As the tury rate-capping noose is slowly tightened around local government jobs and services, the continuing public row between leaders of the GLC is increasingly a sideshow The damage that has been done, however, will continue to have its effect.
has strenethened the hand of the centre right on labour controlled councils, and made the job of those who are prepared to fight much more difficult.
Livingstone's failure lead the battle against the rate-capping legislation betrayal of his responsibilities. But Un f problems go deeper than the debacle of the GLC The plans made last July at the loca government con terence were intended to ensure that all the ratecapped councils would go illegal at the same time.
The decisions made on 7 March in fact avoided doing this. By stating that it was impossible to make a rate, instead of refusing to make a rate, they ducked the key issue facing the boroughs. Many of those who attacking Livingstone were keen supporters of this sion.
The decision • to make this course was taken when it became clear that many Labour groups were not in fact prepared to go all the way. It is an attempt to unite those : to fight with those who do. As the GLC has shown, this kind of unity does not stand up when the test comes.
It is a problem that has •dogged the local government fightback at national and at local level. Its effects will become clear nationally as some boroughs fall by the wayside, and within the boroughs as the right and centre vote with the Tories, Liberals, WelC.. rather than go illegal. In the local unions a similar problem is cucteue a SeCuOuS ortne left propose a work-in tacinstead of strikes deal with cuts in jobs and services.
The left must break with this method. It makes those who want to fight, the prisoners of those who don't: not only of the right, but the fake lefts who are happy to allow the right to get them off the hook. The left must wage a sharp fight against this fake unity, issues directly to the unions, the Party and the condully.