Labour's national executive will be discussed at this year's party conference.
tains a commitment to Irish unity and a call for. the repeal of the Prevention of Terrorism Act. Nevertheless, the majority of the resolutions submitted to party conference and of the demands made by constituency parties to the study group which drew up the statement.
study group was heavily weighted in favour of pro-Loyalists and a good deal of its evidence was rigged.
Socialist Challenge can now reveal how and why this occurred. It is also OUSS DIC those The policy proposed in the statement conthis falls short of the views of The reasons for these failures is that the chiefly responsible.
These are Dick Barrv. a full-time research officer for the Labour Partv. Alex Kitson, party chairperson anO acting general secretary of the Transport and General Workers Union and Tony Saunois, national executive member Young Socialists.
They were assisted by the party's spokesperson on Ireland, Don Concannon.
All were members of the study group, establishtwo ycais ago by the NEC wuch orew un une NEC statement. For dif1C1 CIL i these dividuals were determined to resist the call by rank and file of the party for British withdrawal and unambiguous support for a united Ireland posed because he is, Concannon was UD- by conviction, pro-Unionist.
Even more virulently Loyalist is Dick Barry who ported the view Ireland is 'two nations'. This ideology gives unequivical support to the Loyalists. 1976 In 1976 Barry wrote a policy document Ireland for the NEC. This included the view that the TRA O CA 1A1A0! 1970s, whose favourite pastime was assassinating Catholics, could be perly described counter-terrorist organisations' The 1976 report was rejected by the NEC but the author's views lived on to colour the latest policy statement. Barry was occiclal y of the study group.
chairperson was Kitson who, at one time, seemed likely to counter Barry's influence, having previously spoken favour of withdrawal Kitson's perience whith his trade union members in Bellast moderated rare overwhelmings. views.
Loyalists, which is hardly surprising as Catholic workers who could join the TGWU prefer to be members of the Dublinbased Irish Transport and General Workers Union. ILPYS So concerned became Kitson with keeping his Loyalist members ina be that at point threatened to resign from the study group if it came vut surongiy In lavour ol Irish unity.
Finally, there was Tony Saunois of the LPYS tant. theory Militant has a "troops out' position, but it does not take this seriously, preferring to conduci truitless searches for 'class unity' in the North of Ireland. Saunois' aim in the study group was to get support for the formation of a new Labour Don Concannon Tony Saunois . the Ulster front Dar alillar y Ulster Defence Association, the defunct Progressive Unionist Party and Paisley's Democratic Unionist Party. Alex Kitson (top) and Sam McCluskie The study group did not meet the anti-unionist Peoples Democracy r or the Party both of which have elected Belfast councillors — unlike the 'two nations' groupiels Bias in the section entitled 'Unification Our Objective' 50 per cent more space is given to arguments in favour. Not surprisingl:
SELV group CRiC 'evidence' submitted to it in the North of Ireland as to why unity should be opposed.
Originally, the proLoyalists on the study group wanted their repor to completely oppose İrish unity. As late as February Don Concannon sisting on this in private meetings of the group. Subtle But series of pressures produced a more First, the views the CLPs, reflected in evidence subshowed the majort up showed majority favour of troop withdrawal, Irish unity and against the Labour Party the North of Ireland.
This was followed by CLP's over the party leadership's support for Margaret Thatcher's starving to death of Bobby Sands MP Finally, three members of the study threatened to write if the Loyalist majority group pushed their views too strongly. Veto Consequently, the NEC statement is a mish mash of compromise and ambiguity. It says 'our aim bring about the unification of Ireland by and consent between the two parts of This implies thai without the 'consent'. of the Unionist minority in Ireland there will be no unity. On the other hand the statement states its opposition 'a veto political development by Unionists Nevertheless, while the NEC statement in practical terms it rejects it. Thus it calls for the continuation of direct rule, to be replaced by a powersharing government in the North.
This, together with the formation of a new North of Ireland Labour Party means the NEC is proposing new instituțions and organisations which. because they are long term and confined to the six counties of Northeas Ireland, actually reinforce partition.
Little The truth is that a long term commitment to Irish unity means little. It needs to be backed up by firm for unity and British withdrawal The pro-Loyalists the study group were never going to allow that to happen. All they did was build a Unionist house and pain: