The National Union of Students is the peak umbrella organisation of student unions in Australia. Whilst it has generally been subject to a conservative and careerist Labor leadership, it has also been the scene of struggles between Labor and more left-wing students. The next round of such struggles is expected with the NUS national conference, beginning December 6, 1997.
This discussion paper, put together by the socialist youth group Resistance, which will have delegates at the NUS national conference, is aimed at promoting thinking within the left about how best it can pursue its collective and shared aims within the National Union of Students. It is printed here abridged.
The basic argument we're making is
1. that this year the left will need to have a far more unified, cooperative and coordinated intervention into NUS national conference, and
2. that the only mechanism which will allow us to do this sufficiently well is a single, unified left caucus during conference.
There are three key arguments in favour of this:
1. the current (likely) situation within NUS.
Our best reconstruction of what we can expect at national conference shows that the two Labor factions, NOLS and Unity, (and even to a certain extent the Liberals)have been strengthened at the expense of the left.
The implications of this for policy, constitutional debate and election of office-bearers are obvious — it will make it considerably harder for the left to get its initiatives through conference floor. It even raises the possibility of the left being shut out of office-bearers' positions.
Taken collectively, the broad left vote is roughly equivalent to the vote of NOLS — which would at least give us some leverage, provided we were united enough to exercise it like that.
2. the experience of last year's national conference.
In our view, the left was greatly weakened last year by disagreement and disunity within the left. This meant that, in spite of its weight on floor, the left effectively surrendered much of the initiative to NOLS and Unity. This was borne out in the results of conference. We can't allow ourselves to be that disunited this year.
3. a greater degree of cooperation is in the left's best interests anyway.
This year's experience demonstrates this quite clearly. A more cooperative, constructive and collaborative approach would yield positive results, not just at conference but a "knock-on" effect in the cross-campus and on-campus groups, between left groups more broadly and so on.
What would the benefits be?
A single, unified left caucus would offer several distinct advantages, which couldn't be replicated simply through having a few token "broad lefts" whilst maintaining the centrality of our own caucuses:
1. It would give us numerical leverage that we wouldn't possess separately.
A single, unified left caucus with similar numerical weight to NOLS would be a very different proposition than three or four only loosely connected left caucuses. It would also most likely give us a considerable degree of initiative in a conference which could very easily otherwise become a turkey shoot.
2. It would provide the only basis for some relative agreement on policy/constitution/etc amongst the left.
Currently, the left confronts each other with already developed, worked-out and caucused-through proposals, amendments and attitudes: that is, it's generally on exactly the same basis as with NOLS or other factions, of deals rather than of agreed and shared objectives.
A single, unified left caucus would allow us to put far stronger (because united) arguments in favour of our policy and other initiatives.
3. It would prevent any attempts by NOLS or Unity to split the left on the basis of separate deals.
Given the numerical situation, NOLS or Unity will very predictably attempt to make "separate peaces" with each left caucus, offering one caucus something on the basis of excluding the others. And given the fear of a "left shut-out", the pressure on each left caucus to "cut out" the others would be great.
A single, unified left caucus would ensure that NOLS or Unity (or anyone else) couldn't as easily turn one section of the left against the other.
4. It would scare the shit out of the other factions.
How would it work?
How exactly it would work would need to be discussed and agreed. And it would undoubtedly take quite some energy, tolerance and patience on all our parts.
Whilst there'd obviously still be groups, the single, unified left caucus would become the main body through which the left discusses policy, motions, business etc and through which it relates to other factions.
This sounds like a big step and in a sense it is. But the left has functioned this way in the past — it was exactly to be the caucus of the whole left that Left Alliance was initially set up.
However, Resistance is convinced that a single, unified left caucus could function effectively without diminishing the integrity of the individual left caucuses to any great degree. And the benefits of it do outweigh the potential drawbacks.