing orders, or, more gonorally, of apparently arbitrary and intolerant behaviour." Why, thon, the backsliding into a similar rigidity and intolerance and on a larger scale? Why a constitutional amendment which is far more sweeping and far more offensive to libertarians than is necossary to offset the alleged danger tc the party? Dick Crossmand gives part of the answer, namely a desire to close a constitutional ‘loophole which prevented tho cxpulsion of Lord Russell, John Collins, and Lady Wootton. But that is not alls these three aroused the disciplinarians! ire not nerely by escaping the block but by daring to argue with the executionor.
"The powors given by tho new amendment are therefore designed not merely to discipline the heretic (the existing powors already provide for that) but to make the disciplinary act so nearly automatic that the victim will have littlo or no opportunity to defend himsolf. They are, in fact, designed not merely to punish the dissentiont but also to silence him. Fortunately, however, the final decision rests with the party conference,
Yours etc. Barbara Castle, Tom Driborg, Anthony Greenwood, Jonnie Lee, Ian Mikardo. liore facts come to light about Bast Islington
Tho scandal of the iiast Islington Constituency Labour Party in keeping pooplo cut of the Labour Party by refusing to accept their transfer which was exposed by tho New Statesamn is no new thing. Lottors recoived by that journal fron members, former members and would-be members of jinst Islington C.L.P. bring to light a vory unsavoury stato of affairs. Pat Haynes says that the Party is a typical oxample of the type criticisod in the Pamphlet Mechanics of Victory, one whore "yeeeelocal oligarchies do not like the idea of an incroased mombership diluting their hold over the local machine." Ian Norrie rsminds us of the business in 1958 "when the party pundits there declined to accept a number of would-be nenbers because they were supporters of C.N.D." he goes on to explain that it was only after Anthony Greenwood intorvened and the matter was brought before the N.C. that some of them got in. @ric Flotcher, tho membor for tast Islington, had refused to intorfere. Ernest Millington relates how when he had newly arrived in Jiast Islington during tho Gonoral lection campaign he wont to the Party cffico and offercd his sorvices, he received the enquiry "Are you a menber of C.N.D.? If so wo don't want you here"
Tribune in an cditorial on the question refors to troatment received by Gus MacDonald, a Young socialist from Glasgow and a formor monber of the Glasyow i3eGey Who was told that his application to transfor had not beon accoptod. Tho word mnovtings are so poorly attendod that all throes aro held on the sano night. Tho income from party subscriptions for the yeor 1961 was undor £71 which is a paid up memborship of less than 250 - in a constitucney with a 4,500 Labour majority ond alnost 100% Labour representation on the council!! In this constituency which so rigidly intorpretes scme of thy rulos, both the chairman and the treasurer live outside the constituency in flagrant violation of the rules, Tho political consequences of such a set-up aro shown in the fact that whon at the last G.M.co. it was suggosted that a vote of congratulations bo sent to ric Flotchor on his fight in defence of Carmen Bryan (the West Indian girl who was to be de ported), the idea was angriliy voted down. Wo are informed that many trade union branches who have attompted to affiliate have been prevented from doing so by the simplo oxpedient of the Party secrctary not replying to the application. Here, in our opinion, lics the solution, These trado union branches should insist on thoir rights, and if nocessary enlist tho support of thoir national organisation. von big-time burcaucrats will insist on getting the value of their affiliation fees and will no doubt be very angry with their small time roplicas in ast Islington.