SOCIAL DEMOCRACY

Two souls of the NDP

by Ritch Whyman

Over 1,500 NDP delegates and observers met to celebrate both the recent surge in support and the 50th anniversary of the founding of the NDP at the party’s policy convention in June.

While more time was spent celebrating, the policies that were debated clearly show the two souls of the NDP. The first is the base of the party hoping that the party will use its newfound support to help build a stronger left in Canada.

The second is the leadership of the party looking to use the newfound support to push the party to the centre. This was most obvious when two motions were debated on the final day of the convention.

Debates

The first motion called for the NDP to explicitly reject any merger discussions with the Liberals. Some of the right wing in the party have the appetite to become the new Liberals, made obvious by the celebrations of the history of the party that repeatedly referred to the NDP winning progressive legislation in conjunction with the Liberals.

At the core of this debate was whether the party should be in discussions with the Liberals to merge, as several media pundits and NDP notables have argued.

None of the speakers opposed to the motion spoke in favour of a merger, but instead argued for not cutting off space for discussions with the Liberal Party. Despite several MPs and party bureaucrats denouncing the motion, a surprising 40 per cent of delegates firmly supported the motion and sought to make sure the NDP leadership was barred from engaging in merger discussions.

The second and more pivotal debate centred around a proposal from the NDP’s top executives to drop any mention of socialism and collective ownership from the NDP’s constitution.

They proposed instead to replace it with “social democracy.” In the debate, Pat Martin, a MP on the right of the party, argued that socialism was antiquated and using it in the constitution was an “anchor” holding the NDP back from a bright future—occupying the centre in Canadian politics.

The left inside the NDP was able to push back and create enough opposition to force the NDP leadership to postpone any vote on changes to the constitution until further discussion in the party. This was a victory for the left in the NDP against the “modernizers” who clearly want the NDP to move closer to the Liberals and distance themselves from any notion that they are a left-wing party.

Dilemma

The convention clearly exposed the dilemma for the NDP: while large numbers of its core base want the party to move left and link up with struggles on the streets and picket lines, the leadership and party bureaucracy clearly want to find a way to position the party as a “reasonable” party, one that can govern “responsibly.”

The signals were sent during the election itself, with the NDP agreeing not to run a deficit, to maintain military spending, and to continue to support the bombing of Libya. However, in order to be relevant the NDP also has to show it will stand up to the Tories.

During the postal strike the NDP did engage in parliamentary maneuvers to try to stop back-to-work legislation. This should be supported. At the same time, it exposes the limitations of parliamentary politics.

Strikes, resistance to war, and opposition to austerity won’t be won or lost in the halls of Parliament but rather through building resistance in the workplace and community—like the postal workers 1981 strike that won maternity leave, and the 2003 mass protests that stopped the Liberals going to war in Iraq.

It will be those sorts of actions that will stop austerity and war, build a stronger left, and push the NDP to the left. Those in the NDP fighting to keep the NDP on the left need to fight not just for resolutions, which the leadership routinely ignores, but also to turn riding associations into centres for fighting the Harper agenda on the streets and not just in Parliament.

The NDP convention left it unclear which way the party will go, but the history of social democracy means that the drive for seats and respectability by the leadership will more than likely win out over calls for the party to move left.