RCP reply: IL is tair enough for Charlie Pottins (Workers' Press, Saturday 15 November) to Object: to the decision of Liverpool WRP members to campaign in_ support, of Re- volutionary Communist Par- ty "candidate Dave. Hall Sworth in. the Knowsley North by-election. It is not legitimate howev- er to justify this by distor. tions, of RCP. positions and slanders of the type often produced in the past by Ger- Fy Healy's News Line ‘The RCP never instructed its members to drop out of miners’ support groups dur. ing the miners! srike, for the simple reason that we never supported these groups in the first place. While we were among the first. to organise practical solidarity work — collecting money and food, ete — we did not give our support to committees which were set up under the control of the labour bureaucracy and served the purpose of streny thening its capacity to medi ate between the mining com: munities and the state. We did not oppose a ‘yes’ vote for the political levy Just because the union lead- ‘ers ran cynical campaigns that disguised the fact that virtually all these funds would goto the Labour Party (though we certainly pointed this out). ‘We campaigned for trade unionists to set up political funds to be spent on objec- tives consistent with work- ers’ interests, rather than wasting money financing a party which consistently ‘acts against the interests of the working class. ‘Our argument against sup- jorting public ownership of industries and services has nothing in common with syn- dicalism. In fact it follows the tradi- tions of the Communist In- ternational and the Red In- ternational of Labour Unions in the early twenties. ‘The point is that whether workers are employed by private capitalists or by the state-acting in the interests I in, general, work ers’ first priority is the de- fence of jobs, wages and working conditions Workers, have no interest in defending one form of capitalist exploitation (pub- lie ownership) against another (privatisation) The job-shedding, wage- cutting consequences of un- jon acquiescence in in-house tenders as an alternative to privatisation in the health Service should alert all mili- tants to this danger. Charlie's allegations about the Workers Against Racism campaign sponsored by the RCP are old slanders. It is worth pointing out that while everybody now recognises the problem of racist attacks, we were the first to organise direct action to deal with the problem and bring it to the attention of the labour movement It is simply untrue that any WAR representative ‘claimed credit for the inner city riots. ‘When this accusation was made by the gutter press at the time, we categorically denied it, The allegation that we dis- rupted a Newham Seven de- monstration has long been circulated by sectarian Labour Party supporters in Newham who resented the success and popularity of our campaigning work in the area, Why on earth should we attempt, to disrupt, an anti- racist demonstration? The allegation is absurd. Apart from these points, Charlie seems to be scratch: ing around to find something to disagree with in our Knowsley election platform. ‘Our demands put forward a basic platform for working. class unity at a time when the Labour Party is moving further to the right to appease the demands of the establishment and improve its position in the opinion polls. Tt was encouraging to see that ‘the WRP in Liverpool Tecognised this basic class issue in the Knowsley North by-election, and worrying to see that others in the WRP are inclined to take the sort of traditional sectarian line hich could only help to put Kinnock’s stooge in West- minster. Inthe months leading up to ‘Unfair criticism’ the general election, build- ing a coherent working class alternative to the Labour Party must be the top prior- ity for the left — and this pFoject cannot be the proper- ty of any individual orga- nisation. ‘The future of the working class after the election — whichever party wins — will depend upon it. Alan Harding, RCP election agent, Knows- ley North