Workers of all countries, unite!

Introduction

Comrades, It is my privilege to move the main political resolution which is, through our Congress, being further strengthened by the inclusion of many of the amendments derived from the collective discussions in the districts and branches of our Party. Unlike the Tory Party, where its delegates to National Conference make no decisions, or the Labour Party Conference where the clique around the leadership openly states that it will not abide by any decisions of Conference it doesn't support, our Congress is a sovereign body whose decisions are binding on one and all.

What is remarkable in relation to the Labour Party is that most of its members accept that its Conference decisions can be flouted.

They and the leaders like Blair all pay lip service to democracy, to majority rule, yet they accept in practice autocracy. Collective leadership is subordinated to the whim of the leader and his clique.

As for the Tory rank and file, who also claim to be democrats, whilst they grumble they generally accept that they have no right to actually decide policy at all.

Policy is something that is dished up to them, or to be more accurate down to them, from on high. Sometimes it tastes all right and at others it tastes foul. That is the case at present so the Tory Party membership is shrinking, its financial support is shaky, and its electoral supporters have abandoned it in droves.

One of the things which makes our party a party of a new type is precisely that our Congress decisions are binding on one and all, and the leadership elected from our Congress is responsible and accountable for carrying out the Congress decisions.

In the pre-Congress discussion one or two comrades questioned our attitude to the Labour Party and our call to get the Tory government out and work for the return of a majority Labour government. But no amendment or resolution suggesting a change in our electoral policy, determined at past congresses and reaffirmed in the present Congress resolution, has been tabled.

It is logical to claim that as a collective we are united around our electoral strategy which is itself an integral part of our overall strategy for working class unity. We see that as part of a process in which the working class will close ranks around its vanguard party of Marxism-Leninism to end capitalism by socialist revolution so as to establish its own state machine and move forward to construct a socialist society.

Indeed we see the call for "a general election now" to be a uniting call that can bring the participants campaigning against various Government policies together in an effective movement. This would not only help to bring down the Government but ensure a Labour government is elected under pressure to respond to the popular demands the labour and progressive movement is campaigning for.

Of fundamental importance in resisting the Government and employers' offensive is the developing working class struggle for jobs, increased wages, the shorter working week and improved working conditions. Every expression of this should be met with solidarity and emulation by others.

The Post Office workers in Scotland, the Car workers in Ford and Vauxhall plants, the Fire Fighters in Liverpool, the bank employees in London and the South East are, or have been, in struggle and playing a crucial role in advancing the interests of themselves and the working class as a whole.

The Post Office workers in Scotland defied the law in taking so-called unofficial action and won important concessions. Mass action against, and in spite of, repressive legislation is also to be welcomed and supported.

Our electoral policy arises from our strategy for working class unity. That takes into account the historic development and organised structure of the British labour movement. It is an endeavour to find a way forward in which the working class unites and closes ranks around its vanguard party of Marxism-Leninism to achieve its emancipation by revolution and socialism.

Let no-one think that we have any illusions about Tony Blair. He has, he is, and he will continue to do, his damnedest to betray the interests of the working class. Anyone intent on perpetuating capitalism has no option but to do that, and that goes for anyone who wishes to restore capitalism as well. They too will betray the working class.

When leaders in the communist and labour movement manoeuvre to betray the working class they invariably claim to be modernising political theory. The central pivot in that process is the denial of the reality of the class struggle.

This is logical because when leaders in the communist and workers' movement betray the working class they seek an accommodation with the capitalist class on a national and international scale.

In the modernised political theory of these traitors, enmity and confrontation is out. Peace, harmony, full employment and prosperity can all be achieved if the working class abandons the core values of socialism.

Social ownership has to give way to privatisation. The idea that working class state power is necessary or desirable is denied. The idea that working class power is basic to socialism is brushed aside. Usually in social democratic circles it is not even referred to.

A new buzz-word appears to allay the misgivings of the faithful, to cover up by deception the treachery of those leaders intent on accommodating themselves and the labour movement to the task of perpetuating or restoring capitalism.

Today's buzz-word is PARTNERSHIP.

For class conscious workers the imperialists are the enemy. Not so, said Gorbachov, that's old thinking. In the modern world the imperialists are our partners and we share the responsibility of achieving a better world. In adopting a foreign policy based upon that false premise Gorbachov and the imperialists succeeded in dismantling the Soviet Union and destroying socialism in Eastern Europe. The disintegration of Comecon and the Warsaw Pact, the annexation of the German Democratic Republic, the division of Czechoslovakia and the fragmentation of Yugoslavia have followed.

The imperialists have strengthened Nato, their war alliance. ?'hey are extending its membership to countries of Eastern Europe which were formerly Russia's allies. The imperialists are claiming the right to deploy weaponry up to the very frontiers of Russia itself. They fear a restoration of socialism in what was the Soviet Union; they are therefore preparing for new wars of intervention. Part of that preparation is being enacted as the imperialists impose their will to fragment Yugoslavia.

As long as the Soviet Union existed imperialism was willing to tolerate Yugoslavia Even though Yugoslavia was in the socialist camp it was outside the Soviet bloc.

With the destruction of the Soviet Union what was tolerable for imperialism became intolerable. The imperialist powers were united in their efforts to break up Yugoslavia.

German and US imperialism played the major political role in planning the break-up of that country by the exploitation of narrow nationalism. It constitutes a foretaste for the territory that once constituted the USSR. In the absence of a strong socialist ideology there's no guarantee that imperialism' s use of narrow nationalism won' t yield dividends in the short term.

We can be proud that the New Worker has given excellent coverage of this issue. Information in depth and sharp political analysis around a consistent anti-imperialist position. In contrast to the general media over here which, in being consistently anti-Serbian, served the interests of imperialism as it sought to fragment that country.

The Labour movement and Left has been in disarray over this issue but generally it has played a shameful role with Robin Cook, Labour's Shadow Foreign Secretary and some others on the left, advocating bombing. The honourable exceptions include Tony Benn, Alice Mahon, Tom Dalyell, and a small number of Left MPs who helped initiate and support a Committee for Peace in the Balkans.

The Nato bombing offensive involved hundreds of sorties with virtually no protest from the peace and labour movement. In spite of all the pressure on the Serbs, the Peace Treaty, which has been cobbled together to serve the interests of imperialism, will fail to be durable.

The fact that Nato, under United States' leadership, is to deploy a 60,000-strong army of occupation to police and impose the unjust settlement, will not stabilise the situation.

Other plans for imperialist aggression are being enacted. In October the British Government announced the setting up of a new strike force of 8000 men. Mr. Portillo said in Parliament, "A joint rapid deployment force will provide us with an important tool in meeting the demands of a volatile world". Portillo made it clear that the new force would undertake a broad spectrum of missions as part of the national response to a crisis or as a part of a new international coalition. He estimated there would be a great demand in future for operations to be mounted swiftly.

In November joint British/French military measures were agreed. The prime reason for these is not to offset the influence of German imperialism but to advance preparations for military intervention if and when the current instability in capitalist Russia gives way to a socialist revolution.

The recent election result in Poland, where in spite of the backing of the Church, Lech Walesa lost his presidential post, reflects the growing realisation that the people's prosperity cannot be fulfilled by capitalism.

That is the real significance of the Polish Presidential election. The fact that Walesa has been replaced by a social democrat with a right wing policy need not dismay us. Similar developments may well happen elsewhere including in the pending Russian Presidential election. This is a transitory phenomenon. Mass and decisive support for real communist leadership will emerge from the struggle.

Our Congress salutes the communist parties, governments and peoples, of People's China, Cuba, Democratic Korea, Vietnam and Laos. These countries of socialism, or socialist orientation have successfully withstood the counter-revolutionary offensive. They continue to constitute a rallying point for progressive humanity and are an inspiration for all true communists.

Our Congress salutes the genuine communists, socialists and patriots of the former Soviet Union who today are striving to restore socialism by organising and returning to the tried and tested political theories of Marxism-Leninism.

Their voice will be increasingly heeded by the working class and people generally who fell for, Gorbachov’s social partnership as gullibly as the British Labour movement has momentarily fallen for Tony Blair's.

Our Congress solutes genuine communists in all countries who have bravely upheld the principles of Marxism-Leninism we live by. The international Communist Movement lives and its influence will grow in the context of equipping and serving the working class in the common struggle to defeat imperialism and eliminate capitalism.

The counter-revolution in what was the Soviet Union has been a serious setback to the working class throughout the world including here in Britain.

It helped to facilitate the capitalist offensive here that has seen the nationalised sector privatised, the trade unions shackled by oppressive legislation, the powers of elected representatives and local government reduced, comprehensive education dismantled in the chaos of financial cuts and inducements for schools to withdraw from the main fabric of the educational system. All that with the chopping and changing of school syllabuses, loss of teachers jobs and increased work load generally.

As for the Health Service, it is similarly in the process of being destroyed with 245 hospitals closed since 1990 and a further 86 hospitals to be shut in the current period.

And what about the labour movement? The counter-revolution led by Gorbachov working hand-in-glove with the imperialists put the final nail in the coffin of the Communist Party of Great Britain. The long years of revisionist leadership paving the way for that Party's eventual liquidation.

Tony Blair was elected leader of the Labour Party by a membership stampeded into supporting him by a concerted publicity campaign through the capitalist media. The ruling class recognised Blair to be, as Mrs. Thatcher once said of Gorbachov, a person they can do business with.

What did they expect him to do? What did they mobilise for him to deliver? First of all, the further weakening of the link between the trade unions and the Labour Party. Part of the strategy of the capitalist class is to break that link. As long as it exists the capitalist class feels it has something to fear from a Labour government, even a right wing Labour government.

Secondly, the formal abandonment of socialist values as contained in the previous Clause 4 of the Labour Party Constitution. That clause highlighted the need for social ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange. That's old thinking, said Tony Blair and his cohorts. We need a new Clause 4 that's fine on words and short on substance. We want to win the next election but we don' t want to implement any great policy changes to that of the present government. In any case, we shan't renationalise what has been privatised, nor will we renounce all the anti-trade union legislation.

All that is part of the partnership the Blair leadership is seeking with big business. It is an exercise of accommodation with the capitalist class by agreeing to terms that suit the capitalist class.

Blair wants the working class to be very much the junior partners, with the subordinate role to big business. Like all right-wing social democrats, Blair thinks it is the working class who should make the sacrifices in times of capitalist crisis. So he fauns on the exploiters and pledges their property and profits will be guaranteed by New Labour.

The membership of the Labour Party and trade unions has with some reluctance gone along with Blair's vision of the future. Full employment, social peace and the ending of the crisis of capitalism by social partnership. The vision is in fact a mirage. Its the ideological counterpart of statues drinking milk.

Blair knows it, Brown knows it, and Prestcott knows it, but as long as it deceives the faithful for the time being, the partnership ploy serves its purpose. Its as cynical as that.

For the ruling class efforts to realise maximum profit remain paramount. Privatisation was partly embarked upon to provide fresh areas for private capital to find an outlet for profitable return.

They are also looking to attract inward investment, lured by Britain having a low wage economy with minimal social wage provision, a docile labour force working long hours with the principle of free collective bargaining ended to an increasing extent and the pursuit of national pay claims being replaced by local pay bargaining which they know enhances the influence of the employers.

This scenario is projected by the Tory government as the promotion of enterprise Britain.

Yet the crisis intensifies and the Government gets more and more discredited. The economy is again moving into recession. A Political pundit in The Times described it as a period of post-recession stagnation. Efforts to talk the economy up have failed. The feel-good factor remains elusive. Little green shoots are no longer referred to.

As for the export-led boom, Britain's trade gap leapt as its exports to European Union countries dropped by 7 per cent and its exports to the United States fell by 12 per cent in September.

The building industry is in deep recession. The employers' predict over 100,000 more jobs will go over the next two years. In the engineering industry and before the recent stark statistics, the employers were predicting increased production of 4 per cent next year. In the same report they announced that the work force would fall by 20,000. No one seriously thinks there is a basis for a 4 per cent increase in production, so job losses for the industry might well rise above the 20,000 predicted.

From the steel industry come words of cold comfort. The next recession will be milder than the last downturn since the industry has already shed a lot of capacity.

As a direct result of financial cuts in education 9,000 teachers have lost their jobs this year. No wonder there is a spate of propaganda to Persuade us that large classes are desirable and aren't a handicap to teaching or learning after all. As for the Budget, its overall effect will be to push up food and transport prices and local government taxation and consign many more local government employees to the unemployed pool.

The Tory Party facing an electoral catastrophe sees only two ways of winning support. Demagogy and repression. Harsh laws, longer prison sentences and a wave of the Union Jack in what they call Enterprise Britain.

Their problem is that the bluster doesn't ring true. It doesn't accord with the experience of the working class, which of course includes the so-called middle strata that up to recently could be relied upon to vote Tory and was a factor for the political stability of capitalism.

Privatisation stands exposed as a scandal, a con trick giving massive profits and huge dividends to the narrow band of private investors whilst providing poorer services and higher bills for the customers, huge redundancy programmes for the workers, low investment, asset stripping, still bigger dividends to shareholders, and then fresh mergers and more of the same. The Government's figures on unemployment are simply lies that defy belief as is their claim that the economy is in a state of recovery and the Health Service and Education are improving.

Of course, there is nothing new in Tory Government lying, what is new is that the lies are recognised and cause offence. Large swathes of the electorate feel insulted as well as insecure, hence the loss of Tory Party membership and the anti-Tory vote in elections.

But what of Labour's vision of the future. How can it sustain any credibility if it is only going to tinker with the problems. Partnership with the capitalists to do what? A by partisan policy on foreign affairs to serve the interests of imperialism. A one-off wealth tax instead of a progressive income tax policy that hammers the rich. Regulation which is a poor substitute for public ownership. A national minimum wage certainly less than E4.15 an hour suggested by the trade unions. VAT on domestic fuel reduced to 5 per cent, compliance with some provisions in the European Union Social Contract and a retraining scheme to raise skills to work where? Internationally there is a sharp attack taking place on trade unionism. United States Labour secretary Robert Reich is on record as saying, "I am not sure there is a place for trade unions in the work place of the future". Yet here in Britain the attack on the trade unions by Government legislation and employers continues to be met by pleas for partnership by the TUC. Government ministers, governors of the Bank of England and captains of industry have been invited to address the General Council, yet this servility gains them very little in concessions from the employers. On the contrary, the employers rightly interpret such manoeuvring as weaknesses to be exploited.

What is the TUC looking for from a Labour government, and what is on offer? Some legislation to safeguard trade union representation at workplaces, including union rights for workers at GCHQ. The end to re-balloting on the Check off system. The practice of deducting trade union dues from the pay packet. Marginal benefits that might accrue from Britain signing the European Social Chapter, and a minimum wage, the amount still to be determined.

The TUC is making no demand for a general election now, no demand for renationalisation, and no demand for a complete repeal of anti-trade union legislation.

Nor is the TUC mobilising solidarity for workers in struggle, for jobs, wage increases and a shorter working week.

John Monk's assessment of Tony Blair is that he is a good chap. Monks and Blair are creatures from the same stable. They trade upon the ideology of reformism which still deeply imbues political thinking of the vast majority of the working class in Britain.

However, the material base for reformism is weakening. The capitalist crisis exposes the inadequacy of social democracy as well as the bankruptcy of capitalism.

This is one of the reasons why our Congress resolution makes the point about the dangers of fascism. That requires careful reading and attention. The fact that big business plays an increasingly open and dominant role in the restructuring that's taking place in local government, education, sport; the restructuring by which national governments are strait-jacketed to conform to the dictates of big business which dominates the European Union, the increasing references to changing the constitution, the discussion about the Royalty and questions about its future, the talk of changes in Parliament, are all straws in the wind that suggest the ruling class is moving towards a more open corporate state.

This is all happening as the capitalist crisis is deepening and the conditions for an intensified struggle are maturing. The illusions about crisis-free capitalism are being dispelled.

It is important to us to explain to workers that the economic circumstances that gave rise to the post-war boom, that spanned over more than twenty-five years and enabled the working class to wrest concessions from the employing class and enjoy conditions of relative prosperity and job security, have gone. Nor will they nor can they be repeated under capitalism ever again.

What were the features that enhanced the bargaining power of the working class in that post-war period?

The massive destruction of material wealth in the war that gave rise to expanding markets and a big retooling programme for the manufacturing industry. Then there was a shortage of skilled and unskilled labour to meet the production required. The employers were conscious of the need to cosset their work forces. There was relative full employment and job security, all of which enabled the working class to exact wage increases to achieve increased purchasing power and demand and get a strong social wage element. There was also militant leadership, much of it provided by the influential communist activity operating at every level of the Trade Union movement.

Production, though highly mechanised, retained its labour intensive feature. The youth of yesteryear were envied for the conditions they enjoyed and the opportunities that lay before them. How times have changed?

There were other political and material factors which positively boosted the bargaining position of the working class.

The expansion of the socialist bloc and the ending of the Soviet Union' s isolation. The break up of the colonial empires under the hammer blows of the national liberation movements. The heightened expectations of a better life, and the class and socialist consciousness that gave rise to communist governments in Eastern Europe and social democratic government across Western Europe. Those social democratic governments were themselves under pressure from the working class to introduce substantial and valued reforms and were conscious of the need to head off socialist aspirations and fundamental demands of the working class for state power and real socialism.

In those days we were told about the virtues of crisis-free capitalism and informed that mass unemployment was a thing of the past. Thanks to Keynes, (New Thinking) who had superseded Marx, (Old Thinking) mass unemployment would never recur. It had gone for ever, along with capitalist crisis. That was accompanied by the belief that parliamentary democracy was the only way through which socialism could be achieved.

That period strengthened social democratic ideology in the labour movement. It affected the Communist Party of Great Britain as well, which adopted a revisionist programme.

How different to Labour Day in the United States this Year where President Clinton's Labour secretary Robert Reich, said, "Millions of bluecollared and white-collared workers have become frayed-collared workers as the purchasing power of wages has fallen and job insecurity grows."

That picture is repeated across the capitalist world. In the countries of the European Union over 18 million are officially acknowledged to be unemployed. The reality is greater than that.

If the problems of capitalism in Britain were simply due to administrative foul-ups, Tony Blair would be able to Point to this country or that country to Prove that capitalism is working very well. But there are no such examples to be shown. All are in crisis.

This does not mean that the capitalist class is on the defensive. On the contrary, the material economic circumstances necessitate them becoming more belligerent, more aggressive and more openly hostile to the working class as their system becomes more unstable. The Barings Bank collapse is a harbinger of things to come.

The reality of the deepening crisis is living proof of the validity of Marxist-Leninist critique of capitalism and its general crisis. It is living proof of the validity of socialism and indeed, it provides the necessity for socialism.

There is no basis for an economic boom under capitalism, nor can capitalism continue to revolutionise the production techniques whilst keeping the relations of production unchanged. The crisis of capitalism today is accompanied by new realities. To really modernise political theory, the fundamentally new factor that must be taken into account is this.

For the first time in the history of class-divided society the ruling class, to achieve maximum profit, requires a contracting workforce in the fields of production, distribution, commerce and exchange.

It is true that there have been times in the past when arising from cyclical crises of overproduction millions have been thrown out of work. But the overall progression of capitalist development has taken various technological advances in its stride and still required an expanding workforce to achieve maximum profit.

That is no longer the case. While the incentive of the capitalists to introduce new technology is still to realise maximum Profit by raising productivity, the new technology gives the capitalist no option but to do that with a reduced labour force. Incidentally this is why the fight for a shorter working week with increased wages must be fought for with renewed vigour.

The way forward is to give solidarity to the working class in its immediate struggles and consciously to find ways of linking those struggles to the struggle for socialist revolution, working class state power and socialism.

This capitalist crisis is a period of great danger, but also great opportunity, and at our Congress we rededicate ourselves to raise high the banner of communism in the turbulent times and troubles ahead.

It was in 1977, after twelve years of inner-Party struggle inside the Communist Party of Great Britain, that the decision was taken to form our Marxist-Leninist Party. We said it would always be a party that would be implacably opposed to capitalism and imperialism. Our Party was formed out of the struggle against capitalism, and its attendant allies revisionism, reformism, Trotskyism and ultra-left sectarianism.

In the context of the struggle against imperialism, we established links with the Palestine Liberation Organisation and fraternal relations with the then ruling parties of Ethiopia and Afghanistan. We gave and have never regretted giving those brave parties and peoples unwavering solidarity in their struggles against imperialism and imperialist-backed reaction.

Those progressive governments under Mengistu Mariam in Ethiopia and Babrak Karmal in Afghanistan were swept away as imperialism stepped up its offensive and took advantage of the growing influence of the counter-revolutionary faction in the leadership of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.

In the struggle against imperialism nearer home we had, by our second Congress, sorted ourselves out over the issue of Ireland. We have, ever since, recognised the struggle of the Irish people as being an anti-imperialist struggle for national liberation in which the Republican Movement have played a vanguard role.

The current situation, which gives rise to hope and expectations, has arisen first and foremost from the steadfastness of the Irish people themselves.

That has been the factor that has put British imperialism and imperialist-backed reaction on the defensive.

That defensive position of British Imperialism is being further weakened by inter-imperialist rivalries between the United States and Britain.

Between these two powers there is a clash of economic and political interests and their division has provided new opportunities to advance the cause of Ireland's freedom.

Greater solidarity, not complacency, is now needed from the British labour and progressive movement to ensure the peace process is consolidated and paves the way for a united Ireland.

British imperialism remains the major obstacle to that goal being achieved. Its prevarication and pretext for preventing all party talks by making the decommissioning of arms a pre-condition must be ended.

From 1977 onwards we were never afforded recognition by the Communist Party of the Soviet Union or any of the Communist Parties in Eastern Europe.

At the time we thought that was due to the Communist Party of the Soviet Union operating on the principle that they would only recognise one party in each country. We didn't think there was a problem of revisionism in the CPUs central committee. There was however one area where we were at variance with the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. We did not agree with the concept of working class state power being replaced by the state of the whole people under conditions of socialism - and we still don't.

Here in Britain we were condemned by many as being splitters. But we acted to set up our Marxist-Leninist communist party only after twelve years of inner-party struggle in which the revisionists had strengthened their position at central committee and political committee level and in the major districts of the CPGB. We believed that the unchecked revisionist offensive helped imperialism, betrayed the working class and would pave the way for the eventual liquidation of the party.

In the subsequent period after 1977 many comrades still in the Communist Party of Great Britain, some of whom had condemned us in 1977, felt themselves compelled to found new parties as they sought to defend the Morning Star in the case of the Communist Party of Britain, or in the wake of the formal dissolution of the Communist Party of Great Britain as in the case of the Communist Party of Scotland.

There was one crucial difference between our emergence and that of the later parties I have referred to.

Our Party was formed out of the conscious battle against revisionism. In forming, we consciously discarded the revisionist programme of the CPGB, The British Road To Socialism.

The later parties, the Communist Party of Britain and the Communist Party of Scotland were formed out of opposition to specific acts of the CPGB leadership but saw nothing wrong in the actual programme of the CPGB. In forming their new parties they closed ranks around the ideologically revisionist position of the party they had left.

That fact does mean there are wide ideological differences between us and this includes differences in strategy and tactics for achieving working class unity.

These differences have caused us to face the fact that our hopes for a process of communist unity based on fusion is not realistic at present. However, all three parties are motivated by the desire to serve the working class. There is a basis for expanding the co-operation between us. It is in the interests of the working class for us to collectively build upon the relatively low level of co-operation that exists at present.

It seems to us that our decision to form our Party in 1977 has been vindicated by events, and that our belief that any Party that becomes infected by revisionism also creates a tendency to liquidation is valid. Parties which are infected by revisionism invariably become divided. They also find it difficult to conduct a political defence against being penetrated by anti-Communist elements, agents and parasitic factions with secret agendas such as the Straight Left/Communist Liaison clique.

From the recent Congress of the Communist Party of Britain the Straight Left/ Communist Liaison Faction has strengthened its position. As a result the continued existence of the Morning Star is under increasing threat. Our Party has consistently helped defend the Morning Star as the paper of the left and we reiterate from our Congress our support for those that are genuinely striving to ensure the Morning Star survives.

Outside the ranks of the New Communist Party, the Communist Party of Britain, and the Communist Party of Scotland, all of whom share an allegiance to the working class and labour movement, a mish-mash of Trotskyist and Ultra Left sects claiming to be revolutionary are tending to come together around a desire to smash the Labour Party. They favour severing the link between the Labour Party and the Trade Union movement. They do not see it as being necessary to get the Tory government replaced by a Labour government under pressure from the movement.

It is tragic that Arthur Scargill, for whom we hold the greatest respect, has apparently decided to found what has been referred to as a Socialist Labour Party. The danger is that far from advancing the cause of socialism that he desires, he will find himself acting as a catalyst which brings together organisationally a number of anti-working class and Trotskyist groups which see new possibilities of dividing and fragmenting the Labour and Trade Union movements by joining forces in a new party.

In founding another social democratic party the tragedy for Arthur Scargill is that he could well find himself as titular head of an anti-Communist and anti-working-class organisation.

Other individuals claiming to be in the communist movement are seeking to form their own communist Parties, and all have the central declared aim of destroying the Labour Party. They label anyone who takes a different position revisionist and treat them as enemies. A prime target for their polemic and attack is our Party. They mis-represent our position.

They claim we are revisionists because we advocate a campaign to bring the Tory government down and get it replaced by a Labour government with a big majority and under pressure from the labour movement to implement policies that serves the interests of the working class.

We want the efforts of the right wing to weaken and break the link between the Labour Party and Trade Unions defeated. These individuals seeking to set up new parties want that effort to succeed. indeed, one of these individuals has advanced the argument in print that Tony Blair is much more revolutionary than the New Communist Party precisely because he wants to destroy the link between the trade unions and the Labour Party.

These individuals for the most part have a petty bourgeois background and in fact are operating from neo-Trotskyist positions. They don't attempt to apply dialectics to their analysis of the situation. They don't take into account the particular circumstances here or work out lines of policy that help the working class in their immediate struggles and link those struggles to a strategy for revolution and socialism.

These individuals have adopted sectarian dogma enveloped in revolutionary-sounding rhetoric to try and create a basis for starting up new parties that will pander to their egos and disrupt the Labour movement.

Our Party will forego the luxury of revolutionary phrase mongering which, from the mouths of these individuals is merely a form of demagogy.

We will continue to make our ongoing analysis and develop our policies whilst always keeping our prime aim in view, to help the working class achieve state power and start the process of building socialism and then communism as the whole world is transformed.

Our analysis is encompassed in our Congress documents. We have a right to be confident and to the claim that our Party is a Marxist-Leninist Party, devoted to serving the interests of the working class nationally and internationally. That claim is also a challenge to us, a challenge to enhance the influence of our Party. A challenge to build the circulation of our paper, the New Worker, and the challenge to build our Party, and strengthen and extend the number of self-reliant branches.

We proclaim, socialism has not failed. Nor has it been superseded by anything better. Socialism provides the only solution to capitalism in crisis, that allows the working class to gain its emancipation and hence unleashes the forces of production to fulfil the material and cultural possibilities in a world where peace prevails and the environment is nurtured.

LONG LIVE MARXISM-LENINISM

LONG LIVE PROLETARIAN INTERNATIONALISM

LONG LIVE SOCIALISM AND COMMUNISM