Communist Party of Ireland

	Home page > Policies > Documents of the 23rd National Congress
	Baile > Beartais > Cáipéisí an 23ú Comhdháil Náisiúnta

23rd National Congress (November 2006)

Messages of solidarity from fraternal parties

Opening speech by the general secretary, Eugene McCartan

International solidarity resolution

Programme of the Communist Party of Ireland

1. Imperialism today
The leading role of US imperialism
The distortion of global development
Fair trade, not “free trade”
The dismantling of socialism
Growing global resistance
The undemocratic and class character of the European Union
Anti-democratic structures
Complicating the struggle for social and national justice
Defending and extending international and regional democracy

2. Northern developments
Democratic struggle
Opportunities presented by the Belfast Agreement
Beyond the political stalemate
Defending and extending the Belfast Agreement

3. Developments in the Republic
Increased exploitation and poverty
The illusion of progress and prosperity
Trade unions
Women: social and political issues
Diversity, migrant workers, and the threat of racism
Youth
An alienating culture

4. The role and tasks of the Communist Party
Organisation
Education
A partisan party

1 Imperialism today

The leading role of US imperialism

Since our last congress, imperialism, led by the United States, has continued to use military, political and economic measures against nations and peoples, under the guise of its “war on terror,” in its continuing strategy of global domination to secure access to markets and the control of resources in the interests of transnational corporations.
     Environmental degradation goes unchecked; global warming and global dimming, once dismissed as exaggeration or environmental scaremongering, are now accepted as a fact. The environmental destruction of our planet has almost reached the point of no return. These two processes have the potential to lay waste vast areas of the planet. This environmental destruction is the result of forces motivated by greed and power, exhausting finite resources in the endless pursuit of ever-increasing profits. It is the life-style that capitalism promotes and requires for its very existence that is unsustainable. It can never meet its own illusions and false desires and is prepared to destroy the planet rather than see its profits diminish or the restructuring of economic priorities in a more sustainable, people-centred social order.
     Millions of people across the globe are dying of hunger and curable diseases, and AIDS is an increasing problem, particularly for the people of Africa and eastern Europe. Yet we live in a world with unprecedented wealth and material goods; we have the scientific and technological means to harness the world’s resources to better the lives of the world’s population.
     US-led imperialist forces invaded and continue to occupy Iraq, as well as invading and occupying Afghanistan. These wars of aggression have resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of people. The United States helped organise the attempted coup in Venezuela and was responsible for the coup that overthrew the democratic government in Haïti. These and other events have exposed the predatory nature of imperialism to millions of people across the globe.
     We are witnessing an even more aggressive build-up of arms, headed by the United States. George Bush and the cabal of oil executives, arms manufacturers, global financiers and right-wing ideologues that dominate the present US administration are promising the peoples of the world a future of endless wars in pursuit of their strategic goal of world domination. Billions are wasted on weapons of mass destruction. There are enough weapons, both chemical and nuclear, to kill the world’s population ten times over.
     In addition to a new arms build-up the United States has set about the breaking of international treaties, such as the Non-Proliferation Treaty in relation to the development of new nuclear weapons systems. It continues to develop its Strategic Missile Defence System or “Star Wars”; and the United States is not alone in this arms build-up.
     This continuous rearmament, and the increasing integration of the European armaments industry in parallel with the European Union building its own military structures in the form of the Rapid Reaction Force and the newly established battle groups, encourages the build-up of nuclear armaments by other countries and uses vast amounts of scarce resources on conventional weapons.
     People’s religious beliefs are being abused for reactionary objectives and in anti-democratic and anti-people campaigns. From our own historical experience we know that bitter and often murderous divisions along sectarian lines can make working-class unity extremely difficult.
     On the international level the United States inspired attempts to portray the alleged “war on terror” as a war against Islam. As communists we reject all anti-democratic fundamentalism, but we will work in solidarity with people of religious beliefs who are also striving for social justice.

The distortion of global development

The strategy of imperialism is not just war but the conquest of new markets and sources of cheap labour and raw materials. A consequence of this process is a reduction in wages and working conditions in the metropolitan western capitalist countries as well as those countries where transnational capital sets up its operations. This is applying the old tactic of “divide and rule” in order to extract maximum return. In its current stage of development capitalism is accentuating inequalities within the imperialist bloc and also within the developing countries.
     It is not just a matter of the gap between the rich and poor but also the very structural relationship between the developing countries and major capitalist powers that breeds inequality and uneven development. Developed capitalist countries themselves display this uneven development. We now have vast areas of formerly industrialised regions in developed capitalist countries that have witnessed the closure of coal mines, steel production, car manufacturing, and other industries.
     The United States is now using its economic, political and military power across the globe to limit the scope and effectiveness of such bodies as the United Nations and the World Court, and it completely ignores international law when it suits its policies. It continues, along with other imperialist states, to reduce the effectiveness of progressive international organisations, restricting the ability and capacity of developing countries to use such structures and regional bodies to defend themselves or their ability to take multilateral action. They use their political and economic control over such bodies as the IMF, World Bank and WTO to impose terms and conditions that favour transnational capital.
     Today’s imperialist expansion is not new. Capitalism from its very birth has striven to control and dominate the world around it, to suppress its competitors both politically and economically. Centuries of colonialism and neo-colonialism have created the base and established the unequal relations, both economic and political, that now exist. Imperialism, in alliance with the elites of the developing countries, pursues these anti-development policies, forging new neo-colonialist relationships, constructing dependent, anti-development states.

Fair trade, not “free trade”

The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development states that three commodities account for 75 per cent of total exports from the forty-eight poorest countries. The problem of indebtedness only compounds this situation. The polices being imposed by such organisations as the IMF, World Bank and WTO upon debtor-countries, forcing them to produce cash crops for export, is further restricting their ability to develop. They also hamper their ability to produce food for the home market.
     From 1997 to 2001 the combined price index of all commodities fell by 53 per cent. Raw-material exports lost half their purchasing power in terms of manufactured goods. Poor countries have to pay more for imports from the developed capitalist countries. These countries have to produce more to buy less: the more they trade the poorer they get. One example of the consequences of these subsidies is Mali in west Africa. In 2002 Mali received $37 million in aid but lost $43 million as a result of lower export earnings because of American subsidies. Historically, the capitalist base of the United States and Britain and other major capitalist countries was built by protecting their own domestic industry from foreign competition.
     In 2004 the European Union issued a demand to 109 countries that outlined areas of their economies that were to be opened to European corporations—areas such as water, health, and education, including government contracts. If they refuse to open up they do not get access to the EU markets. This is similar to the gunboat diplomacy of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. What they describe today as “competitive liberalisation” is in fact pitting one poor nation against another, seeking to extract maximum penetration and domination. This takes the form of
• privatisation
• unregulated foreign investment
• the free movement of capital
• reduced regulation and environmental controls
• restriction and controls on labour
• the reduced role of the state in economic activity.
     Today two companies—Philip Morris and Nestlé—control more than half the world market in roasted and instant coffee. Four companies—Cargill, Tyson, Conagra, and Farmland National—control 81 per cent of the global beef market. The Marxist analysis that the tendency within capitalism is towards monopoly and that free competition is a myth continues to be confirmed.

The dismantling of socialism

Sufficient time has now passed since the demise of the Soviet Union to assess what that counter-revolution has delivered. Though under attack from its first days, the Soviet Union was able to transform the lives of millions of people for the better, in comparison with the feudalism and colonialism they were rescued from by the October Revolution. This was never acknowledged amidst the advertised promise of the post-Soviet utopia. Throughout the history of the Soviet Union one of the pillars of the propaganda war waged against it was presenting a bogus contrast between a caricature portrait of “life under communism” and the treasures that awaited its citizens once capitalism had come to their rescue.
     If we examine seventeen former socialist countries we see that they are poorer in every sense, whether in life expectancy, education, adult literacy, or income. A report by the European Children’s Trust in 2000 revealed that 40 per cent of the population of the former socialist countries—160 million people—live in poverty, with infant mortality and tuberculosis rising to Third World levels, while Russia itself has seen a tripling of poverty levels, with an estimated 30,000 to 50,000 children sleeping rough on the streets of Moscow. The people of eastern Europe are now experiencing the world’s highest rate of detection of AIDS, following the collapse of the health and education systems.
     Emboldened by the dismantling of the Soviet Union and the other socialist states of eastern Europe, monopoly capitalism has carried on a sustained campaign of undermining and rolling back the advances made by the working class, over decades, across the whole of Europe. As the leadership of social democracy retreats from its own goals and preaches neo-liberalism as the only economic model, imperialism aims to stir up ethnic tension within the former Soviet republics, particularly in the southern states, such as Georgia and Uzbekistan, and to install compliant governments. This is carried out in alliance with organised criminal gangs masquerading as entrepreneurs.
     Their aim is to destroy any potential co-operation between Russia and the western republics—primarily Ukraine—with the ultimate prize of the vast oil reserves in the Caspian basin and the Black Sea. An additional weapon in the armoury of imperialism in this context is the use of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) as conduits for money, ideas and personnel seeking to secure their interests throughout the former socialist countries and to prevent any return to socialism. These bogus organisations provide a cover for imperialism’s political machinations and aim to subvert any nation that challenges neo-liberal orthodoxy.
     In short, the dismantling of the Soviet Union has been catastrophic, impoverishing millions of its former citizens and encouraging imperialism’s confidence in imposing unfettered market solutions in western Europe by threatening that cheaper, unregulated labour will be used or imported if organised labour tries to retain its hard-won working practices, benefits, or health and safety requirements.

Growing global resistance

The United States cannot fully impose its will—even upon what it defines as its own back yard—while such imperialist institutions as the IMF, World Bank and World Trade Organisation, through their myriad of complex international treaties, and other imperialist entities are attempting to control world trade, to impose neo-liberalism, and to shape economic and social developments to meet the needs of contemporary capitalism.
     Resistance is growing to the imposition of neo-liberalism and neo-colonialism across the globe and in particular in Latin America, with new progressive governments being elected. Governments that have failed to deliver the necessary changes but instead continue with the old failed policies imposed by imperialist-controlled global institutions, and continue in their attempts to make the people pay the price of solving debt crises and the restructuring of capitalism in the interest of the ruling class, have been forced out.
     With the popular mobilisation throughout the continent, and the example of Cuba and Venezuela, it is the compromising governments that are unstable, and those “left” compromising governments are obliged to take up progressive positions on many issues, such as regional economic co-operation in opposition to the United States and opposition to the blockade of Cuba.
     Cuba continues to be a beacon of hope and resistance, which increasing numbers of the oppressed see as the way forward. Cuban doctors are now the front-line soldiers in the struggle for a new future. The Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela is setting down deep roots and inspiring millions throughout Latin America. Along with growing regional co-operation in economic and political matters, the recent launch of the television station Telesur is a very significant challenge to US ideological domination.
     People throughout Latin America are increasingly ready for change. They are no longer alienated from politics, and they see powerful examples of how change can be brought about. Their world and what they experience are increasingly being reconnected to politics, to political struggle and radical change. In little over a decade since the dismantling of the Soviet Union and the socialist bloc of countries, imperialism is facing renewed challenges to its hegemony.
     It is clear that over the next decade we could possibly have a number of significant regional blocs that will have the capacity to challenge imperialism in Latin America and south-east Asia. This potential co-operation among developing countries to protect themselves and to give them greater political clout at the global level is a progressive development but not one without potential dangers. How these contradictions work themselves out will have a major bearing on the future of humanity. Imperialism is clearly worried about the emergence of India and China as economic and political powers, and this will lead to major competition between all these forces for the world’s increasingly scarce resources, such as oil, gas, and water.

The undemocratic and class character of the European Union

The CPI has been opposed to the Common Market since its inception and in particular since the whole of the country joined (the Republic as an independent state and the North as part of the British state). There continues to be a debate within the European labour movement over whether a “United States of Europe” is good or bad for working people. The economic forces driving EU integration—the people who really make these decisions—do not use such categories as “good” or “bad”: their values are based upon the maximisation of profits, market share, market penetration, labour availability, and global strategies of domination. Their economic and political class interests guide them.
     The development of the Common Market in the 1950s and the process of its gradual development into what is now proposed—a strong, centralised European superstate—was and is driven by European monopoly capitalism. This is tied closely to and dependent upon the big nation-states, in particular the former European imperial powers that lost their colonies after the Second World War: France, Germany, Britain, Italy, the Netherlands, and Belgium.
     European monopoly capitalism needed both to break and to combine and strengthen the European nation-states into one unit in order to streamline investment, production, and the movement of goods, to establish a larger market, to consolidate labour resources, and to create a more friendly business environment. As separate economic powers they were not and are not capable of competing with American capital on their own, because of that country’s population, its vast natural resources, the scale and level of development of its productive forces, and its military power and domination. They also needed the concentration of capital to compete with Japanese capital for similar reasons.
     The United States both welcomed and encouraged closer co-operation between European states in the initial phase as a bulwark against the perceived threat from the Soviet Union and the growing strength of working-class forces in post-war Europe and the role those forces played in the defeat of fascism. The contradiction between keeping socialism at bay and building up a potential economic and political competitor is now very apparent.
     We are witnessing the development of these contradictions between the United States and the the European Union as the United States attempts to build and consolidate its influence in eastern Europe. It is attempting to have a subservient ally in relation to the European Union, using its political influence within a number of present and future member-states. This is to prevent the European Union emerging as a potential threat to its world imperial hegemony; it is using the tactic of divide and rule in the form of the “Old Europe” and “New Europe.”
     European monopoly capitalism has many shared interests with US imperialism but does not want to be treated as a junior partner but rather as an equal in the overall strategy of global imperial domination. The division that emerged between Germany and France on the one hand and the United States over Iraq is a reflection of those tensions and potential divisions and dangers in the future.
     The expansion of the European Union eastwards is motivated by self-interest and the consolidation primarily around Germany, with France playing a junior role, to extend their control. It was also motivated by their desire to minimise the influence of the United States, while another underlying factor was the interest of the ruling class throughout Europe in blocking any way back to a socialist path of development by these former socialist societies. Parallel with this strategy is the naked economic advantage to be gained. They wish to control and dominate these low-wage economies, secure new markets, and exploit their resources and infrastructure.
     Neo-liberalism is now the dominant economic philosophy within the European Union. A reflection of this dominance is the fact that the central thrust of the Single European Act (1987), Maastricht Treaty (1992), Amsterdam Treaty (1998) and Nice Treaty (2003) remains intact. These treaties are now to be totally repealed and superseded by the proposed EU Constitution Treaty as the legal, political and constitutional basis of the European Union.
     Throughout the European Union, with the backing of the Commission, governments, including the Irish government, have been commodifying and privatising services in accordance with neo-liberal dogma and the proposed GATS regulations and the Lisbon Tasks. This, while simultaneously enriching a few, represents an attack on the living standards of the majority of working people.

Anti-democratic structures

The EU rules are about ever-increasing uniformity and the centralisation and homogeneity of decision-making. They are the conduit through which the neo-liberal social and economic model is being institutionalised in Europe. They are also carried through into its global relations with other countries, particularly developing countries. Policies favouring public enterprise as against private enterprise are legally forbidden by the proposed EU Constitution. No other model of social and economic development is to be considered or allowed.
     The Commission has all the powers over economic policy. None of the bodies exercising power in the European Union are answerable to the voters, unlike the situation in member-states, where executive bodies are responsible under the national constitution. Economic integration and the concentration of capital within the European Union have steadily increased, as have trade and the movement of capital between EU member-states.
     We will be caught in their gravitational pull. As power is removed and transferred to the EU level, the impact of this is an undermining of democracy at the national level and the building of an enclosed system at the EU level. This is increasing the distance between those who govern and those who are governed.
     This process is concerned with removing political and economic decisions from popular democratic debate and influence. The whole process is about removing essential economic, fiscal and political decisions from the realm of national class struggles. This will ensure that such issues as poverty, unemployment, economic investment priorities and public ownership at the national level become mere technical issues, to be solved by committees of experts or consultants. Lobbyists for transnational capital are able to ensure that their interests are well catered for. Calls for more powers for the EU Parliament will not mean more democracy but less democracy. The whole process is geared towards blocking both the democratic and socialist objectives of the labour movement.
     Increasingly, the governments of EU member-states will fulfil the role of territorial administrators and guardians of the repressive apparatus on behalf of the EU superstate. This is reflected in a number of ways, particularly with the establishment of Europol, a common arrest warrant, and the automatic extradition to another member-state even if the crime an individual is alleged to have committed is not illegal in his or her home country. There will be no necessity to provide evidence against the accused.
     European Directive 30/5/02 allows state agencies to track what individuals are accessing on the internet and to intercept phone, fax and e-mail communications. They do not need a court order or permission, nor do they need to suspect a person of having committed an offence. This is clearly about political control of dissent. The agreed EU definition of terrorism as “intentional acts destabilising the fundamental political, constitutional, economic and social structures” could be and no doubt will be used against workers who are involved in industrial action in a wide range of services, particularly state employees.
     The whole process is about “controlled democracy.” The EU Council of Ministers has the power to ban political parties from speaking in the European Parliament. The Council of Ministers can also remove public funding from parties that refuse to develop a “European awareness.” This controlled democracy functions by diktat in the form of directives to national parliaments without discussion or debate—like city and county managers imposing directives and rules, without any opportunity or ability by local government or local communities to change or influence them. An example of this is the directive in relation to waste incineration in the Republic.
     The forces driving European integration are the economic and political elites representative of European monopolies. This integration is totally lacking in democratic legitimacy. The role of the left in relation to this process must be to give a lead to struggles against the subversion of democracy that is involved, always taking into account the specific conditions and history of each country.
     The draft Constitutional Treaty continues to be foisted on the peoples of Europe, despite being democratically rejected by both the French and Dutch people. This is just another example of the elites’ subversion of democracy. They need to secure its adoption, as it will place working people throughout the European Union in a straitjacket and erect even higher barriers in the struggles for democracy and social progress.

Complicating the struggle for social and national justice

The continuing integration within the European Union poses serious questions for Irish democrats. Can the needs of our people be met within the economic straitjacket of this new emerging superstate? Can the European Union deliver democracy and accountability? Can it deliver the changes that such a democratic struggle demands without unravelling or changing the nature of the union itself?
     A new layer has been added to the struggle for national democracy in that we must now battle to win back areas already conceded to the European Union, without which it is impossible to advance to a socially progressive Ireland. We recognise that we need to open up new areas of struggle for more flexible forms of co-operation in a Europe of democracies and diversity.
     The Irish struggle for national democracy and independence has been made progressively more complicated and difficult as many of the powers of an independent, sovereign Ireland have been transferred to the EEC and European Union. This has meant in practice that, in addition to the struggles for civil rights, democracy, community reconciliation, and social progress, Irish national democratic forces have had to confront and battle against the erosion of Irish democracy that has come with involvement in the European Union. This has proved to be a very difficult battle, as was illustrated by the manoeuvres of the ruling class after their defeat in the first Nice Treaty referendum.
     We would welcome the break-up of the European Union, but the possibility of that happening at this time is slim, particularly as Ireland, one of the smaller member-states, would be vulnerable to the economic consequences. If one or more of the bigger countries were to withdraw, that would open up a completely new scenario. Our strategic position is to work for its break-up, but we must develop tactics that bring new forces into play and defend Irish national interests. This presents new challenges to those forces that share our understanding of the European Union.
     We need to develop strategies for exploiting the inherent contradictions within the whole process, thereby leading to a situation where the character of the European Union itself changes. We need to develop the contradictions between democracy and diktat, between the interests of monopoly capitalism and those of working people. The democratic and the class question are interrelated and intertwined.
     Our party has gained much experience from the struggle to build the civil rights movement in the North of Ireland. We know that the demands for democracy and democratic reforms exposed the inherently anti-democratic nature of the Unionist regime and began the break-up of unionism.
     This requires us to make demands that involve democratic opinion in general and working people in particular to expose these contradictions. The CPI believes that the European Union is not accountable and cannot deliver democracy. The needs of the people cannot be met within the economics of the European Union.
     It is our view that there is no benign European imperialism. There is no European superstate that could be built to combat and confront aggressive US imperialism that of itself is not imperialist. From our analysis of the class character of the forces involved and the interests propelling us towards a new centralised imperial superstate, the current direction of the European Union is not in the interests of Irish workers nor, we believe, in the best interests of workers throughout Europe.

Defending and extending international and regional democracy

It is our view that an anti-monopoly, democratic alliance needs to be built here in Ireland to work with other democratic forces within the European Union and other European states. We believe that the following demands would form the basis of that alliance:
• To internationalise the struggle for national democracy and not leave it to the parties and chauvinistic forces of the right
• To fight for policies that are centred on mutual solidarity between peoples and nations
• To have more flexible relations between the different nations and states of Europe, to work towards relations that are built upon respect for national independence and national sovereignty
• That international or regional regulations should be introduced only in problem areas that cannot be solved by individual states
• That national parliaments or peoples alone determine what powers should be exercised at the international or regional level
• To fight for a more flexible economic model of policies and co-operation in Europe
• To struggle for controls on capital and on its ability to exploit regional differences within the European Union as it now stands
• To defend the gains of the working class in relation to social provisions
• To build alliances against the privatisation of services, such as water, health, education, and other social services
• To withdraw from the “Partnership for Peace”
• To scrap the Rapid Reaction Force
• To engage in an ideological struggle against the spurious and artificial “European values.”
In spite of Europe’s shared cultural heritage, the violent history of plunder, slavery, colonialism and wars of the European elites must be exposed. They have no right to claim that human rights or democratic concerns are especially characteristic of the European continent. We are faced with either taking the course of compromise and compliance with the EU elites’ strategy or that of struggle and resistance.

2 Northern developments

The peace process and the workings of governmental institutions under the terms of the Belfast Agreement (1998) are proving to be more difficult than anticipated at our last congress. While sharing the deep frustration felt by so many with this lack of political progress, the CPI continues in its long-standing commitment to democratic struggle as the sole means of moving beyond sectarian politics through class unity to national independence and socialism. The Belfast Agreement continues to provide the best opportunity available to develop that democratic struggle.
Faced with the slow pace of progress and the potential for a political vacuum in which violence can flourish, it is imperative to emphasise how far we have come over the last forty years and just how improved the political landscape is in which we now operate. As noted at our last congress, the political institutions and cross-border bodies set up under the Belfast Agreement provide a unique opportunity for the labour movement and all progressive forces in Northern Ireland to develop and struggle for common economic, social and political demands in a way that reaches out to similar forces in the Republic.

Democratic struggle

Two misleading myths must be challenged regarding how the Belfast Agreement was arrived at. Neither of these views is correct:
—that republican violence brought the British government to this agreement
—that an upsurge in loyalist violence brought the republicans to this agreement.
It is vital that both are exposed, to avoid any temptation to resort to violence to move on the political process. Republican “armed struggle” did not deliver a victory. The provisions within the agreement fall well short of the declared aims of the militarist republicans.
     The root cause of political violence in the North lies in the denial of democracy, in discrimination, inequality, draconian legislation and state repression under the Stormont regime that existed with British government support for half a century. However, the CPI is opposed to armed insurrection against Stormont and the British state as destructive of working-class unity and counter-productive in the struggle for national independence. This political position has been consistently presented and argued by our party not just over the last three decades but right back to the 1930s. It is a political position consistent with that of James Connolly.
     In 1962 the CPI programme stated that democracy was the pivotal issue on which British rule could be challenged. The broad political appeal and the mass mobilisations around the non-sectarian demands of the Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association in the late 1960s proved this to be the case. It exposed the sectarian nature of Northern Ireland to the world and fatally weakened the political monolith of the Unionist Party. Initially the NICRA brought together a broad range of social forces—trade union, political, democratic and cultural forces—from throughout both communities. CPI members played a leading role in the NICRA, seeing the potential for it to open the way to a democratic alternative to Stormont, which would allow the emergence of working-class unity around a progressive political agenda. Unfortunately, under the pressure of state repression, and with the actions of the militarist republicans, the NICRA gradually lost its inclusive character and influence.
     The oppressive reaction of the Unionist regime to the effective campaigning of the NICRA worsened the situation. Such repression was doomed to fail as anti-unionist resistance grew. However, bloody attacks on NICRA protests by the police and sectarian mobs incited by hard-line populist Unionist politicians, especially Ian Paisley, led some to believe mistakenly that peaceful protest was not the way forward. The pogroms against Catholic homes galvanised this opinion among militarists in the republican movement. When British imperialism tried to impose a military solution, armed conflict became certain.
     The need to reform Northern Ireland was spurred on by the needs of British monopoly capitalism within the framework of the EEC—needs shared by the establishment in the South of Ireland, which was wedded to British economic interests. In 1972 the British government ended Unionist rule at Stormont and imposed “direct rule” from London. The attempt to build a “moderate” majority for reform through the Sunningdale Agreement (1973) opened the way for a “power-sharing” Executive, which ran from January to the end of May 1974. But it was doomed as republican violence continued and hard-line unionists, with loyalist paramilitary backing, opposed to sharing power with nationalists and the proposed Council of Ireland campaigned to bring it down. This short-lived power-sharing Assembly contained many of the same elements as the Belfast Agreement (1998).
     Over the following years the armed conflict resulted in more than 3,600 deaths through state violence and republican and loyalist paramilitary violence. The murder of civilians in their homes, work-places and other public places continued to divide the working people and further ingrained sectarian attitudes. The resulting polarisation severely hampered the development of progressive politics within and outside the labour movement. However, there were some outstanding attempts to challenge the situation, including the march back to work during the UWC lock-out, the Better Life for All campaign, and numerous peace rallies called by the trade union movement in response to acts of violence.
     Throughout this period the CPI continued to argue that British state terror and repression, and the denial of democracy, would never resolve the problem here. At the same time the party contended that British imperialism would not be defeated by an elitist paramilitary campaign of armed republicans acting without the support of the majority of the working people. Accordingly, we welcomed the IRA ceasefire when it eventually came and the loyalist paramilitary ceasefires that followed.
     The CPI recognises the unambiguous wording of the IRA statement in July 2005 calling an end to the armed campaign, taken with its decommissioning of weapons, as a clear indication that there is an acceptance by the republican movement of the political path. It is a significant step forward that Sinn Féin no longer sees any role for an armed organisation or the use of arms at this time, and all democrats should welcome this. It is clear that another generation of physical-force nationalists have fought themselves to a standstill and recognise that they will make and sustain political progress, north and south, only if they can finally put old methods of struggle behind them.

Opportunities presented by the Belfast Agreement

The consensus reached in the multi-party negotiations resulting in the Belfast Agreement marked a rejection of the use of violence to achieve political ends in favour of a political and constitutional arrangement, with protections built in, through which they could pursue their aims. The Belfast Agreement provides for
• a power-sharing arrangement capable of exercising executive and legislative authority, with protections built in to avoid the domination of one section of the community over the other
• joint North-South governmental bodies to implement shared polices
• the decision to join a new all-Ireland political structure or remain within the United Kingdom to lie with the people of Northern Ireland.
     Communists are well aware of the nature and limitations of the political “solutions” for Ireland that the hegemony of international capitalism is prepared to accommodate and accept. While fully recognising its faults and shortcomings, the CPI supported the Belfast Agreement and continues to do so.
     The failure to implement the Belfast Agreement has had the effect of reinforcing sectarian divisions and is responsible for the loss of progressive political momentum through apathy and polarisation. With a large section of the unionist electorate (approximately 40 per cent) failing to vote in the last election, it is clear that the UUP have really only themselves to blame for their humiliating defeat at the hands of the DUP. The UUP leadership’s relationship with the Belfast Agreement waxed and waned. Initially they sold it to their constituency as a victory over militarist republicanism and in the process outflanked the anti-agreement unionists. But as various aspects of the agreement were implemented, such as policing reform and the release of paramilitary prisoners, the UUP’s confidence ebbed. As anti-agreement forces within unionism from the comfortable position of opposition blamed anything that went wrong on the Belfast Agreement, the UUP leadership began to hesitate and falter.
     Anti-agreement unionists, particularly the DUP, used the old tactic of unionism to secure votes. They stirred up fear. They propagated the Sinn Féin myth that “armed struggle” had delivered for republicans, in that the British government, with the UUP on its coat tails, was acceding to escalating nationalist demands. It became a widely held belief in the unionist community that politically, economically and culturally they were losing as those on the other side of the sectarian divide were gaining. At the same time as this view delivers votes for the DUP, making it the leading unionist party, it also entrenches sectarianism.
     The growth of the DUP has meant that even the Progressive Unionist Party, the political representatives of the paramilitary Ulster Volunteer Force, lost out. In 1996 the success of the PUP and the Ulster Democratic Party, political advisers to the Ulster Defence Association, indicated the potential for an independent voice from the working-class unionist community.
     Alongside their expression of national identity and their position on the constitutional issue they were also raising concerns that affected their class, criticising the traditional Unionist parties for consistently using and then betraying the Protestant section of the working class. This new position saw the PUP win two seats in the Assembly. The successful proliferation of the anti-agreement position, particularly in working-class unionist areas, and the PUP’s inability to develop an alternative position that could attract support saw them reduced to one Assembly member in the last election.
     Sinn Féin’s surpassing of the SDLP in recent elections should not be misconstrued as a similar phenomenon. Rather it is Sinn Féin that has moved into SDLP political territory. Benefiting from the ending of the armed struggle and continued unionist intransigence, Sinn Féin has broken out from its traditional support base among the nationalist working class to attract votes from the nationalist middle class. Communists are cognisant of the developments and influence of the tendency within Sinn Féin that is susceptible to the priorities of domestic and US capital.
     The DUP’s successful electoral programme declared that they would renegotiate the Belfast Agreement on terms more favourable to unionism. Faced with the reality that this is not possible, they are reduced to attempting to extract concessions through, more or less, the existing structures by making demands impossible for Sinn Féin to meet, or by refusing to engage with Sinn Féin at all, in the hope that some concessions, however cosmetic, will be made. However, continued direct rule under ministers will result only in further economic hardship for the people and lead to resentment towards not only the British government but those local forces holding back the implementation of the Belfast Agreement. The British government will continue to implement the agreement and has threatened to give the Southern government a greater say in the running of the North.

Beyond the political stalemate

Despite the overwhelming strength of the forces of international capitalism, transnational corporations, and their political supporters in the governments of Britain and Ireland, contradictions exist for them. Within the political parameters of the Belfast Agreement the potential exists for exploiting those contradictions and for the development of the democratic forces that represent the interests of our people.
     Since the signing of the Belfast Agreement the Northern economy has grown faster than that of the United Kingdom as a whole, yet not as fast as the South’s. As a result, the gap in living standards (in terms of national income per capita) has widened between North and South, to the disadvantage of the North. Failure to achieve the targets set out in the Strategy 2010 document (and it does not now look as if they will be achieved) will widen the gap further as the economy of the Republic seems set to expand by up to 5 per cent per annum for the rest of the decade.
     Progressive forces need to be asking why, despite the peace dividend and despite twelve years of unprecedented growth in the Republic, the gap between North and South is going to continue to widen for another five years or so. Part of the answer must lie in the differences between economic policies pursued between North and South, and part of it must be due to the fact that the productive sector of the economy is too small in the North.
     As well as the structural weaknesses in the Northern economy there is also an urgent requirement to address the serious problems of deprivation and social exclusion. A recent study has found that poverty in the North is worse than in the South or in Britain. Well over a quarter of households in Northern Ireland were in poverty, and the study concluded: “Northern Ireland is one of the most unequal societies in the developed world.” Seven out of the ten lowest-paid areas of the United Kingdom are in the North.

Defending and extending the Belfast Agreement

While the Executive and the Assembly remain suspended, the New Labour government is attempting to push through policies that will see a dramatic increase in the already excessive cost of living in the North. Serious problems facing the economy and issues of deprivation and social exclusion in Northern society are not being addressed, and in some instances the policies of the direct-rule ministers, who are unaccountable to the people they rule, are exacerbating the situation. Direct rule is a disaster for the working people of Northern Ireland.
     To deliver this and to cover up for years of underinvestment in our water service, direct-rule ministers are intending to impose annual water charges of, on average, £450 per household, with annual increases on top. More and more of the service will be handed over to unaccountable private companies, including transnationals, which will be interested only in making profits. Instead of the money going into the running and improvement of the local water service, much of it will be creamed off by private companies. The CPI welcomes the positive initiative of the Anti-Water-Charges Coalition and views this as having the potential to unite the working class around a progressive political agenda.
     The introduction of these water charges will not result in a reduction of the rates bill, despite the fact that a large percentage of the rates goes on water and sewerage. Current New Labour proposals for calculating rates will see at least 40 per cent of homes facing increased charges. Water charges and the increase in rates will have devastating implications for already hard-pressed local farmers.
     “Top-up” tuition fees for university education could leave students here with debts of £21,000 to £60,000 on graduating. How can you develop a high-quality work force if you discourage people from higher education?
     With the Executive and Assembly suspended, the New Labour government can push through the legislation imposing these increases in our cost of living unopposed and against the interests of the people of the North. Major problems affecting the people of Northern Ireland are not being addressed.
• Northern Ireland’s health levels now qualify as the worst in Europe. Hospital waiting lists are the highest in the United Kingdom.
• 16,426 people are homeless here, while the number of unfit dwellings has reached 31,600. House prices alone rose by 81 per cent between 1993 and 2000—the largest increase in any UK region except London (up 101 per cent over the period).
• One-third of households are living in fuel poverty, compared with 9 per cent in England. Each year a thousand people are dying from cold-related illnesses. Fuel costs in the North are higher than any other region of the United Kingdom and are also significantly higher than costs in the Republic.
• Out of a total of 667,050 employed in the North in September 2003, 226,830 are in part-time jobs.
• In the public sector, 20,000 jobs will be lost; this will result in a reduction in public services and an increase in the privatisation programme. The economy will also have less money coming into it.
• Despite government manipulation of the figures, unemployment levels are still highest in Northern Ireland, particularly among youth and the long-term unemployed (twice the rate for the United Kingdom as a whole).
• The manufacturing sector is being dismantled and transferred to other parts of the world. In the food sector, transnational supermarkets have put local food producers out of business.
     The NIO’s strategy of attempting to attract foreign investment by marketing Northern Ireland as a low-wage economy and offering grants, loan guarantees or other indirect subsidies to foreign investors to create jobs here has not stopped the decline in manufacturing. Call centre jobs are not a realistic or long-term alternative. Many transnational businesses have set up branches in Northern Ireland, had their low-value production subsidised by the state for a period, and then dumped the work force and moved to other parts of the world, where they can make even bigger profits. In the process they offered little more to the local economy than the subsidised wages they paid out. Other transnationals, with the benefit of state subsidies, have bought over existing businesses here, dumped key skills, and bled what’s left dry.
     The restoration of the Northern Ireland Assembly and the full implementation of the Belfast Agreement are the key to democratic, anti-sectarian progress in the North. A broad alliance of democratic forces must be built to press this demand on local political parties and the British and Irish governments. The labour movement, along with progressive community and voluntary organisations, must play a leading role in the campaign for implementation of the Belfast Agreement.
     Armed groups, both loyalist and republican, that continue to engage in failed military responses to what are political problems must end their campaigns of violence and sectarian intimidation. The continued existence of armed republican groups that still advocate, use or are involved in armed actions is the road to nowhere. It is the mobilisation of the people, not the actions of small elite groups, that will defeat imperialism.
     We call upon loyalist paramilitaries to end their campaign of sectarian violence and intimidation. Their actions, carried out under the pretext of defending “Protestant traditions,” is not in the interests of these working-class communities and has increasingly degenerated into what can only be called gangsterism. The economic and social deprivation experienced by the Protestant and unionist section of the working class can only be addressed effectively by sustained political struggle in alliance with the working class as a whole.
     With the return of the Assembly as a focus for political campaigning and representation, the labour movement must initiate and lead a campaign for the adoption by the Assembly of a programme of government based on a progressive economic and social strategy. This Alternative Economic and Social Strategy must stress the importance of the manufacturing and public sectors, make full use of the opportunities for mutually advantageous all-Ireland co-operation, and aim to end poverty and social exclusion.

3 Developments in the Republic

The establishment continues its efforts to abandon the neutrality of the Republic, having signed up to “Partnership for Peace,” the European Rapid Reaction Force, and the new EU battle groups. Irish soldiers are actively involved in planning and exercises under the PFP, which is indirectly under the control of NATO. Irish soldiers are serving in Afghanistan and in Kosovo under EU and NATO control.
They are active junior partners in the building of the new imperial superpower that is the European Union while at the same time they continue to allow the use of Shannon Airport and Baldonnel Aerodrome by US military aircraft on their way to and from Iraq. The European Union has provided them with their long-held dream of being active junior partners, a role denied them by Britain.

Increasing exploitation and poverty

The effects of neo-liberalism, in particular the gross disparities of income it creates and extends, are starkly illustrated by an examination of the Irish economy. Some among the capitalist class have attempted to give the economic changes within Ireland over the last decade a patriotic veneer, as if a “tiger” on the loose is somehow less dangerous or fearsome because it is draped in a Tricolour and labelled “Celtic.” It is clear that even as it is proclaimed by some as miraculous, the “Celtic Tiger” can neither perform for the public good nor offer the political control that would make the economy less vulnerable to market fluctuations and dependence.
     The general consequences of embracing neo-liberalism are exemplified by statistics that show that spending on social welfare, health and education in the Republic is far below the EU average, and welfare spending is lower than in the European Union’s fifteen new member-states. As a consequence, it was calculated that that in 2003, 20 per cent of men and 23 per cent of women in the Republic are at risk of poverty, and almost 10 per cent of the population are living in consistent poverty. In addition to the evidence of crisis from our health service (which tolerates growing hospital queues and waiting lists, spiralling health insurance costs, etc.), other examples of market failings in relation to pensions, education and housing demonstrate that the price of any “Celtic Tiger” improvement for the few is paid for by the most vulnerable in society.
     With regard to the pension issue, far from the “Celtic Tiger” offering security in old age for the many, under present state provision two-thirds of old people are at risk of poverty, because of their dependence on one of the worst state pension systems in the western world (providing less than one-third of average pre-retirement earnings). While the stick being proposed for dealing with this crisis is the predictable one of raising the retirement age, greater compulsory contributions, etc., the carrot of tax relief is offered to the already affluent, with the tax relief system designed to aid private pension-holders (at a cost of €1.5 billion per year), nearly matching what is spent on the state pension scheme (€1.6 billion). The result of such practices is that a large amount of public resources, which could be used to bolster the present state scheme, is being thrown away for the benefit of already affluent high-income earners.
     The market orientation of economic policy is similarly destructive and regressive in the educational field. At the primary school level, for example, the Republic has the third-highest pupil-teacher ratio (20:1) in the European Union. At the other end of the educational spectrum, third-level education is increasingly under threat from privatisation. Furthermore, with the constant pressure for the reintroduction of fees, an already underprivileged and under-represented working class will be unable to afford higher education. Simultaneously, the government is pushing private investment and the amalgamation of big business and international corporations in university funding. Eventually, only profitable areas of learning and research will survive, while many humanities, cultural areas and long-term research projects furthering the general well-being of the people will disappear.
     The class bias and divisive foundation of current economic policy are also exemplified by the crisis in relation to housing policy. For the first time the number of people buying a second house is greater than the number of first-time buyers. In this way a housing “market” creates a situation where some are so wealthy that they can buy a second house for speculation or luxury (house prices in the Dublin area have risen in the last three years alone by 47 per cent) while others cannot afford a house at all. This inflation and exploitation is built on a policy of allowing the public housing stock to fall while the government surrenders to developers’ ambitions rather than providing the appropriate level of social housing. Increasingly, rented accommodation from private landlords is becoming the norm, while tenants’ rights in Ireland are the worst in Europe. We have no tradition of families relying on private landlords to provide long-term housing, as it was geared towards students and short-term letting. The inequality of those living in private rented accommodation is reflected in a recent study that found that tenants pay twice as much for housing as mortgage-holders, while having no security of tenure.
     This market triumph of profit over social responsibility is echoed in the toleration of the environmental damage created by building apartments and large housing estates without accompanying infrastructural planning, both in the city and in outer commuter areas. Our party must fight for the right to shelter to be added to the Constitution of Ireland, as it has been in the UN Charter of Human Rights. It must campaign for an increase in the building of public housing by local authorities and for a limit to subsidies and tax concessions to landlords and building speculators. We must also campaign for
• a stop to the sale of state land to building speculators and demand that this land be used for public housing
• the repeal of the amendment to the Planning and Development Act, to reinstate the requirement that 20 per cent of all private house-building be for social housing (rather than giving money in lieu to the councils)
• the taking over of speculative land by compulsory purchase order and of church-owned land no longer in use.
We must defend the rights of public and private tenants and develop their security and equality rights.
     While the economy of the Republic has shown very sustained growth over the last decade and seems set to maintain that growth over the next five to ten years, its vulnerability should not be underestimated. This is due to the fact that capitalism has no loyalty other than to making greater and greater profits, in the search for new areas to exploit and cheaper labour to use. Therefore, while the Republic has been one of the major beneficiaries of American direct investment for the last couple of decades, China and India are the new preferred destinations. Despite this change, however, the continuing outward flow of huge profits by the Irish capitalist class, in addition to the massive outflows of profits made by foreign transnationals, illustrates the need for us to control the flows of capital out of the country.
     While the policy of privatising publicly owned commercial companies has continued, with at least ten major state companies privatised since 1984 (Irish Ferries, Irish Sugar, Irish Life, Irish Steel, B&I, Telecom Éireann, INPC, ACC, ICC, and the TSB), policy in relation to publicly owned companies, such as Dublin Bus, Aer Lingus, Aer Rianta, and the ESB, has met with resistance from the workers in those companies. This defence of public ownership is vital, as over the decades the state sector of the economy provided very useful vehicles for stimulating growth and increasing employment and scientific, engineering and technological innovation, which had a knock-on effect in the economy as a whole.
     Furthermore, it is essential that the necessary and natural monopolies within any economy be retained or brought under public ownership in order to sustain and develop a modern economy. What is required is an integrated approach in such areas as public transport, electricity generation, water, and other public services. It is also necessary to have state control for the public good in controlling our natural resources, such as oil and gas, so that the state can set targets and strategically plan areas of the economy that need to be developed and strengthened.
     The alternative to such an approach is to continue to surrender much of our fiscal and economic decision-making to Brussels, losing our ability to take independent economic measures to reflect either the specific needs and interests of Irish workers or to protect the rights of migrant labour. The examples of workers from Turkey’s largest construction firm, Gama, and the seafarers in the Irish Ferries dispute illustrate the dire consequences of this failure to control our own economy. In the former case, despite working on major infrastructural projects for the Irish state, the workers were paid less than €5 an hour for a working week of nearly eighty hours. Similarly, Irish Ferries sought to make more than 543 seafarers redundant under a flag of convenience and to replace them with eastern European workers on €3.50 per hour, despite the Irish minimum wage being €7.65 per hour.
     The effects of the “Celtic Tiger” and the experience of the Republic with neo-liberal orthodoxy, therefore, reinforce the case for opposing a system that has allowed the natural resources of the country to remain under the control of foreign transnationals and prevented the development of these finite resources in a planned and integrated way.

The illusion of progress and prosperity

The mass peace march of February 2003, the response to the tsunami disaster of 2004 and the continuing support for progressive overseas development agencies are a clear expression of how our people see this country’s role in world affairs. This identification with the oppressed and exploited provides fertile ground on which we can develop a more anti-imperialist consciousness to challenge the establishment and to re-establish our neutrality.

Trade unions

As communists, we recognise that the trade union movement is the basic form of independent workers’ organisation for the defence and advancement of jobs, pay, and working conditions. In that respect it is not our aim to control and manipulate but rather to give a lead with ideas and action within our specific unions.
     Irish and British unions operate in both parts of Ireland; this continues to make the analysis of the laws and conditions of work more complex.
     In the Republic, “social partnership” is a contradiction in terms. Trade unions that truly represent or respect the workers’ rights are not social partners with big business and employers; neither are they in partnership with governments that do not respect workers’ interests.
     The Irish government and employers see social partnership as a one-way street, of workers doing as they are told. Consultation over policy formation and investment decisions is devoid of real or meaningful content. This was best reflected in the government’s attitude in relation to both Dublin Bus and Aer Rianta and more recently with Irish Ferries. It has only been when workers have resisted that their opinions have been considered.
     The Irish Ferries dispute demonstrated the massive public support that workers have. More than a hundred thousand people demonstrated in support of the Irish Ferries workers and against exploitation in the work-place. The CPI believes that the trade union movement should build on the strength of this unity. Though this dispute was seen publicly as a victory for the workers, in effect the employers got the deal they wanted, that is, the removal of workers on higher wages and their replacement with workers on the minimum wage.
     The government continues to use public-sector workers as bargaining chips in relation to their pay in securing “wage restraint” within the private sector. The strength of public-service unions within the ICTU leadership is making the struggles against “social partnership” and for real, meaningful change more complicated.
     It is clear that the problem is not just that the trade union movement has no political vision of its own but the regressive effect this absence has. As a consequence, political discussion within the trade union movement is dominated by elements that are connected to many of the establishment parties, while the majority of trade union officials and trade union activists have grown up with “social partnership.” This limits the development of an understanding of the history and political potential of trade unions.
     The CPI and other left forces will have to challenge this limited vision and encourage thinking that moves beyond the trade union movement being grateful for being a token consultant in unequal “social partnerships,” north or south of the border. This requires us to reassert—particularly within the ICTU—the right and ability of the trade union movement to provide a critique of current political orthodoxy and to offer an alternative economic strategy, exposing and challenging the very basis and class bias of the decisions that the ruling class attempt to impose upon us.
     Trade unions operate in a complex legal framework. Flowing from this we witness the growing role of full-time professional trade union negotiators and the complex web of arbitration and court bodies dealing with labour disputes and regulations. Communists are not in favour of turning our frustrations with the present state of the labour movement into some principled opposition to the ICTU or to trade union officials. Rather, we need to recognise that we need to mobilise trade unionists on the ground to re-engage with their trade unions by participation within the democracy of trade unions at all levels.
     The merger of trade unions poses a particular challenge to those who want to see a more effective trade union movement. This challenge means working for greater democracy within the structures, and keeping the goal of workers’ rights paramount in the development of the unions. The struggle for positions within trade unions is inevitable, but as communists we must try to ensure that this does not obscure the real issues relating to the needs of workers and the trade union movement. The positive aspects of such mergers must be emphasised and built upon. Another aspect of these mergers must be that workers should have ownership of the history and struggles of the individual unions, and these should be recorded and not lost to the new generations of workers.
     A large number of workers remain outside the trade union movement and remain unorganised. This is particularly true of young workers, low-paid, part-time, casual and contract workers and workers in the private sector. The fall in trade union membership is a result of attacks on trade unions and the inability of unions to appeal to working people. The struggle for the workers of Irish Ferries and the mobilisation of tens of thousands of workers in solidarity with their struggle proved wrong those within the labour movement who said that it could not be done. This is an example of the need to have confidence in the fight for the rights of workers.
     The revitalisation of trades councils throughout the country can provide an important vehicle for rebuilding the influence of trade unions at the community level and involving lay members in the life of the labour movement. The role of trades councils, north and south, is a potential force for helping to unify and bring radical action to the trade union movement. Belfast and Dublin Trades Councils have a leading role to play in this area of work.
     Though we recognise the fact that labour policy in not binding on government policy, nevertheless in the North the significance of the decision of the British Labour Party conference to support secondary action, arising out of the Gate Gourmet dispute, has to be built upon.
     The militancy shown by members of NIPSA and the Fire Brigade Union shows that the willingness to fight for better wages and conditions is not dead if positive leadership is given. More recently, the Post Office workers demonstrated considerable working-class unity in their demand for greater democratic rights and challenges to management practices.
     The development of policy and action against changes that are detrimental both to the workers within an industry and to working-class living standards is an integral part of trade union work. Examples of the need for such policy in the North include the fight against the water charges, for pension rights, against the privatisation of the postal service, and for the survival of industry, which has received millions in public investment money, for example Bombardier. In the South examples include the fight against the privatisation of waste disposal, the water services, the transport system, and so on.
     Workers need to be mobilised to prevent the further privatisation of publicly owned companies, such as the ESB, Aer Lingus, and Aer Rianta, the erosion and undermining of publicly owned transport and of educational institutions, and the introduction by stealth of private medical facilities, such as hospitals built on publicly owned land, which is undermining the public health service. We need to continue to build workers’ understanding that the defence of their jobs is best served by defending the public ownership of important sectors of the economy and that the expansion of the state into other important areas, such as natural resources, is vital to our future economic and social development.
     International solidarity is an essential part of the labour movement; we can learn and support each other through our common struggles. The trade union movement needs to reassert its international perspective, consolidating and developing links with trade unions around the world as an essential part of its struggle to defend and advance its members’ interests and to promote a better quality of life.
     Our party needs to bring a different dimension to trade union work. We are not only concerned about being more militant shop stewards but place trade union work in the context of building a political class consciousness. We are committed to the building of the labour and trade union movement, and the following targets are achievable tasks that we as a party are capable of fulfilling:
• the publication of a bimonthly newsletter aimed at trade union activists
• producing a pamphlet aimed at trade union activists, outlining our political strategic view
• being more systematic in our industrial organisation
• giving priority to building inter-union sector-based left co-coordinating groups
• holding a yearly seminar on the tasks of working-class forces today.
     May Day is one event that signifies workers’ unity and workers’ rights. Over the years communists have worked to increase its success. We should continue to build May Day and to draw in more community support.

Women: social and political issues

The women’s movement at home and abroad has helped to raise issues relating to gender inequalities. Sometimes this has been done in a very positive way, working for example in the trade union movement to help expose the fact that the majority of women in paid work are in low-paid, part-time or contract work, with little or no security.
     As communists we also recognise that women face specific problems relating to the law, family life, and work. This means that we have to be ready to identify and challenge the problems when we see them. Connolly’s writing on women is still relevant in that respect, helping to give a theoretical lead. Communists have been active within the women’s movement in helping to initiate campaigns, and so on.
     Feminist politics has also helped to encourage women to examine the exploitation that they face in both their personal and their public life. The Communist Party rejects the narrow politics of radical feminists that identifies only the patriarchal nature of society and does not recognise the class exploitation.
     North and south, women’s organisations have linked together in peace project initiatives. The best of these should be publicised to a greater extent, and repeated.
     Violence against women has increased, though it is true to say the aid-related organisations play an essential role, both in giving help to victims and as a catalyst in shaping social and government policy relating to court, hospital and police services. However, much more needs to be done to eliminate this violence from society. This includes an overhaul of the education system to ensure that our young people respect the rights of women.
     The Communist Party of Ireland welcomed the initiative of those women in the community who formed the Northern Ireland Women’s Coalition, which, if it could be emulated by the community as a whole, might go some way towards uniting our people. The Northern Ireland Women’s Coalition (1996–2006) played a most positive role in the peace process, helping to change and challenge dogmatic and sectarian attitudes. It was not welcomed by some politicians because of its honest and forthright actions. Without the involvement of the NIWC the issue of victims would not have been addressed in the Belfast Agreement. The NIWC’s objectives, which were to address the hard politics of the situation, to bring a fresh approach to politics, and to be inclusive of all, are a lesson that is well worth recording and continuing.
     The Northern Ireland Women’s Coalition helped to expose and to some extent redress the situation where women are under-represented in formal politics. It also gave many women first-hand experience of involvement in politics and forced political parties to look at their own election practices regarding selection and so on. They pushed forward important political issues and developed policy that sought to improve women’s lives.
     Reproductive rights continue to be a major issue that most political parties avoid. The Northern Ireland Women’s Coalition is to be congratulated for the policies that it has developed in this area. The NIWC contributed to a wide-ranging discussion that links the need for abortion with inadequate sex education, the elimination of poverty, health care, the provision of child care, and a whole range of other factors that are needed in order to prevent unwanted pregnancies. However, the fact remains that a woman’s right to choose is a human right.
     Issues of poverty are of real concern for everyone, but women face specific conditions that make them more vulnerable. The majority of lone parents are women who live on benefits. Teenage pregnancies are particularly prevalent among those families that live in impoverished conditions.
     The service industry has increased, and more and more women are working in low-paid or part-time jobs. Often there is no trade union established in such work-places, and where unions are present many women are unable or unwilling to be active.
     Women pensioners suffer poverty because their pension reflects the low wages that they earn; because women take breaks to have children they often do not qualify for a full pension, and many women have to live on state benefits because they were not in paid work or because they work on short-term contracts for employers who do not provide pension rights.
     Married women who are not in paid work have to rely upon a partner’s income. For example, women farmers often receive no actual wage for the work that they do on their farms, leading to hidden poverty. There is no law that says that a husband or partner must give women an adequate income.
     The high cost of private child care ensures that only higher-paid professional working women can afford to take a job. There should be more state child care, offering services for all child ages, from creche to after-school care.
     All these factors increase the poverty level of women and the problems associated with poverty. As a party we are committed to exposing this situation and to helping to improve people’s lives; but we realise that only in a socialist society will there be an economic base for eliminating poverty.
     Socialist women established International Women’s Day nearly a hundred years ago. It has become recognised throughout the world, but its origins, based on socialism and peace, are often relegated to some kind of liberal and businesswomen’s celebration. The working women of the world and the trade union movement in particular must rescue the eighth of March and reclaim it as their own, pursuing demands that enhance the majority of humankind’s living standards, showing international solidarity with women throughout the world and declaring opposition to war and poverty.

Diversity, migrant workers, and the threat of racism

Over the last two centuries Irish society has been blighted by emigration. In the 1800s more than two million people, driven by famine, oppression, persecution, and poverty, left these shores. In the twentieth century generations of young people were forced to “take the boat,” seeking a better life. At one stage there were more Irish people living abroad than in their own country.
     Apart from the several thousand Jewish immigrants who came to Ireland in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, fleeing persecution in eastern Europe, immigration was practically unknown in Ireland. In the 1960s and 70s small numbers of people came to study or work here, primarily in the field of medicine. In the late 1970s people fleeing the war in Viet Nam and repression in Chile were offered refuge here. Similarly, refugees from the conflict in Bosnia and Kosovo were subsequently welcomed here.
     However, this situation began to change in the 1990s, with large numbers of immigrants coming to Ireland to seek work. The central reason for this has been the unprecedented growth in the Irish economy, which the growth in the working population has not kept pace with. Notwithstanding the fact that many emigrants have returned home, the lower birth rate, the ageing population and the pace of growth in the economy have led to labour shortages.
     In 1996, for the first time, the number of immigrants exceeded the number of emigrants. Since the late 1990s there has been an inflow of about 35,000 migrant workers a year. Ireland now has the fastest-growing population in Europe and in the space of ten years has gone from the least diverse to one of the more diverse countries in Europe, with approximately 250,000 migrant workers employed in the economy. This situation will continue in the short to medium term, with economic forecasters estimating a need for 45,000 migrant workers per annum over the next few years.
     While these developments have led to a welcome diversity and growing cultural richness in Irish society, the unprecedented rapid growth has led to tensions, incidents of racist abuse and even physical attacks, and gross exploitation of vulnerable workers by unscrupulous employers. Most migrant workers are not members of a trade union, and many suffer abuse by their employers because of the fact that the employers control the work permits. More and more cases of the abuse of migrant workers are coming to public light. A large number do not receive the legal minimum wage and work excessive hours. Horror stories abound of migrant workers sleeping in sheds, being paid as little as €2 per hour, working twelve-hour shifts (including Christmas Day; no overtime rates apply), etc. Health and safety legislation is flouted almost with impunity, and the breaking of industrial protective laws is widespread.
     It is in everyone’s interests, particularly workers’ interests, that the abuse and gross exploitation of migrant labour is stamped out. If it continues, the wages and conditions of all workers will begin to suffer, and there is growing evidence that this is already taking place. It is in the interests of both Irish and migrant workers to unite to protect and improve their pay and conditions.
     Some important initiatives have been taken by trade union and community groups around the country. In SIPTU, the largest union, the Organising Unit has appointed Polish and Lithuanian organisers to work specifically to organise migrant workers; regular English-language classes are provided for members; union materials and “Know Your Rights” leaflets are available in nine different languages; more than 15,000 migrant members are organised in SIPTU branches; regular diversity and anti-racism training programmes for union staff and activists are undertaken; a guide for shop stewards, “Diversity in the Workplace,” was produced this year; and a co-ordinating committee has been set up at the national level specifically on migrant workers.
     The ICTU has produced “Guidelines for Combating Racism and Planning for Diversity” and, under its Workplace Initiative for Education and Learning (WIELD) programme has secured funding for English-language and diversity training for work-place training initiatives. The ICTU’s anti-intimidation unit, Counteract, has been relaunched in 2006, with a heavy emphasis on anti-racism training. In addition, many worthwhile initiatives have been taken at the community level with migrant workers in the community, notably the STEPS project in County Tyrone and Residents Against Racism in Dublin.
     Such initiatives, while welcome, must be built on and brought to every work-place and community. The use of racism to divide workers is a tried and tested weapon by reactionary forces and exploitative employers, both native and foreign. Trade unions have a crucial role to play in combating racism, for it is their members who have most to lose, as shown by the cases of Gama and Irish Ferries.
     The cancer of racism must be challenged and defeated. This requires a comprehensive educational and political campaign at all levels—governmental, local authorities, in the schools and colleges, and, most importantly, in the work-place and in the community. This is necessary to challenge, undermine and defeat racism and build the necessary unity between workers of all nationalities.

Youth

The education systems in both the North and South are driven by exam results and performance, and pressure to meet assessment targets is placing teachers under so much pressure that they do not have the time or space to develop young people’s intellect or to develop them into well-rounded individuals, able to engage with their communities and wider society. Current attacks on public-sector workers and the removal of essential services for more vulnerable young people only serve to compound this problem further.
     We recognise that the introduction of university tuition fees or top-up fees in the North of Ireland will vastly reduce the number of working-class young people able to attend higher-level education, leaving those who do attend university tens of thousands of pounds in debt.
     Young people are constantly bombarded by advertising and the media to engage in an excessive and consumerist life-style, which is unattainable for the majority of young people in society. As a result, many become alienated from society or turn to other means, including crime and violence, to obtain the latest “must-have” consumer products.
     This alienation is reflected in the behaviour and attitudes of many young people, who are demonised in the press and feel they have no part to play in society. As a result of these perceived inadequacies, numbers of young people turn to crime, drugs, and in some cases suicide.
     Despite this alienation, developments including globalisation, “9/11” and the resulting “war on terror” have politicised large numbers of young people across the world.
     The Communist Party recognises the need to work with and organise such young people and must aim to offer them a constructive and alternative way to engage in politics.

An alienating culture

It is becoming increasingly obvious to more and more people that within our society the ideological role that culture plays in the armoury of imperialism and contemporary capitalism is crucial. In contemporary capitalist society, ideas and values are a one-way process, from the top down. In any healthy democratic and socially just society, ideas and values would develop and be enriched in a two-way process, would be both a reflection of and a means of advancing a more culturally advanced, humane and developed society.
     Increasingly, the popular culture of our society displays its inhuman and alienating characteristics. It presents life-styles that are unachievable or unsustainable as the main goal, as the measure of one’s worth. In the plethora of soap operas, the presentation of working-class experience is one of petty chancers or drunks, unreliable and on the make. Working-class women are presented in a similar disparaging way.
     There are few if any positive role models: no-one active in social organisations such as trade unions; no politics are allowed except life-style choices. Our society tells us that the only way to obtain access to culture is to consume it, rather than to produce or actively engage with it, to consume sport rather than participate, with the over-emphasis on professionalism as against amateurism. Culture and sport are commodities, to be bought and consumed rather than experienced or participated in.
     The over-emphasis on winning permeates all sports, resulting in fewer and fewer people taking part, or falling away after a certain age. The majority are left to cheer from the sidelines. The use and abuse of drugs can only increase with the commodification of sport and culture, driven by corporate domination. Contemporary capitalism is shaping culture to suit its market needs and its ideological agenda.
     Today in culture, like many other areas of social life, the language used is filled with business jargon and marketing terminology—“consumers” instead of citizens, removing such values as democracy, access, who should be represented and involved. The “bottom line” becomes the measure of value. This strategy is to ensure uniformity in style, content, and, increasingly, language. It is a deeply alienating and anti-people culture; it is class-biased, sexist, and stereotypical of racial and national minorities.

4 The role and tasks of the Communist Party

The Communist Party of Ireland is part of the world communist movement. The revolutionary ideas of Marx, Engels and Lenin remain the theory and ideology that guide our practical work and our understanding of capitalism and socialism. We also take inspiration from the ideas of James Connolly in his development of revolutionary socialist theory specific to Irish conditions. We are internationalists, and as such we draw upon the experience of the working-class and revolutionary movements that are struggling against capitalism and also those involved in building socialism.
We are a party that believes in the revolutionary transformation of society, led by the working class. We recognise the importance of and the necessity for retaining our revolutionary philosophy and the scientific belief and application of dialectical and historical materialism. We are an anti-imperialist party, a party of a new type.

Organisation

As a party we must prioritise our actions and recognise our limitations. Our priority must be to continue to build working-class unity and the unity of Ireland by initiating and working with organisations and on campaigns that reflect the needs of the people of Ireland, north and south. We need to be firm and clear in our strategy and flexible in our tactics, to set realisable goals, and to concentrate our energies where we can make an impact.
     The building of an anti-imperialist democratic alliance is an objective that we must aim for. We will work with other organisations and build alliances for both short-term and long-term objectives. There will be times when we can take a leading role, but there will also be times when the CPI has to fall in with other organisations if they take a leading role on issues.
     We need to have a programme of work that is realistic, one that is aimed at the needs of the party internally, such as education and branch meetings, and externally—a programme that will give the CPI a public face. We are a small organisation with limited resources; however, we can be effective if we work together collectively. Our premises in Dublin and Belfast and other resources are a positive aspect of our organisation.
     As communists, we must give more priority to our own organisation and the way we organise. We should consider our discussion and decision-making processes as well as the need for more effective organisational methods and party structures. We must look for more opportunities to sell Unity and Socialist Voice, to organise fund-raising events, and to produce leaflets and other party documents. Finance is a major issue that we tend to ignore.
     The opening up of the means of mass communication—not by design but as a result of developments within technology itself—presents us and other working-class forces with new opportunities. We need to look into our involvement in and use of modern means of communication, such as the internet and local radio and television, to reach out to a wider audience than hitherto.
     There is an urgent need to address the shortcomings of our written publications, Unity and Socialist Voice, and our web site, to develop the presentation, production, means of circulation and quality of content of our publications. We need to ask ourselves, Do they present a view of a party going forward, a confident party? In many cases the first point of contact with our party is our papers or our web site. The capacity of our comrades to effectively present our ideas in public arenas needs to be addressed.

Education

Education is an area of work that needs to be given higher priority. In the past, national schools have been organised. These are of particular importance, giving us the time to discuss ideas and action in greater depth. Branch education is also an important issue, and to this extent the education classes that were organised in the North were a positive example of the kind of classes that we need. The James Connolly Education Trust events are also very productive, and we should look at how we can bring these events to Belfast.
     We need to relegitimise socialist ideas and the struggle for socialism, that socialism is still the only political and economic system that can provide for the future of humankind, is the only sustainable way of organising society, both nationally and globally.
     The party must therefore work to build and maintain a strong and vibrant Connolly Youth Movement and help to organise and educate young people to enable them to engage with their communities and working-class organisations, including the trade union movement.
     We have benefited from our attendance at different international events that help our understanding of world politics and also inform international organisations of CPI policy. The development of international links with other communist and progressive organisations is essential in helping to rebuild the movement. Of particular importance are the contact, activity and communication with the Communist Party of Britain and also the Connolly Association, which has a special role to play with respect to British and Irish politics.

A partisan party

The Communist Party of Ireland is a partisan party of the working class but not a sectarian one. We do see and understand the need to build alliances, to walk the road with those forces that will walk the road with us, both on immediate demands and for the transformation of our society. We champion the cause of our class within the broader labour movement, in the political, social, cultural and gender spheres of struggle. The challenges facing our class and nation are manifold; but it is only in class struggle, with the development of the consciousness of workers, that advance will be made and sustained.
Our world can no longer endure the damage that capitalism and imperialism are inflicting both upon the people and the global environment. The “I want” life-style that capitalism promotes and encourages, this individualism, is not sustainable in the long term. There is a need to establish a balance between individual desires and individual rights with socially necessary priorities and social rights. Imperialism of itself will not collapse but needs to be actively challenged and defeated. We are clearly at the point in the development of human society where the choice is between barbarism and socialism. Our party and our class face many challenges.
It is seventy-three years since our party was founded. We have weathered many storms and faced many battles. We are heirs to the militant fighting traditions of James Connolly, to the first working-class party founded by him in 1896 and the first Communist Party that took part in the Civil War against the Treaty settlement in 1921. We have seen some of our most active and militant comrades sacrifice their lives in the struggle against fascism. Many of our comrades and their families have suffered great hardship for their beliefs and commitment. We have had our offices and shops burned and ransacked over the decades, but we have remained determined. New challenges face us, which will require us to learn from our own history to remain true to our class and that class struggle is the engine of change.

	Home page > Policies and statements > Documents of the 23rd National Congress
	Baile > Beartais agus ráitis > Cáipéisí an 23ú Comhdháil Náisiúnta