Letter – What would a socialist councillor do?
During last month’s local council elections, an elector put the following question to one of our candidates:
If I understand your position correctly, the Socialist Party of Great Britain believes that meaningful change can only happen through the democratic abolition of the current capitalist system, and the need for a system that prioritises human needs over profit resonates with me. However, I would like to better understand how Socialist Party representatives would engage with the existing structures in the meantime.
If Socialist Party candidates were elected to our local council, would they seek to influence decisions in ways that could incrementally empower local people, for example, by advocating for greater community ownership, encouraging democratic participation, or supporting measures that improve housing conditions, even within the current system? Or would the position be to abstain from participating in decisions that do not directly challenge capitalism as a whole?
In essence, I am curious: while recognising that systemic change is the ultimate goal, how would Socialist Party councillors use their platform day-to-day to represent and support their constituents? Are there specific steps you envision towards addressing issues like homelessness, unaffordable rents, and poor-quality housing, to use your example? How would you use your voice, which is effectively the representation of your voters’ voices, in practical terms?
Reply:
That is a fair question. Our correspondent has understood our position correctly. We do say that the various problems regarding housing, health care, education, transport, food quality and the standard of living and quality of life generally, as well as global problems such as global warming and war, arise from the nature of the capitalist profit system and can only be lastingly tackled within the framework of a society of common ownership and democratic control of the resources society needs to exist.
That is our only aim and what we campaign for, including when we stand candidates in national and local elections. We do not seek support on the basis of improvements within capitalism, desirable as some may be, and do not advocate any when we stand in elections. We stand for socialism and nothing else and only want votes on that basis.
What if one of our candidates were to be elected a local councillor? This assumes that those who voted for them would also want socialism and not, or not just, improvements within capitalism. Since, in elections at the moment, we only present one or two candidates, the situation would be one where there would not be a majority of socialist councillors. These would therefore be in the same position as the councillors representing parties that do not control the council. In other words, they would not be involved in decision-making and could only play an oppositional role.
In these circumstances, a socialist councillor could not do much other than argue the case for socialism, using the council chamber as a platform from which to explain how capitalism cannot be made to work in the interest of the majority excluded from ownership of means of production and hence the need for socialism where there would no longer be production for profit. This would not rule out explaining in detail how a socialist society might approach a particular problem under discussion.
Local councils have very limited powers in the fields you mention of community ownership, democratic participation, and measures to improve housing. The overall powers they do have are granted by the central government which also provides much of the money and lays down what it must be spent on. Nevertheless, councils do have limited discretion to make some minor changes.
In accordance with the mandate from those who elected them, a socialist councillor would not themself propose any measure to improve housing or democratic participation. But this does not mean that they would necessarily abstain on all matters, even if this might be taken to be the default position.
Any important decision would have to be referred back to local socialists and it is conceivable that the councillor could be instructed to vote for some measure (some extension of democratic participation perhaps) or against some measure that would manifestly make things worse (like selling off a park to developers or closing a library or a social centre). On the other hand, local socialists might decide the councillor should abstain on all votes as a matter of principle. So we can only speculate on what might be decided.
Would a socialist councillor act as a social assistant for those in their ward with some problem with the local administration? Would they draw to the attention of the local council potholes that needed filling or fly tipping that needs clearing? Maybe, but they wouldn’t want people to vote for them next time on the basis just of having been a ‘good councillor’. – Editors.