Reply To: $15 nmw USA

Rule 27 of our Rulebook reads:

Candidates elected to a Political office shall be pledged to act on the instructions of their Branches locally, and by the Executive Committee locally.

So, from our point of view, there is no problem with councillors being instructed by non-councillors. But there are two differences with “Socialist Action” in Seattle. First, Sawant was elected on a programme of reforms not on a straight socialist ticket. Second, all of meetings, including those to instruct socialist councillors, will be open to the public.

In the internal document “Socialist Alternative” acknowledge the tensions between their councillor elected by reform-minded non-members of their party and their local and national executive committees who want to prioritise their wider aim of “building a vanguard party”. Since a socialist councillor would also be elected by non-members even if on a straight socialist programme there could well be a tension about who the councillor was answerable to: the socialist-minded but non-member workers who elected them or the members of the party locally?

This is a less remote practical problem than dealing with a socialist MP, as what if ex-comrade Colborn had been elected for us to Seaham Town Council as opposed to for a group of anti-Labour independents?