Two election myths about Respect

Jim Jepps

 

Socialist Unity used to run a column called myths in the movement, written by Mother Courage (you can read the 16 articles in the archive here). The column was always fun and controversial, landing us in hot water on numerous occasions. However, despite this plus point Mother Courage's output slowed and we had her decommissioned. Sadly this was more an indicator of her growing age than the lack of myths to debunk, as we can see from this recent local election.

Respect's showing at elections is always subjected to intense and partisan scrutiny. Unfortunately this micro-analysis can often lead to rather self serving myths growing around the vote, myths that well are worth challenging.

 

Communalism

 

The first myth revolves around the more general accusation that Respect is 'racist' and built upon Asian communal support, a charge we at Socialist Unity have examined on a number of occasions and found, that whilst Respect has been able to gain ground among Asian voters and, therefore, Respect's bases have been concentrated in areas with a high proportion of Asians - there is no evidence that the basis that the Asian vote for Respect is communal (with all the derogatory implications of the term) nor is it true that only Asians vote for Respect.

 

When we look at the fact that Jerry Hicks and Maxine Bowler, both white SWP members, achieved impressive results it rather cuts against the idea that Respect, particularly as a national organisation, could be categorised as Communal or simply a party for Muslims. For instance during the course of my research into voter behaviour in Cambridge (here) it was clear that Asians were voting en block for the Lib Dem candidates and Respect's vote was solidly white working class in character.

 

But the specific myth that has arisen out of the local elections is the fact that English (or non-Asian) Respect candidates achieved a consistently lower result than their Asian running mates in Tower Hamlets. We thought that it was worth investigating the facts rather than let ourselves accept either side's version of events on face value. We compared the results in each ward for all the parties.

 

 

What was clear was that there is a strong tendency for the voters of all the parties to favour (sometimes only slightly) candidates with Asian names over those with non-Asian names. It is true that for Respect this tendency is more pronounced, but assuming (which I think is reasonable) that it is a minority of Asian voters who wish to vote only for Asian candidates, as Respect have more support among Asians than the other parties this tendency was always going to be more pronounced for Respect than for their rivals.

 

This is not something that Respect encouraged, as Respect campaigners wanted all their candidates to do well, and it is worth bearing in mind that in some cases the difference in votes is rather small. If Respect itself was biased against non-Asian candidates then it would not have selected them in the first place - it's a mistake to say that it is something inherent in Respect that meant their white candidates did not do well. Nor is it wise to conflate an organisation with those who vote for it.

 

In fact the only ward where this tendency was particular significant was for John Rees who obtained substantially less than his Asian running mates. It would be foolish however to assume that this is down to his ethnic origins when there are possibly a number of other factors at play. Having a Hackney address when running for Tower Hamlets council might be one. It may have been something specifically about Rees' personality or style. The disjunction between a national figure running in a local election might be another, it's also possible that some inside of the local Respect felt Rees was imposed from the outside - all of these are possible explanations of the drop in vote for Rees which are more likely than the fact that he is not Asian.

 

One other quick point was that the Green Party did not run even one Asian candidate. Now we are not going to be quick to leap to accusations of racism as some others have, which are more part of an anti-Green Party propaganda campaign on the left than a genuine representation of the Greens position in Tower Hamlets, but it is a clear indicator that the Greens in Tower Hamlets do not adequately represent those who live in the area, a problem they should seek to address.

 

Green spoiler candidates

 

The second myth is that the Greens ran 'spoiler candidates' against Respect.

This is a myth born out of understandable frustration from one Preston ward where a Respect candidate that was always going to do better than the Greens lost by seven votes (below). It is fair to say that had the Greens stood down in this ward then Respect would probably have had an extra councillor elected (and doubled their outside of London wins). But it is an extremely one sided picture of events.

 

Preston Town Centre ward
Ronald Henry Atkins	Labour	654	ELECTED
Mukhtar Master	Respect	647
Ronald Arthur Smith	Conservative	235
Liam Pennington	Liberal Democrats	122
Robert Stuart Douglas	Green	82

 

But let's also look at  a couple of wards where Respect probably cost the Greens council seats, one in Hackney Clissold and one in Hackney Leabridge (there are some other possibles but it's unwise to simply assume that Green votes automatically transfer to Respect and visa versa, so where the gap is wider it's as well to discount the example).

 

Hackney Clissold ward
Mischa Borris	Green	1,240	ELECTED
Karen Lesley Alcock	Labour	1,175	ELECTED
Linda Kay Smith	Labour	1,127	ELECTED
Keith Owen Magnum	Green	1,066
Susan Fajana-Thomas	Labour	1,050
Charlotte Woodworth	Green	843
Sylvia Anderson	Liberal Democrats	365
Asli Demirel	Respect	262
Habiba Bham	Liberal Democrats	245
Sasha Simic	Respect	216
Abraham Jacobson	Liberal Democrats	212
Martin Bakewell	Conservative	208
Vanessa Jane Ford	Conservative	185
Irene Lewington	Conservative	135

 

Hackney Leabridge ward
Linda Kelly	Labour	1,060	ELECTED
Ian Rathbone	Labour	939	ELECTED
Deniz Cemgil Oguzkanli	Labour	803	ELECTED
Douglas Earl	Green	642
Daisy Johnson	Green	539
Bhavesh Hindocha	Green	506
Mohamed Sadik Husain	Conservative	393
Fero Firat	Respect	324
Guy Humphreys	Conservative	311
Michael Leonard Simons	Respect	282
Mark Bernard Timmis	Conservative	210
Judith Palmer	Liberal Democrats	203
Anna Tan	Liberal Democrats	199
Gita Jacobson	Liberal Democrats	181
James Ivan Beavis	Communist Party of Britain	77

 

Now, are we to regard these as Respect 'spoiler candidates'? The fact is that both organisations had there own reasons for standing in these wards that had nothing to do with any rival for progressive votes. Our opinion is that both organisations would have been better off if they could come to some accommodation with each other, but to lay the blame at the door of the Greens alone is to ignore the obstreperous behaviour of certain individuals in Respect towards the Greens.

 

There was no serious attempt at this election from either side to come to any agreement over these elections and it was left to local groups to make initiatives in these directions - which some did. The most successful example of this is in Haringey and Hackney Queensbridge ward where Respect and Greens utilised the multi-vote wards to stand what almost amounts to a joint ticket.

 

Haringey St Anns ward
Brian Andrew Haley	Labour	1,195	ELECTED
Azize Nilgun Canver	Labour	1,184	ELECTED
Robert William Harris	Labour	1,064	ELECTED
Simon John Hester	Respect	579
Adam Frank Jethro Boardman	Green	500
Tekin Kartal	Respect	468
Alexander Michael Sweet	Liberal Democrats	390
Sakina Saba Rizvi	Liberal Democrats	348
Harris Aeronwy	Conservative	337
Phivous Joannides	Conservative	329
Michael Willett	Liberal Democrats	280
Peter Anthony Sartori	Conservative	203
Haringey West Green ward
Eddie Griffith	Labour	1,192	ELECTED
Gmmh Rahman Khan	Labour	1,135	ELECTED
Antonia Lilly Mallett	Labour	1,073	ELECTED
Sait Akgul	Respect	626
Gary Alexander Joseph McFarlane	Respect	535
Anne Maureen Gray	Green	469
James Stephen John Haskings	Liberal Democrats	426
Jean Elizabeth Mary Farmer	Conservative	378
Phodis Costas Evangelou	Conservative	336
John Louis Fynaut	Liberal Democrats	329
Della Ryness Hirsch	Liberal Democrats	326
Eyvind Normann Andresen	Conservative	324

Hackney Queensbridge ward
Thomas William Price	Labour	1,360	ELECTED
Emma Margaret Plouviez	Labour	1,246	ELECTED
Patrick Philip Vernon	Labour	1,119	ELECTED
Andrew Boff	Conservative	913
Alexander Vivian Ellis	Conservative	632
Marcel Philip Matthew	Conservative	585
Ralph James Macgeough Smyth	Green	544
Rosemary More	Liberal Democrats	408
Monica Mattocks	Liberal Democrats	367
Diana Lesley Swingler	Respect	317
George Andreas Solomou	Respect	310
Anthony Terrill	Liberal Democrats	256

 

In all of these wards cooperation was mutually beneficial and is a model for coming to terms with each other where that is possible (and with the best will in the world it will not always be possible).

Added to this there were a number of local deals that don't show up officially because they meant no clash took place. As leading Green Party member Peter Cranie elsewhere on this site "informal understandings at a local level were developed in many areas of London. This was in line with the guidance I outlined in my 2005 post election debrief on Socialist Unity Network. Lambeth was a good example of this. Local Greens allowed Respect a clear run at their target ward of Vassall. These informal arrangements with the Greens were not the exclusive preserve of Respect, and in a number of areas, there were similar informal understandings with the Liberal Democrats." (here)

Respect's argument for Preston was that the Greens should just go away rather than about reaching an accommodation, and there are real problems with this approach. The Greens and Respect are different organisations, with different political approaches and policies, and appeal to different (if over lapping) voters. It is not simple sectarianism that meant the Greens didn't all join Respect (or that Respect members didn't decide to join the Greens, which actually would have been easier to do) because these political differences cannot be simply wished away.

Respect in Hackney stood against the Greens because they didn't care if Greens did not get elected due to their presence on the ballot paper, and if that's okay for Hackney it's okay the other way round in Preston. Respect want to have their cake and eat it. They want to stand against the Greens where they wish, explaining how rubbish they are compared to Respect, and expect the Greens to stand down in other places because the organisations are so similar. It is not possible to have it both ways, this is a purely self serving argument.

The Greens are a highly decentralised organisation. Respect has a highly centralised command structure. Conversely the Greens have a clear and transparent method to hold their leadership to account (as they did when Hugo Charlton stepped out of line), Respect have no system to hold their leadership to account. The Greens often focus on respectable style politics (working through the council, writing letters) Respect has more of a focus on demonstrations and activism. It is not simple to fuse the two things together.

These are all genuine political differences not examples of sectarian rivalry and it is legitimate for these organisations with different approaches, programmes and aims to stand against each other, even if we at Socialist Unity would like them to cooperate on a far more regular and fraternal basis. That's politics and people need to be more robust and less irate about the occasions when things do not go all their way.

We would like to encourage communication and discourage the sectarian propaganda emanating from Respect over this issue, and both organisations more generally, as a start to building some sort of working trust.

 

 

May 2006

> > home page > >