[page 8]
Harry MacShane is a veteran of Red Clydeside and was a shop steward at Weirs of Cathcart in the days of the Clyde Workers* Committee. In 1920, he became closely associated with John MacLean and one of the group of agitators around Maclean who became known as the "Tramps" Trust Unlimited.
In 1922, while MacLean was in prison, Harry MaeShane joined the newit founded British Communist Party and later became a central leader of the National Unemployed Workers' Movement under its direction.
After a series of disagreements with the Communist Party leadership, he resigned in 1953 together with a group of other militants including Matt MeGuins.
Since that time he has remained active as an independent militant in the socialist and trade union movement He is Honorary president of the Jok MacLean Society and a delegate to Glasgow Trades Council
ALAN FREEMAN
Alan Freeman: To what extent has the demand for Home Rule figured in the history of the Scottish Labour Movement? Harry MacShane: It has always been part of the working class tradition until recent years, Long before the Labour Party was formed, Dr. G.B. Clark, who was associated for a short period with Karl Marx and the International Workingmen's Association. was the Crofters' MP for Cuithness and he moved a Scottish Home Rulc Bill.
Keir Hardie was one of the founders, along with Cunningham- Greene and others, of the Scottish Labour Party and later on of the national Labour Party. They were always in favour of a Scottish Parliament. And in 1924, George Buchanan of the ILP. who would never have done anything against Labour Party policy, moved a Bill in favour of a Scottish Parliument.
It was always a principle. If one looks at Forward, which was probably the best Labour paper that Scotland ever had, one finds that right the way through, Tom Johnston advocated Scottish self-government.
AF: John MacLean went further than this and pur forward the call for a Scottish Workers' Republic. And this has led people like the SNP to lay claim to come sort of inheritance from MacLean. How do you react to this? HM: Well, the claim of the SNP is a fraudulent one. Only the other day they were making it clear that they are all for the monarchy. They are looking forward to the Queen's visit and to the Jubilee. They are not against the Kingdom; they are just against unity with England some of them anyway? They want Fngland to have a separate parliament and the same relation to the Queen that they have!
John Mact can advocated a Scottish Workers" Republic: and in circumstances that don't hold today.
First of all, he was concerned about the leadership that was developing in the British Communist Party. He thought that they were opportunist in some respects, and lacked an understinding of a revolutionary situation. On top of that, he had arcady had some trouble with one of the contact nen with Glasgow, Theodore Rothstein, and he fell out with them. He had left the executive of the British Socialist Party (ESP) which was one of the main bodies that made up the Communist Party: (this was why the secretary of the BSP became the first secretary of the Communist Party Albert Inkpin). That was one thing.
The other thing was that the Clyde workers had made history. He was opposed to heir fillure to come out in their opposton to the war; he was opposed to Gallacher because he believed his somersault on this question was not a genuine one.
He thought that the workers, being more advanced in Scotland, could give a lead to the whole country. Therefore, he advocated 1 move forward, a move in advance of the rest of the country, to a Scottish Workers' Republic.
Prior to that, there had been an article in The Vanguard by Erskine of Marr. He was a descendant of one of the old families of Scotland, and he had written on primitive communism in Scotland - Celtic Communism.
John Maclean was very influenced by this; when he issued the first leaflet calling for a Communist Republic, which was printed in 1920, it included the words Back to Communism, Forward to Communism'. He thought that the Communist idea was deeply embedded in the Scottish tradition.
Also, he had been inovled in the struggle about Ireland. Ireland was about to get a Republic - it had not got it yet - and be protested against the military being used against the Irish: in particular, he was against the use of Scottish troops, the Black and Tans.
He thought that the appeal for a Scottish Workers' Republic could advance the revolutionary movement. AF: Do you think that the slogan for a Workers" Republic was a correct one with some relevance for today? HM: I don't think that it's relevant now, quite frankly. I think that John's instincts were good, that the working class in Scotland was in advance of the English working class.
I'm not convinced that this is true today. I think what has happened now to a great extent is that the kind of leadership that has been thrown up is an opportunist leadership. It's mainly composed of the Communist Party people who have prevented struggle, who have damped down the struggle, and intend to keep damping it down in the future.
I think that the grip the CP has on the Shop Stewards and other elements has a lot to do with the backwardness, or rather the comparative backwardness, of the Scottish movement at the present moment. AF: What do you think of the present debate about the Government Devolution Bill and the defeat of the Guillotine motion? HM: I can't complain about the Guillotine motion very much because I wanted to see the thing finished with. The Bill was holding up a whole lot of vital questions connected with the crisis. I understund ticy had spent forty days in debate: they didn't have much hope of getting any contentious amendments through, and i don't soc anything very much wrong with the idea of cutting down the debate to try and get the Bill through. i think that was the important thing.
[page 9]
AF: Many of the left-wing MPs were instrumental in blocking the Bill by abstaining or voting against on the Guillotine; how do you think socialists today should relate to the proposal for a Scottish Assembly? HM: First of all, I think that the Left MPs were those in England not those in Scotland. Most of the MPs in Scotland were busy trying to get on to a bandwagon which had to a large extent been created by the SNP.
The Labour Party has changed its tune considerably in recent years; 1 think we must remember that. When Willic Ross was Secretary of State for Scotland, at every Labour Party Scottish Conference he went all out against the SNP. But he never discussed nationalism; he only saw a rival party- And this led him to oppose the principle of a Scottish Assembly. I'm sure that's how the vast majority of Labour Party members in Scotland felt about it. That's why they applunded him. He was the man who first christened the SNP "Tartan Tories.
As far as the left MPs are concerned, I would say that one or two of them have always been in favour of Scottish selfgovernment. This is particularly true of Norman Buchan. As long as 1 can remember, he has had a sort of feeling towards the idea of a Scottish Assembly -a Scottish parliament as he then called it. 1 remember Norman Buchan in the Communist Party and even in those days he had a bias of that kind. I recall, for example, when I was working for the Daily Worker, there was a John MacLean gathering in the City Halls, organised mainly by the Communist Party, at which Hugh MeDiarmid spoke among others.
The meeting went on beyond my deadline with the result that it could not be reported in full on the Monday. I sent it down but it didn't appear until the Tuesday and then it had small coverage: to them it was stale news.
Irecall 1 had adeputation from Norman Buchan and Hamish Henderson. They played merry hell with me; they said I was responsible for the lack of coverage. They were both very keen on it and they were quite right to criticise.
I was not to blame entirely. I recall saying to them I had sent down everything 1 could by five o'clock but there were some things I could not speculate on before they happened. They were getting quite nasty with me, but I said quite frankly that I could not speculate on the effect of a pipe band at a Communist Party meeting! AF: What do you think of the argument that the Assembly will not bring socialism any closer? Does the Assembly have any relevance for Socialists? HM: I think that it is quite true: I don't think that any assembly or parliament can give you socialism. I think that it depends on the masses to get socialism. I think, however, that the principle of the Assembly is quite sound, If the Scottish people want it then they must be quite entitled to get it. That is really the meuning of sclf-determination, though self-determination should not be seen as equivalent to the narrow nationalism expounded by the SNP. AF: What's wrong with the SNP's kind of nationalism? And how can it be defeated? HM: I think it has to be defeated on the grounds that they have no policy of any kind that meets the demands of the proletariat. Just the other night, I heard one of them advocating some sort of representation on boards, profit-sharing and things like that. It just shows how confused they are. They are still at the level of the old pre-1914 Liberals. And they are just putting that stuff forward — it's completely bankrupt and they really have no idea of what to do - in order to try and make out they can meet the demands of the working class.
They claim to have some Scottish Nationalist Trade Unionists just a handful but they are about as dumb as their leaders. They haven't the slightest idea of what the working class requires, or of its historical role or anything like that. AF: The argument of the English "left' MPs was that, by attempting to grant an Assembly, the Labour Party was making concessions to the SNP. They thought this would encourage the growth of the SNP at the expense of the Labour Party. HM: Well, look what's happening now the Assembly's been blocked. According to the poll in the Sunday Mail, the Labour Party are going to lose damn near all their scats. I don't think that's altogether correct: I don't think that it's a real reflection. But that's what they say today and the Labour Party is in a mess because of it.
Up until now Callaghan could claim that he represented the only party which could bring about the Assembly. But many of the Labour MPs voted against the Guillotine; and this is something that has cut right across and, to some extent, destr-yed that claim. Although all the Scottish MPs except Dayell and this clown from Fife - Hamilton - voted for it.
But the thing is it'srather a peculiar thing - parliamentary procedure is more important than the principle. And because the Bill has been defeated on this, they say it is dead; that it can and should be defeated. And, of course, it quite probably is dead.
It all shows the inadequacy of parliament on anything. Parliament is in a process of decay anyway. It is discredited to a great extent. It's unfortunate, I think, that this sort of parliamentary procedure has stopped an important measure from being adopted.