The Socialist Issue 175

TONY BLAIR and his government used their party conference speeches to frighten voters about a possible return of the Tories. But while working-class people shiver at the nightmare of Hague and his motley crew returning to government, many will also ask what exactly can Labour offer that's different to the Tories?
People are angry with Labour precisely because it carried out with gusto Tory spending plans. They have increased taxes, like the Tories before them, and also like the Tories have privatised and worsened public services.
Socialist Party councillor Dave Nellist said: "Labour have done the seemingly impossible - given a discredited and hated Tory Party an opinion poll lead. They risk losing the next general election because instead of reversing the policies of the Tories, they've adopted them and run the system just like them. They're like shop stewards who become foremen."
Now Labour promises to 'get it right', especially for pensioners, but what exactly are they going to do to get it right? Gordon Brown's promises for pensioners are vague 'pie-in-the sky'. Even one of Labour's biggest supporters, the Daily Mirror demanded of Brown: "let's see the colour of your money".
Recent weeks show that action can extract concessions from this government. But don't be conned by Blair's spin. Labour's tactic is to buy time and hope the anger against them will subside.
But that anger won't subside, especially not when Blair's government does nothing against the companies and big businessmen which accumulate obscene wealth. 'Fat Fish' Bill Alexander, chief executive of Thames Water, is about to personally gain Ł1 million because the company is being taken over by German utility giant RWE.
Mick Griffiths, a Yorkshire health worker said: "Blair's speech was the biggest exercise in double-speak I've ever heard. He claims to have helped the poor but he's increased the numbers in poverty while increasing the number of millionaires.
"Working-class people have experienced the biggest ever transfer of wealth from the poorest to the mega-rich in three years. It's increased my determination to build a working-class socialist alternative to both New Labour and the Tories."

Biwaters workers fight closure

Unity to Save Jobs

THE BATTLE to save 700 jobs at Biwaters pipe works in Clay Cross, is getting underway. Since the takeover of the company by multinational Saint Gobain, with closure announced 45 minutes later, trade unionists, their families and community have been getting organised.

A women’s support group has been formed. Two from the group were allowed in to the plant to see a director. Kath Esmond told ‘The Socialist’ what happened.

“I asked him if he knew anything of the history of Clay Cross. I told him in the 1970s we fought the Tory Housing Finance Act and were the only town in the country to stand out against it. In the 1980s we went through the miners’ strike and most of the miners stayed out ‘til the end. In the 1990s we had the poll tax and sent no end of buses down to demonstrate. Now it’s your turn!

“He was smirking while I was talking. Then I said we were going over to France to tell other workers in Saint Gobain how we were being treated. He stopped smirking at that point and started to look worried. We then walked out. We’re also going to Tyneside to tell trade secretary Steven Byers’ constituents how he’s treated us.”

400 demonstrated through the North East Derbyshire town, with another march in nearby Chesterfield planned for 30 September.

A coach-load went to London to lobby Steven Byers. He claims not to have known the takeover would lead to closure!

Although pressure on him could delay closure, action may have to be taken in the plant as well. The full order book for spun pipes can only be met with Biwaters’ machinery.

If any attempt to move plant or completed orders is blocked, and links made with the rest of the Saint Gobain workforce, their plans can be defeated. Other plants could suffer the same fate as Clay Cross unless a united campaign is built.

+ Send messages of support to: GMB Biwater Branch, Coney Green, Market Street, Clay Cross, S45 9NE. Tel: 01246 250740 x254.

Prague Protests

Czech police go in heavy

TENS of thousands of people demonstrated in Prague against the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank meeting there.

In the run-up to the demo government and police propaganda tried, partly successfully, to scare away local residents with threats of ‘anarchist violence’. Although police took a ‘relaxed’ approach in Prague in the smaller demos before 26 September, they came fully prepared on that day for confrontation.

Although the demonstrations were large and vocal many potential campaigners had been stopped at Czech borders by police. Many had been detained for five hours or even longer - meaning they either arrived late or not at all. In total on the day, over 20,000 demonstrators joined three separate demonstrations, with about 10,000-15,000 on the main demo.

The police were fully equipped and used riot shields, water cannon and tear gas to hold back demonstrators for over two hours at three blockades at the bridge near the conference centre. The police were particularly involved in waves of battles with Italian anarchists.

During and after this stand-off, the police went in heavy against sections of the demonstrators. Nevertheless, IMF delegations were stopped leaving the conference. In the evening demonstrators blockaded the area near the opera where IMF delegates were supposedly gathering and the adjacent Metro station was also closed. But sporadic violent confrontations occurred throughout the evening in the city centre.

Next day (Wednesday) the police tried to stop another protest but withdrew after they conceded it was a ‘legal’ demo. The Committee for a Workers International (CWI) contingent had a lively, successful intervention on the demonstration, although one Czech CWI member, among a small group of CWI members, was beaten up by fascists after the demo and taken to hospital.

A couple of CWI public meetings were held every night during the demonstrations and new recruits for the CWI were made. Over 450 copies of the CWI’s Czech paper were sold on the demonstrations.

Fuel Protest

FOR A week in September, fuel protests and pickets almost brought Britain to a halt. The protests though stirred up much controversy, with the government accusing the protesters of colluding with the oil companies and Tories. The report below shows the contradictory nature of this movement. But it also shows that the Socialist Party was correct to support this struggle as the forerunner of bigger movements against New Labour’s pro-capitalist policies.

The movement which stopped Britain

TWO SOCIALIST Party members drove to Cardiff docks on 10 September to see if anything was happening there. At the dock gates were about ten pickets. We introduced ourselves as Socialist Party members joining the protest against fuel charges.

The picket organiser said that tanker drivers had refused to cross the picket line. 60 tankers were stranded inside the docks but drivers had told them that oil companies would try and move them next morning (Monday).

We returned on Monday at 4am where the Texaco tanker drivers’ steward met the pickets and explained they wouldn’t cross the line. The core of the pickets were haulage contractors, their drivers and self-employed drivers. Some drivers worked during the day and slept in their cab on the picket line. The original picket organiser was given time off by his boss to organise it.

The organiser had been involved in the previous Friday’s blockade of Pembroke Dock, where the police gave tickets to lorries. The whole convoy stopped and refused to move until the tickets were revoked. A senior officer was flown in by helicopter to rip up the tickets.

At Cardiff the police realised there was little they could do to stop the action and adopted a ‘softly, softly’ approach.Many pickets were owners, probably Tories at some time. During the miners' strike many haulage contractors crossed the NUM picket lines in the huge coal convoys outside the steelworks.

But the fact that some of them might have crossed picket lines was no reason not to intervene. The dispute showed the power that lorry drivers have and they have to be won behind the working class.

While the Tories opportunistically took up the fuel tax issue, most pickets didn’t support them. Some haulage contractors and especially self-employed drivers were being driven out of business by high fuel prices. This movement could go either to the right or the left, but was tending towards the left. We needed to try and link this struggle to the labour movement and to raise socialist ideas as far as possible.

This was a strike, with unionised tanker drivers taking secondary action to support the haulage contractors. The oil companies didn’t put too much pressure on the drivers - any threat of disciplinary action would have led to a complete walkout, but there was no evidence that they colluded with the protesters.

They tried several tricks to get the tankers out of the depot. A fitter was told to take a tanker to an MOT station, where a supervisor told him to leave the tanker and get a taxi. The fitter refused and drove the tanker back into the depot.

BY TUESDAY virtually all South Wales service stations were closed and there was talk of emergency services running out of fuel. The pickets had always let fuel get to the emergency services but New Labour’s claims that pickets were hitting emergency services made the situation very serious.

Socialist Party members contacted the Fire Brigades Union (FBU) and the ambulance convenor. Representatives came to the picket line.

A very successful meeting between the FBU and ambulance convenor and the four picket organisers, was followed by a press conference where trade unionists confirmed the supply of fuel and declared support for the dispute at a time when trade union leaders were attacking the protests.

By Wednesday support was growing. An eight-car cavalcade of ordinary working-class people arrived from Pontypridd. Other visitors were arriving by the hour. A 50-strong taxi protest arrived led by the transport union TGWU taxi organiser (a regular buyer of The Socialist).

Some government ministers accused the pickets of being manipulated by the pro-hunting, pro-Tory Countryside Alliance. While the Alliance poked their noses into the dispute, their effect was to sabotage the action.

David Hanley from Farmers For Action, with Tory connections, turned up on Tuesday offering the Countryside Alliance’s professional facilities. Hanley returned with a police officer early. on Thursday morning. By then there were predictions that the economy would grind to a halt on the Friday.

The Daily Mail’s front-page headline called for the picket to end the same day. Hanley said Avonmouth had finished the blockade and that a conference in Birmingham had been organised for Thursday morning, so all pickets in the country were standing down.

This information, together with fatigue and fear of losing public support led the picket leaders to call off the protest.

A few hours later they saw they’d been conned. The ‘conference’ in Birmingham was a farmers' rally in a Staffordshire farmyard. Avonmouth had been told that Cardiff was standing down.

A MEETING between picket leaders and Socialist Party members discussed further action. Firstly, a Cardiff leadership committee was formed, including a Socialist Party member. They would attempt to create a national co-ordinating committee.

The public meeting publicised for the Friday had about 50 present. There was a Socialist Party and Communication Workers' Union speaker, an FBU speaker and the original picket organiser. The rest of the platform was all truck drivers.

The mood of the meeting swung from one side to the other. Our speaker supported the pickets as well as raising wider points on the environment and got warm support. Then an environmentalist supported higher fuel taxes and the meeting swung the other way. After a Socialist Party member made another point it swung back, and so on.

The FBU speaker reported to loud applause that his members had been at a funeral but they said they would all be down to support the pickets next time. The drivers agreed that the campaign should be continued, including reimposing even bigger pickets in 60 days if Brown didn’t drop fuel charges.

The protest had many of the effects, although not the features or scope, of a general strike. These remarkable events have completely vindicated the Socialist Party's ideas and methods. As we outlined in last week’s crisis special supplement, they show how mass struggles can quickly develop in Britain.

When Housing goes to market

MARGARET THATCHER promised to create a "property owning democracy" by selling council houses and applying the 'benefits' of the market to housing provision.
Jared Wood
Twenty years on, the proportion of homes provided by social landlords (councils and housing associations) has fallen sharply but the market has brought increased homelessness and an epidemic of sub-standard housing that is outdated and in urgent need of repair.
The government's green paper, which is now passing before parliament, tells a story of millions of people in 21st-century Britain who still live in poor housing. They say:
* Too many live in poor-quality housing or find that their landlord, private or public, does not provide a proper service. It would cost about Ł19 billion just to bring the worst council housing up to a decent modern standard.
* Many live on estates which have been left to deteriorate for too long, and which contribute to ill health, crime and poverty.
* Some homeowners, including many retired people, cannot afford to maintain their own homes.
* Others who have bought homes cannot afford mortgage payments, for example after losing a job.
My article in The Socialist (28 July), looked at the disastrous effects the dismantling of social housing has had on low-income households. The article below looks at the other main element of recent government housing policy, the promotion of owner occupation and support for the private market in property.

RISING PROPERTY prices now exclude even those on average earnings from owning their own homes. Meanwhile the private rented sector offers poor quality housing at unaffordable prices.
What's more, thousands of privately owned homes sit empty despite a chronic housing shortage! Nowhere is the problem so virulent as in London. As "The City" has dished out million pound bonuses, its executives have splashed out on "pied-a-terres", formerly known as flats, to save commuting from Godalming.
There has also been an influx of European executives coming to London, which many analysts believe is a key factor in property prices rising beyond the stratosphere in the last two years. Indeed you could be forgiven for thinking that many house prices are now being quoted in Euros.
In need of new housing myself, I recently visited an estate agent in Acton, West London. Acton is one of those areas that used to be predominantly working class and offered relatively affordable housing.
Today agents are offering rented studio flats, another invention of 'estate agent speak' to dress up a bed-sit, starting at Ł140 a week.
Rents for a two-bedroom family home in inner London start at around Ł200 - Ł250 a week. To buy a similar property will cost at least Ł150,000. To get a mortgage sufficient for this, a household needs an income of Ł40,000 or more.
Housing policy in London is leading to the economic cleansing of the city's working class! Londoners on average or below average earnings are facing forced migration as every avenue of housing is closed off.
London is at the sharp end of the housing crisis but its situation is not unique. The average price of a home in Britain has risen to Ł102,000, according to the Department of the Environment.
A mortgage to cover this requires a single income of Ł30,000 or joint income in excess of Ł40,000. As most people in Britain earn well below Ł20,000, crisis is inevitable.
Owner occupation has risen from 56% in 1979 to 68% today and this increases the impact that booms and slumps in the housing market have on the rest of the economy. Housing constitutes a large part of most households' expenditure and a massive proportion of any savings.
Because of this, any shock in the housing market is felt throughout society and has to be paid for by working-class households whether owner occupiers or not.

MANY ECONOMISTS reckon that "equity withdrawal" from property contributes to "overheating" consumer spending and other inflationary trends.
This gobbledegook means that homeowners are spending the profits made on their homes, either by selling up or, more often, borrowing against expectations of even higher values in future years. This can push up interest rates, set by the Bank of England in order to cool demand.
Higher borrowing costs have an adverse impact on investment and can accelerate a slide into recession. Once in a recession the economy needs people to start spending, but the housing market is likely to have collapsed even more dramatically than the economy as a whole.
Homeowners will have suffered falling property values or even negative equity, when their outstanding mortgage is greater than the value of their home. That means they're likely to cut back on their general expenditure.
So while the housing market promotes inflation in a boom period when inflationary trends are dominating, it dampens consumer spending in a recession.
Economic studies also blame Britain's high proportion of owner occupation for "labour immobility". Moving is not only very expensive but home ownership can act as a powerful psychological disincentive to moving.
But employers now increasingly demand "flexible", i.e. easy to sack, workers. Part-time working, short-term contracts and self-employment don't sit easily with mortgage lenders. So owner-occupation can cause economic disruption and can clash with the labour market.
The private rented sector also reveals the disruptive influence of the market on housing provision. A huge stock of empty housing can be blamed, at least in part, on the boom in property values.
The government's empty homes agency estimates that there are 773,000 empty homes in Britain. Of these 637,000 are owned privately. In London alone there are 114,000 empty homes of which 40,000 have been empty for over a year.
While property values are rising at around 20% per year, many landlords don't bother themselves with the messy business of tenancy agreements and repairs but just sit back and watch the profits roll in.
Those landlords who do choose to let their property preside over another sector in crisis. The Department of the Environment (DofE) reports that private rents are still around 30% more than equivalent council rents while the standard of maintenance and the quality of accommodation remains inferior.
The DofE's estimate of this cost differential is very conservative. Commercial rents in London for a family home can easily exceed council rents by 100% or more.

THE GOVERNMENT'S housing green paper reveals a crisis. It estimates that Ł19 billion is needed to renovate Britain's council housing stock; Ł60 billion would bring the country's entire stock of housing, public and private up to scratch.
The green paper's proposals are predictably anodyne and ineffectual. No new resources are offered; the repairs will have to wait. The paper seeks to further promote the private market.
There are fine words about 'empowering' local authorities but these hide the real intention to force councils to smooth the path for the market in their local areas. The government is considering tax breaks for private landlords, to be paid for by restricting housing benefit to the market's victims!
The state of private housing provision is a clear warning of what to expect from private health care and privatised pensions. The invisible hand of the market acts only for those who own and control society's resources.
The rehabilitation of social housing, i.e. the provision of affordable, good quality housing as an essential part of state welfare must be a central demand of socialists and the working class today.

Indian kidnapping stokes sectarian divisions

THE CITY of Bangalore in the Indian state of Karnataka is facing a general strike on 28 September over the kidnapping of veteran film actor Rajkumar by the infamous bandit Veerappan. Rajkumar's fans are infuriated at the authorities' failure to secure the actor's freedom. Jagdish Chandra of Dudiyora Hooryta (Workers' Struggle) explains how the kidnapping on 30 July has inflamed the region's nationalist politics.

IN KARNATAKA, Rajkumar personifies the saviour of the Kannadiga people and their language. He has meticulously built that image over 40 years through his films by portraying himself as a down-to-earth simpleton.
The Kannada film industry dances to his tune, all the political parties bow to his requests when it comes to granting tax exemptions or waivers of entertainment taxes. A larger-than-life film personality, Rajkumar has acquired this envious position through his fan clubs.
In the 1980s when there was an agitation for the supremacy of the Kannada language, Rajkumar led that movement. It shot him to fame as a language icon. His fan clubs, though not completely controlled by him, are his muscle power.
In the recurring anti-Tamil riots and Kaveri water dispute riots, these lumpen clubs have had a field day. The abduction of Rajkumar by a Tamil bandit is seen as an affront to the prestige and fame of the Kannada language in general and Kannada chauvinists in particular.
Veerappan, a one-time sandal wood smuggler and elephant poacher, is virtually dictating terms and getting them successfully met. For example, he got a government order passed dropping all the charges against his comrades languishing in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu jails!
There is no doubt that the forest brigand has found new friends, the Tamil Nadu Liberation Army (TNLA) - which is a virulent Tamil nationalist group - is behind him. If you look at the demands that Veerappan has put forward, and the political language he speaks, it is certain that the TNLA has found a new recruit.
Apart from the linguistic communal tension it created in the first week, the kidnapping has held the whole Karnataka state to ransom. The worst hit are the unorganised workers in general and the workers of Tamil origin in particular.
The construction workers who hail mostly from neighbouring Tamil Nadu have fled the cities. The film industry has come to a standstill throwing thousands of workers on to streets with no income.
Ironically Veerappan, who has at least 100 criminal acts to his credit on account of looting, murders, rape and arson, is voicing popular demands on behalf of ordinary Tamils. They have cheered his Tamil language demands and other demands such as compensation for the Kaveri riots victims, a permanent solution to the Kaveri river dispute between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu and compensation to the innocent victims of excesses by the special task force employed to nab Veerappan.
His demand for minimum wages for the tea estate workers of Nilgiri Hills in Tamil Nadu and compensation for the Dalith ['untouchable' caste] families whose male spouses were burnt alive in the village Kambalapally of Karnataka has surprised many people.
However 'well meaning' Veerappan's demands may be, socialists must oppose the methods and tactics that he and his guerrilla friends are adopting. The present hostage crisis is threatening the unity of Tamil and Kannadiga workers. Rajkurmar's kidnapping has put the lives of tens of thousands of working-class Tamils in Karnataka on the line.
Socialists oppose the tactics of individual terrorism as it makes the working class mere passive spectators in the drama. The substitution of guns and bombs in place of collective methods of struggle such as mass strikes, industrial stoppages and all-out hartaals [general strikes], mutes the power of the working-class to defend its own interests. It also gives the government an excuse to step up state repression.
The kidnapping not only shows the incapacity of the ruling classes to solve the fundamental problems faced by the mass of the population, but also the utter failure of the leaderships of the Left and the working class movement in dealing with these issues.
The working class has to inscribe on its banner all democratic demands in relation to language, creed and caste but must also strive to achieve the goal of a society free of all exploitation.

We demand full compensation to the Kaveri water riot victims, Kamballapaly massacre victims. A minimum wages of at least Rs 5,000 to not only to the tea estate workers of Nilgiries but for all workers. A sliding scale of wages, which would fully compensate the spiralling prices of essential goods and services.
All minority languages should be given their respectful place and the medium of instruction should be in the languages that people best understand.
The working class and the Left should form defence committees at the time of riots and communal disturbances, to physically defend the linguistic, religious and caste minorities.
Only the working class and poor farmers of our region and the whole of India can achieve the complete removal of landlordism and capitalism from our midst and bring peace, progress and harmony to our lives.

New Labour and the Trade Unions

Workers' disgust at New Labour's failure to deliver anything on wages, pensions, jobs or services has raised once again the question of Labour's links with the Trade Unions and the need for a new workers' party. Craig Johnson, president of North West and Manchester regional council of the rail workers union RMT and North East organiser for the RMT Campaign for an Independent Political Fund, spoke to Christine Thomas

"AT OUR national conference this year 40% of delegates voted in favour of organising a special conference of the RMT to discuss setting up an independent political fund. I think this was an important step forward. More and more rail workers are discussing breaking the link with New Labour. Other unions of course are also doing the same. There have been discussions in the CWU and FBU for example.

But it's significant that it was the rail workers, who moved the original resolution which led to the formation of the Labour Party in 1900 to represent workers' interests. Now, looking to the future, we are discussing breaking the link because New Labour is just there for big business. On the railways, Labour were against privatisation in opposition and look at the situation now. They are going ahead with privatising London Underground against the wishes of tube workers.

The guards balloted recently for industrial action and got an overwhelming majority in most train-operating companies. But the ballot was declared illegal under the Tory anti-union laws, continued by Labour. Now everything is coming home to roost. It's challenging the traditional loyalty of rail workers.

RMT members have set up the Campaign for an Independent Political Fund (CIPF). It has now got the support of several union branches. I see this as part of the process towards a new mass workers' party. It's absolutely necessary. There must be somewhere else to go. Workers need a political voice. Understandably, it's heart-rending for some members to take on board that they've been betrayed by the Labour Party. It's not just about the railways and transport. There are so many other issues.

Look at the privatisation of the NHS and education and student fees and doing away with the grant. Many didn't expect this continuation of Tory policies. Labour now occupy the ground where the Tories were. There's a big void on the Left and we need an alternative.

In the Tyneside branch there was a serious row when the resolution supporting CIPF was discussed. This is one of the biggest branches. Some said "we've got to stick with Labour because there's nowhere else to go yet". But others said: "There's no point staying, they've betrayed us and are incapable of changing". There was no action on the resolution, but 20 conductors signed up to the campaign.

Some underground workers have said: "Why should we give them [Labour] our money?" and are refusing to pay their political dues. But that's an individual response. We need a political voice and have to make sure our money goes to the candidates who support our interests.

We are drawing up a pamphlet to put the case for an independent political fund. We've got a leaflet and have elected regional organisers and organising a fringe meeting at the reconvened RMT AGM in London in the autumn.

We are doing everything we can to sign up branches, regional councils and individual rail workers to the CIPF resolution and are getting a brilliant response. On the London Underground it's been passed at every branch where it's been put. It's the older workers who are most resistant to ditching Labour, the younger ones are most keen.

There are many workers in other unions who have similar views, like in the CWU, FBU and UNISON. We have to link up with other unions."

What's the alternative to New Labour?

THE RECENT oil protests graphically demonstrate the need for a new workers' party. The action of the protesters represented the most serious challenge to the Blair government since it came to power in 1997.

Their action became a catalyst for a general outpouring of discontent against New Labour. Millions supported the protest not only because of the high level of fuel tax but also because of all the other ways in which they feel let down by New Labour; such as the state of the NHS, the attacks on education, and the pathetic level of the pension.

Now, New Labour's support has plummeted in the polls. For the majority of working-class people this poses the question: "What's the alternative? Who else can we vote for?"

All of the existing major parties are parties of big business; they all put the interests of the billionaire fat cats before the interests of the rest of us.

In the coming months and years the need for a new party, that organises and represents the working class, will become increasingly clear to millions. Out of future mass struggles such a party will be forged.

The Socialist Party is campaigning for a new mass workers' party. At the same time we are doing our best to provide a socialist alternative to New Labour now. Our party is the only socialist party or socialist group in England to have successfully won seats in elections; we now have three councillors in Coventry (Dave Nellist, Karen Mackay and Rob Windsor) and one in Lewisham (Ian Page).

In the general election we will be standing in 18 seats across the country. However, we are anxious to maximise the impact that socialists make in the general election.

That is why we want to stand as part of a broad Socialist Alliance campaign, bringing together as many socialist organisations, groups of trade unionists and anti-cuts campaigners as possible.

Free the Funds

'FREE THE Funds - trade union campaign for a new workers' party’ is the new cross-union campaign initiated by the Socialist Party. The campaign is sponsored, in a personal capacity, by 12 national executive members from six different unions. A national petition aims to collect as many names as possible in support of the following two demands:

A letter is available asking trade union organisations to invite a speaker and sponsor the campaign. There are also model resolutions for each of the unions. For copies of petitions, letters and resolutions and for more information about the campaign, contact Chris Thomas on 020 8988 8769.

Blair's Empty Promises

Blair's empty promises