Certainly it marked a break with the normal practice of being in favour of vague motions which leave the EC room for manoeuvre. But it does mean that by not being party to any deal he will be able to avoid undermining his reputation as a left' by having to enforos its terms on the rank and file -particularly as the first major challenge to the viability of any deal The most vital decision, of course, was that is likely to come from his own members over the impending engineers" wage claim. At the same time he has managed to remain respectable in the eyes of the Government and the press, with right-wing Tory MP Angus Maude even speculating in the Sunday Exprear that, "He might become a martyr - but he might become a hero as well'.
The AUEW Conference also reaffirmed the wage claim agreed by the engineering section in April, for an increase from E25 for a 40 hour week to £35 for a 35 hour week on the basic rate, along with an extra week's holiday. This was being discussed by the Confederation of Shipbuilding and Engineering Unions (which includes the T&G) on Thursday, with a recommendation from the AUEW that 'national industrial action be taken "if necessary" if no reply is received within one month of lodging the claim in August. But national strike action in engineering would bring much of industry to a halt and could lead directly or indirectly to a goneral strike, the last thing Scanion wants. Last year's tactic of plant-by-plant bargaining was a fiasco, so Scanion's recommendation this time is likely to be for a national overtime ban and work-to-rule.
At the same time the promise of a new left' Labour Government will be used by the trade union bureaucracy in an effort to quell threats of an industrial offensive. The AUEW Conference itself passed resolutions calling for any Labour Government to withdraw from (rather than renegotiate terms with) the EEC, and for the nationalisation of major industries without compensation. The AUEW block vote will strengthen the hand of the left wing at the Labour Party conference in September, but it will aiso give the bureaucracy a useful weapon against their members. "Don't struggle', they will say, "wait for the new left Labour Government to come along. Major industrial disruption will play into the hands of the Tories at the next election.' It is these kinds of pitfalls which will have to be avoided in mapping out an alternative way forward in the coming months.
Later that month the government introduced a number of measures into the House designed to reform the labour laws. The Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act' now protected trude unionists from the most oppressive conspiracy charges - those used to make into a criminal offence an act that would not be a crime by itself. The new law provided that no combination to carry out an action, connected with a trades dispute, would be a criminal conspiracy unless that action was in itself a There had been no provision for repeal of the Criminal Law Amendment Act in the original draft bill the government had produced. But the trade union movement across the country was insistent that this hateful law had to go. The TUC Parliamentary Committee undertook to lobby for its repeal and redrafted and endorsed an amendment prepared by Robert ‹et Law?
Lowe, a prominent Liberal MP. This had the effect of repealing the Criminal Law Amendment Act and incorporating many of its criminal provisions into the now Act, The Lowe/TUC amendment was, with a fev. changes, accepted by the government and became part of the new Act, This Act now removed the worst parts af the old law, but still gave only limited protection to pickets. Picketing was only permitted for 'communicating information, and could bot even include peaceful persuasion, as it had betwoen 1859 and 1871, Today. the TUC amendment is the infamous section 7 under which the Shrewsbury 24 are being tried, and under which two Pilkington strikers were tried and convicted in 1970, The emerging trade union bureaucracy that whole working class movement. A number of extremely important resolutions were passed. which could serve to-take the struggle of the working class forward providing that the problems of how to carry them out are solved.
which forced Scanlon to withdraw from the Government-TEC talks. The ruling ciass is under no illusions about the importance of this. The Financai Timer on 21 June declared that the decision, reduces the prospects of any agreement involving a wage restraint formula being acceptable to the TUC Congress in September • Moteover, even il such an agreement were to be endorsed by the Congress, its effec tiveness could be jeopardised by the opposition of the 1,4 million member union. NEED FOR CAMPAIGN But the Conference did not go on to express the need for a campaign in all other unions to get the TUC to call off the talks. To make the decision really etrective it is now necessary to conduct a concerted campaign in all the other unions to get the TUC out - the T&G especsully, where Jack Jones is the otber left" negotiator for the TUC. Now i the time to put into practice the age old sentiment that the TUG mist he accountable to the working class move ment. Sid Harraway's line about individual unions having no say in the personalities in the talks implicitly accepts that the rank and file cannot dictate to those who speak in their name. This line is worse than uscless. The second potentiaily vital decision was that the AUEW would not accept an incomes policy under any government. This asserts the princi ple of maintaining the independence of the trade unions from the capitalist state - whether the hangman's noose is offered by Tory or Labour, It is only by maintaining this principle of complete independence from the employers, both in individual fitms and from their state, that the way forward for struggle can be kept open. The AUEW decision is a big step forward to the fundamental position of No to any form of incomes policy under capitalism'. It must now fight for this position against the plans of the Labour Party, both its left und its right wing for a voluntary incomes policy under the next Labour Government. A second part of the main resolution expressed the alternative to the talks: to build a cammade up the TUC Parliamentary Committee were never interested in giving the trade union movement the necessary teeth to wage the class struggle, They agreed wholehcartedly with the government and capitalist class that threats, violence and intimidation' should never be used by workers, and should be treated as crimes if they were. This they gave their blessing to a law that could easily become a powerful weapon in the hands of the ruling class against the workers movement, as we are seeing at the present time. Despite a few minor advances, the law of picketing still remains today one of the weakest legal spots in trade union activity. The trade union bureaucracy has never really been concerned with gaining the leeway to carry on effective picketing. They have been willing to fight for legal recognition of the organisations they head and for legal protection of the funds out of which their salaries come But they have always accepted the framework of capitalism and capitalist law. This means accepting that 'threats and violence' are the exclusive privilege of the ruling class, and that anyone else who tries to fight back in kind deserves to be ruthlessly suppressed. Trade unionists have, for many years, benefited from a fairly loose application of the picketing laws, because of the strength and determination of the rank and file of the movement. Today. when the traditional rights of picketing are once more under attack, it will only be the rank-and-file militants who are really prepared to fight this attack. The weapon of effective picketing is a crucial instrument in the class struggle, hut that struggle Jas never interested the trade union bereaucrals.
Brian Slocack George Odger, o leuding member of the TUC Porlementory Committee in 1875 » government and its policies of legal restrictions on the trade union movement."
The alternatives were summed up sharply by speakers in the debate. A right winger, Jack Hadley, said that, 'if we can't beat this is government we must go in and negotiate the best deal we can', Cliff Roberts, however, speaking for the main resolution in opposition to talks and to incomes policy, stated clearly that, "if you are not prepared to back this res olution with total industrial action you might as well forget about it. It was this policy which the AUEW adopted.
This could casily be forgotten by both the Executive Committee and the CP in the midst of the surprise and embarrassment over Scanion's insistence on forcing the Vole, Forgetfulness would be in line with the ambiguity which the CP cultivates on questions which might disrupt their alliance with the lefts", such as the general strike. Now the AUBW is in favour of a campaign of industrial action designed to defeat the government, the CP must come out openly for the general strike and all the means necessary to prepare it. Though the Morning Star continually talks of the necessity to get rid of the Tories, and Bert Ramelson in his pamphlet on the Industrial Relations Act tulks of thie demand for a general strike pour ing in like a torrent to Congress House', they want to remain ambiguous given that the lefts" preter to get nud of goscenments only by electoral means.
An essential part of preparing any general strike controntation is to ensure that the necessary techical means are not impaired and that the working chess is educated to use them. A key instrument for developing and extending a general strike is the Flying pickel. In the discussion on picketing at the Conference, Bob Wright said: Let's not have any of this non sense about neutrality on the part of the police. "The establishment of this country. including the police, have always seen their role in the protection of property.' Len Miseldine from London pointed out that, "The police have now organised themscives with heavy squads which are being ised with the sole purpose of causing an affray", us at Briant's The Conference called on the TUC to set up a coordinating committee, armed with a defence fund, to investicate cases against pickets and help defend those like the Shrewsbury 24.
and paiğn of industrial action designed to defeat the But what is really needed is for the trade unions
----- pull-quotes -----
e at ce
The AUEW Conference was a vital one for the to defend every picket regardless of the ruling class "law'. The working class is going to have to confront all the armed forces of the capital ist state as well as the unofficial gangs of thugs used by the bosses us at Chrysler's. It can't bother itsell about the law. To do this the working claas must be prepared to systematically organise pickets with all physical means nocemary to carry out the struggle. But instead of this the Conference confined itself to demanding the Labour Party bring in legal safeguards for picketing The real tusk is to take measures to defend the right to picket now, which can only be done by depriving the enerny of his monopoly of force If then UEw is serious about its commitment to a campaigi for industrial action to defeat the Government' a campaign of this kind on picketing is indispensable.
The same holds true of the wage claim. Since the AUEW claim & bound to exceed any norms which the Government will lay down under Phase 3, a major national struggle will be necessary to win the claim. No matter what the AUEW bureaucracy tries to do, the working class as a whole will see in such a struggle a major focus for their resistance to the Tory This makes urgent the preparation of the working clam tor a coming fight that will necessarily take on general strike dimensions.
The danger with ail the decisions lies in willing the end but not the means. If the logic of the decisions is accepted - no negotiations, independence of unions from the state, no incomes policy with Labour, pursuit of the clain, and Industrial action lo defeat and remove the Government - the AUEW could start a process leading to hig working chiss victories, If this logic is not translated into practice other demands such as for expropriating the major companies without compensation are so much hot air. If the working class is to go-forward to carry out revolutionary measures of this kind, extra-parliamentary measures will be necesary. Withour the deepest mobilisation of the working class against the immediate obstacles facing it, the working class will never be prepared for such a revolutionary struggle Without confronting the immediate obstacles in a decisive manner, the working class will suffer a defeat which will put those sullered under Phase 2 into the shade Red Weekly 29 June 1973 Page 5
This Endangered Planet, by Richard A. Falk (Vintage Books, £1.25) /John Ray and Kerin Todd In the last few years there has been a flood of books onto the market dealing with the question of the cavironment and its deterioration. Most of these have ended with some form of 'solution, along the lines of curbing the "population explosion, control of the use of the planet's resources or some other wonderful abstract notion. This recent arrival on the environmental band wagon is no exception. Falk's main proposal is an insane set-up based upon the United Nations as the World Government," which will solve the 'environmental problems" by application of what Falk calls the ccological imperative," which he defines as * the development of ecological politics, whose essence is a political embodiment of manin-nature, as the ideological underpinning for an adequate conception of world order. (p.21). SCALE OF PRODUCTION Clearly we would agree with the main aim of the 'ecology movement" - that is, the rational control of the planet's resources but we must take up very strongly Falk's totally inadequate conception of world order" from whuch such control could derive, The theoreticians of the 'ecologs movement" simply do not understand the economic forces from which the problems of society derive, Thus Falk states:*.. the patterns of behaviour that gonerate the crisis are created by the scile of production and the life-styles of the most advanced industrial countries. (p.10), While we would agree that the polluting effect of 100 factories is greater than that of one factory, this is only a quantitative difference which does not approuch the root of the problem.
The problem is not the scale of production but the form of production. We live in a capitalist society, that is a society where cach individual capitalist, in order to survive, must maximice his profit margins. Looked at in this way, we cin very casey snow Lauris tals waica determines mass wastage, inadequato pollutioncontrol, the blind plunder of scaroe resources, etc. etc., not purely the sole of production. WHAT IS POLLUTION?
Pollution can be defined as the introduction of some man-made product into the environment which disturbs the natural balance that exists there, The main source of pollution is industry and the servicing of industry and not, as for example. "The Friends of the Earth' seem to think, the disposal of waste products by individuals. Is it then that cach factory-owner is una ware of the damage he is causing? Is it possible to convince all capitalists of their evil terided itself now to the working class, as he claims? Even a casual examination shows the main fector 10 be ways simply by informing them of the facts? The answer is of course, no. We must reject all solutions which put the cause of the problems in the psychology of this or that or all capitalists. The answer lies in the very nature the driving force — of capitalism itacif. For example, throw that. The only proven way is by organithe century-long struggle by workers to have proper safety-equipment installed in factories is by no means over, Introduction of this equipment has been consistently rejected by the owners of industry on the grounds of expenditure (Le, reduction in profits). Clearly the struggle to enforce adequate antipollution devices will be just as hard, INDIVIDUAL ACTS How then are we to overcome these problems, so intimately bound up with the capitalist system? Falk conceives of the solution in the following way: "The first need is to uwaken the consciousness of men and women everywhere to the causes of their distress." (p.3). To grasp a new reality requires a combination of experience, understanding and an organised effort at positive response. (p.5). "The secret of beginning is to begin somewhere, with a uality must be seen, not as supracless latanding above and regulating the activity of social classesi, but as concrete and personal act, perbaps located in the minal, in one's daily routine or in one's neighbourhood. The early acts should be close at hand and gradtally the circies of effect should be expanded. (p.19).
Of course we must change consciousness, but how is this to be done? Falk argues that it will be achieved by individual acts against whatever produces this environmental danger. But it is an entire way of orgulising the econo my that produces the environmental danger and individual acts of any kind cannot over sing the working class, which has no interest in clogging its lungs, fouling up the sea and poisoning its own food, to act collectively ro get rid of the source of its prublems through a social revolution. The consciousness of these workers will be raised by the active inferven. tion and leadership of a revolutionary party in their day-to-day struggles, including increasingly in the future those against the oppression caused by pollution WHO WILL CHANGE SOCIETY? It is by refusing to take up the question of whe will change society - which class that this theoretician of the 'ecology movement' arrives at the absurd conclusion that the probJems of society can be solved through the United Nations. The UN, however, is a body which was set up by world capitalism precisely in order to maintain the status quo and not to strive for an adequate conception of world order," If the UN cannol guarantee the demo cratic right of self-determination for all oppressed nations (e.g. Bangla Desh, Vietnam and Kored), then how is it going to change the basic laws by which the world capitalist system operates.
Tho only way is the complete restructuring and reforming of the whole of society, after the barbarities and insane, unplanned dangers of the capitalist method of 'organising production and distribution of goods have been swepc away, This will not be achieved by 'individual acts, still less by acts of the United Nations, but by revolutionary action by the majority of the working class. It is the revolutionary marxists — not the Falks of this world — who are the realists on questions of such pressing gency to the people of this Increasingy murky, stinking planet