A couple of months ago, the Jury Party (sometimes known as the Jury Team) asked me to stand as its candidate in the Glasgow North East by-election.
It intends to put up anti-sleaze figures in by-elections and next year’s General Election.
Like many people, I agree with the campaign against political sleaze. Having lived in deprived areas for 30 years, I am angered that former minister Tony McNulty wrongly claimed £60,000 in expenses for a second home when I know people who own no homes and live in damp, rented ones. I have long argued that the greed of MPs is a reflection of a greedy society which is undermining the values of sharing and caring.
The aims of the Jury Party are clearly and forcibly put out in Sir Paul Judge’s The End of the Party (second
edition, 2009). I agree with him that many MPs are now just career politicians. But much as I admired its anti-sleaze stance, I declined the invitation to be its candidate. Partly, this was due to illness which has slowed me down. But there were other, more political, reasons.
The Jury Party is predominantly a one-issue party. Not completely, but its obsession with amoral MPs means it is known for little else. One result is that it can draw backing from a wide spectrum. Its supporters include both radical former Labour supporters and The Taxation Alliance, a Tory lobby that wants to reduce taxes spent on public services. I could not co-operate with the latter.
A drawback is that its views on matters other than sleaze are not well promoted. The Jury Party candidate is John Smeaton, the man who helped foil the al Qaeda attack on Glasgow Airport. In the Glasgow North East campaign, John has been excellent at bantering with residents and convincing in his praise of community-run projects.
By contrast, he has found it difficult to answer questions about the Jury Party’s views on the economy, social policy and Europe. On examination, its views are contentious. For instance, it wants complete withdrawal from the European Union and would encourage state schools to become independent charities outside of local authority control.
Should the Jury Party gain a significant number of MPs, it is likely to be hopelessly divided on policies once it has aired its criticisms of sleaze. Division would provoke decline. Even the topic of sleaze may diminish in importance. Sir Christopher Kelly’s proposals to reduce claims for second homes, to stop MPs hiring relatives, to cut the amount claimable for travel and food and so on may undermine the sleaze racket. The Jury Party could lose what holds it together.
I consider a one-issue party to be muddled and ineffective. If I lived in Glasgow North East, I would vote Labour. I joined the party nearly 50 years ago because I wanted a society based on the fellowship which comes from equality, not the division which springs from inequality. The Jury Party wants politics without parties, with MPs being independents. By contrast, I advocate government by a Labour Party committed to socialist principles.
OK, I know some Labour MPs are sleazy – as are some in the SNP, Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties. I realise New Labour sneers at the concept of equality. I acknowledge that some of its members are the personification of material greed. Scottish MP and former Defence Minister Adam Ingram enjoys consultancies which bring him an extra £170,000. Former Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt earns £100,000 from posts with health companies. I am ashamed of them.
Many disillusioned Labour supporters have resigned their memberships. I remain in the party because of its past, because of what I can do in the present and because of its future. In its beginnings, the Labour Party was rooted in the drive for equality. If in doubt, read the speeches of Keir Hardie. In the present, as a member I can criticise sleazy and money-obsessed MPs from the inside. And there is hope for the future. It still has MPs such as Jon Cruddas and John McDonnell who lead a group – which gets little media coverage – calling for a redistribution of incomes and expansion of public services. Add the number of trade unionists and local community activists who want a better, more equal, Britain, then the egalitarian lobby could expand.
After 1930, a defeated and demoralised Labour Party gradually
reformed itself into the left-wing party which won the election of 1945. It can happen again if we back them. No other major party contains an organised core of egalitarians.
