DSP, greens and Greens

["Steve Painter and Rose McCann" <spainter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Nick wrote:
>>Maybe mistakes were made in interventions in the environment campaigns and
Green electoral movements, and of course by 1992 the Greens decided, for
better or worse, to become a fully fledged national party proscribing
socialist tendencies, as opposed to the DSP's proposal for a broad
left-green electoral front.>>

The Greens didn't proscribe socialist tendencies, they proscribed membership
of other parties, and in my opinion that's pretty reasonable. If you want to
be a member of the Greens, you can't be a member of the Democrats, ALP,
Liberals, DSP etc. Most parties have a rule like that, and I think if any
other party tried to intervene in the DSP the way the DSP was intervening in
the Greens in 1992, the DSP's action would be swift and summary.

At the historical seminar that I, Bob Gould and others, organised earlier
this year, a former member of the DSP provided some recollections of that
time. By 1992 this comrade was a prominent member of the Greens. Nick
presents one perspective on events surrounding the formation of the Greens.
Here is another one, the view of a left activist very familiar with the DSP
and at the time a potential ally in the emerging Green movement.

In my opinion it shows how the DSP's preoccupation with establishing
organisational hegemony alienated potential allies and isolated the DSP, a
pattern that has been repeated many times.

Steve Painter

"I joined Resistance and the Socialist Workers Party in 1984 whilst at the
University of Tasmania.  In 1986 I attended the party school in Sydney,
after which I accepted a posting to Newcastle where my first   task was to
depose the incumbent Resistance organiser, Skye O.  It was typical of the
party leadership that a posting to a new city was accompanied with a
'special mission' to deal with alleged wayward cadre   ...

"In Easter 1986, whilst the SWP was principally focussed on the New Left
Conference, a smaller number of activists attended the Getting Together
Conference that involved Greens, Democrats and other independent left and
alternative activists.  Post-Nuclear Disarmament Party split (of Easter
1995), there was a significant amount of tension about the involvement of
the SWP and the variety of vested interests participating ensured that there
was no ongoing organisation flowing from the conference.  However, some
informal contacts were strengthened between green/left activist and issues
of movement versus organisation were clarified for some people.

"In particular, the Sydney-based organisation that took out the political
party registration of The Greens in 1984 was still seeking to broaden the
use of the registration and the Green agenda.  This organisation, whose
leading members included Tony Harris, Hall Greenland, Paul Fitzgerald, Danny
Bessel, Daphne Gollan and Ken Matthews was informed by old Trotskyism
(handed down by Nick Origlass and Issy Wyner), community activism, the
German Greens' experience and contemporary 'ecological thought'.

"I was involved in the Newcastle NDP, possibly the most active NDP branch
subsequent to the hoo-haa of the split. Rob Woods was elected to the Senate
in 1987 with significant preferences from The (Sydney) Greens, who has stood
Ian Cohen.  However, Rob Woods was disqualified from the Senate some months
later when it was discovered that he held a British passport, and turmoil
ensued when Irina Dunn, number two on the NDP ticket, took the opportunity
to assume the seat.  Whilst I saw this in the Newcastle NDP as an
opportunity to discuss issues around representation, democracy and
accountability, I believe that the SWP leadership saw an opportunity to
wreck the NDP as a viable focus for independent/green/left political
organisation, which could rival the SWP.  As a result of my inevitable
run-in with the SWP leadership, I moved to Sydney and gradually withdrew
from party activity and resigned in 1989.

"Later in 1989, the Sydney Greens launched a process to develop a broad
ticket for the Federal election due in 1990.  Called the 'NSW Green
Alliance', it was advertised widely around NSW and drew in hundreds of
independent, community and Green activists, many not previously involved in
electoral politics.  There was a strong tendency to avoid admitting that
what was being organised was a 'political party' and there was suspicion
from Conservation Foundation and Wilderness Society leaderships who had
projects involving influencing the ALP and/or the Democrats and feared an
organisation built on participatory democracy and hence not easily
controlled.

"The first couple of Green Alliance conferences drew several hundred people
and were very exhilarating.  Organisational principles were developed from
scratch.  The Sydney Greens premised the Alliance on agreement with the 4
principles of Green politics - taken from the German Greens: Ecological
Sustainability; Grassroots Democracy; Social and Economic Justice; Peace and
Non-Violence.

"These four principles were developed in workshops to produce policy.
Decision-making required consensus, or at least nobody to 'block'.
Eventually, a modified consensus procedure was taken on board that allowed a
proposal to pass on a vote of 75 per cent in favour, if it was a decision
that couldn't be deferred.

"Once the personalities, organisation and polices began to take shape, some
people stopped participating because the Alliance did not go in the
direction of their personal preference.  Still, there were hundreds of
activists involved.

"The SWP had a small number of members involved with the Green Alliance.
Whilst the Alliance encompassed many activists from a broad range of
organisations, the SWP involvement was tolerated, although many people, some
with NDP or CPA experience, regarded them suspiciously.

"The alliance decided to stand a ticket of six for the Senate election, and
local groups were encouraged to organise in their local area and stand
candidates for House of Representatives seats.

"Local groups, if sufficiently organised, were encouraged to take out
registration as a separate Green party, which gave them a legal share in
ownership of the name and a high degree of autonomy in their methods of
organising.  The apparent plethora of Green parties gave rise to the
(mostly) journalistic misconception that the Green political movement was
hopelessly fractured, when in fact the organisation that was developing was
intentionally a federation of autonomous local parties where the principle
of subsidiarity (decisions should be taken at the lowest practical level)
was in practice.

"Groups with a viable active base were formed along the North Coast of NSW,
one in the Illawarra, the Central Coast, and several in regions of Sydney.

"In a few areas, where, with their superior national communications, the SWP
were ahead of the game, the local Green group was largely set up by the SWP,
such as Newcastle.  This meant that independent and community activists
stayed away (many came on board once the SWP had gone), but fortunately,
such groups did not achieve registration (with the exception of the Western
Suburbs Greens and Victorian Green Alliance).  South Sydney Greens,
initiated by SWP, joined up some good independents and evolved away from SWP
domination.  The lack of an attempt to register a SWP dominated Newcastle
Greens at this time must have been partly due to the obvious fact, for all
concerned, that no independents were involved and the SWP's possible
schematic conception was that the local group was a 'branch' of the NSW
Alliance-Party.

"It must have been around 1990 that the SWP changed its name to the
"Democratic Socialist Party", despite an objection letter from Labor Senator
Chris Schatt.  Glasnost and Perestroika were in full swing in the Soviet
Union and reformation and possible revitalisation on the Left seemed a
possibility.

"Western Australia Greens formed at this time, principally from the merger
of four existing activist organisations, including one of which anti-nuclear
Senator Jo Valentine was a member.  Registration of the Brisbane Greens had
taken place in 1984, of an anarchist-leaning group - this organisation now
broadened to become the Queensland Greens.  The Tasmanian Greens already
existed with years of campaigning dating back to 1972 ... South Australia
lagged in development of a Green political organisation, perhaps due to the
strength of the Australian Democrats there.  A small sectarian organisation
of which Bob Lamb was a key member received registration there, but were
ineffective and somewhat inactive.  Victoria and the ACT were also slow to
develop, perhaps due to the strength of the Labor Left.

"Rob Woods and Irina Dunn, participants up to this point, declined the
opportunity to nominate for the NSW Green ALliance ticket, believing
(wrongly, as it turned out) that they would have a better chance in their
own rump organisations.  Jane Beckman, DSP Newcastle branch organiser, was
nominated, along with about 14 others.  The selection process involved two
voting stages.  Firstly, a vote (counted by single transferable vote) to
elect six; then a second stage to determine the order of the ticket, with
the main focus on the potentially electable top position.  The second stage
was conducted as a preferential vote, with nominees filling the ticket from
the bottom in the order that they were excluded from the count.

"In a misjudged moment, the 30-or-so DSP members present all voted for
Beckman in the first round, giving her the highest primary vote and giving
rise to a lot of concern that she would take the top position on the ticket.
The method of election in the second round meant that the top position would
go to a candidate acceptable to a majority of participants, when the DSP
participation was probably between 10-20 per cent.  However, Beckman had to
publicly say that she would decline the top position in order to assuage
some of the anxiety pervading this process.

"Hall Greenland pulled out of the selection process, finding it all too
unprincipled.  For some others, the sheer shock of not getting many votes
from the activist ranks was enough for them to take their bat and ball and
go home.  The ticket was finally decided, with largely unknown Illawarra
activist Steve Brigham filling the top position.  Beckman was number five or
six.

"Once campaigning got under way, the DSP gave tremendous support, as they
traditionally did in grassroots campaigns.  In some electorates, SWP
candidates stood -- but not usually where there was a Green candidate.  The
DSP approach to coalition campaigning was to support them strongly in the
interests of (a) gaining the respect of leading activists; and (b) bringing
into politics new people who were possible recruits to the Party or
Resistance.

"Electoral funding meant that if a campaign achieved 4 per cent of the vote,
the group would get funding back for all their expenses - which most groups
did, although the Senate did not, from memory.

"In the afterglow of the 1990 election, people turned their thoughts to
better structuring of the organisation, upcoming state elections and a
policy development process that was less constrained by time.  There was
also support for some sort of national structure which could promote the
Green political agenda with the national media and promulgate national
policies.

"The Tasmanians, some Western Australians and others were involved in some
closed-door discussions with a view to developing a blueprint for a national
organisation.  The initiators of this process were keen to exclude, or
proscribe, the DSP.  The second issue in these discussions was the degree of
centralisation/decentralisation in the proposed organisation.  The process
was not open and even.  However, it did seem to have some momentum.

"As the Greens organisation developed into more of a party and less of an
alliance or coalition, the continued presence of the DSP became more
problematic.  Could a DSP member genuinely serve as an office-bearer or
candidate for The Greens?  Of those remaining actively involved, more began
to think not.  At this time, the DSP changed the name of its weekly
newspaper from "Direct Action" to "Green Left" and let it be known that they
were prepared to "dissolve" their organisation and work through the Greens
as their primary political vehicle.

"It is not clear to me how bona fide the intention to dissolve was.  Jim
Percy had a concept of joining 'the swamp' and then, over time, 'draining
the swamp'.  It seemed quite reckless to gamble with the name of their
newspaper in the way they did.  To gamble with the organisation seemed hard
to believe.  There would have been some society or other organisational
structure remaining that would influence ex-DSP members' activities, I am
sure.

"The thought of the DSP dissolving was chilling for many independent
activists.  Our fledgling organisation would have been crippled by an
organised faction within it, when the independents involved still enjoyed
the mix of ideas in a free-thinking atmosphere, relatively free of
favouritism and factional loyalties.

"With pressure to exclude the DSP coming from some key figures, mostly from
other states, a delegated national meeting was held at the Sydney Earth
Exchange in mid-1991 to discuss a possible national organisation.  Agreement
with proscription of other political parties was a prerequisite for
attendance, although some DSP turned up anyway.  Whilst being an
excruciating meeting, held in a hot, noisy room, the main outcome was that
further national meetings would require participating organisations to
implement proscription.

"Shortly afterwards was the infamous NSW Greens 'stack, where 12 DSP members
turned up at a regular administrative meeting (when one or two, at best,
might usually attend)  and proceeded to decide organisational changes to
their benefit, including shoring up their access to The Greens registration.

'Ownership of the NSW Greens turned on the colour of the Registered Officer,
the person recognised by the Electoral Act as the party representative able
to endorse candidates.  Previously, an election for RO had been tied, so it
was held jointly between Murray Addison and Paul Fitzgerald.  Addison, I
believe, was a secret member of the DSP at this point.  When the stack was
played out and Addison revealed his allegiance, the non-DSP wrote to the
Electoral Commission requesting that Addison be removed as RO since he
served another party which was acting destructively.  After a week or two of
uncertainty, Addison was removed.  We abandoned the non-delegated Green
Alliance meetings to the DSP, which now had no relationship to a registered
Green Party name and expanded the role of the Registrations Committee, which
was comprised of a delegate from each (mainly registered) local party.  We
took the next Registrations Committee meeting to Lismore where the emergency
actions taken to defeat the DSP were endorsed.  The DSP wasn't prepared to
travel and we were more-or-less free of the DSP at a stroke.  Local groups
which had not adopted prescription of members of other political parties now
did so.  Only in a couple of groups where the DSP was present was there
tension.  In Sydney Greens, with Pat Brewer and a couple of fellow
travellers present, a 75 per cent in favour of proscription was not
achieved, so Paul Fitzgerald, myself and a few others walked out and formed
the Inner West Greens (on the night of the Russian Coup).

"It was surprising easy to get the DSP out of the Greens.  It was said after
the Central America solidarity and NDP splits that the DSP/SWP didn't split,
they just sat, like cuckoos - and the independents would get frustrated and
walk out.  Well, thanks partly to the interminable decision-making process
(and the decentralised/delegated structures) it was the DSP's patience that
ran out first in the Greens case ...  I can also imagine that the DSP
perceived no gains being made through their involvement with the Greens and
it was time to 'get out of the tent and piss in'. It cost the Greens some
members whilst the 'fight' was going on, but many came back once it was
over.

"Having resolved the DSP issue at the NSW level, where the DSP penetration
was greatest, we now had to negotiate with the national process for an
organisation that was decentralised, with only specific, limited powers give
to the center; for stronger accountability of representatives; and for
membership to remain at the local level.  The "Australian Greens"
constitution that was eventually agreed had to have a couple of clauses that
specifically applied or did not apply to the NSW party ...

"The Australian Greens structure was very limited in scope and power.
However, the DSP chose to make this the major stick to beat us with,
continually fulminating in Green Left about the 'National Greens'.
'National Greens' was a term that we didn't use and it was very clear to me
that this was a term cooked up in the DSP HQ to colour perceptions of The
Greens ...

"Green Parties related to the Australian Greens presented the Australian
Electoral Commission with a view that only parties within its structure
should be recognised as being 'related parties' for the purposes of
registration ... The DSP-dominated registered Green parties were eventually
deregistered when they couldn't supply a list of 200 names for their
'network'.

"Once The Greens were a distinct organisation from the DSP, I saw no reason
why there couldn't be joint campaigning based on mutual organisational
respect.  However, perhaps the objectives of both organisations would not be
advanced much by such a relationship.  The DSP now saw The Greens as
political rivals and sought to damn with faint praise, if not outright
hostility.

"The Greens have gone on to achieving representation in dozens of councils
and parliaments.  The two WA Senators demonstrated their heroic
effectiveness in amending the 1995 federal budget.  There is no argument
these days that The Greens are a political party, though perhaps more
factional or cliquey than   in the early days.  The challenge remains to
impart the principles developed in the early, heady days to a  new
generation of activists."


~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.