The Socialist 15 June 2001 [Top] [Home] [News] [The Socialist] 

Join the Socialist Party   To get the full story subscribe to The Socialist

 

National action needed against privatisation

Save Our Public Services

• Privatisation is destroying health, education, transport,...
• Blair's £47,000 pay rise - an insult to the low paid.

"PUBLIC SERVICES will be the battleground of the next government", predicted Coventry Socialist Party councillor Dave Nellist, national chair of the Socialist Alliance, before last week's election.

"Labour's manifesto boasts there will be no ideological barriers to the widespread introduction of private companies into health, education and social services. "Already 800 schools and 60 hospitals are built by private companies - whose first and legal duty is to provide a profit for their shareholders.

"This is fundamentally incompatible with the ethos of public services, of being democratically accountable."

A big majority agree with Dave Nellist. A new poll commissioned by public sector union UNISON shows that 78% of people oppose privatisation. Blair and his cronies have ignored this message.

Not content with underpaying public-sector workers they now add insult to injury by massively increasing their own salaries. Blair increased his by £47,000 a year, double the average wage. Blair's total salary is now 17 times more than an adult on the minimum wage.

Most trade union leaders kept quiet during the election campaign about New Labour's privatisation proposals, but are now reacting angrily.

Dave Prentis, general secretary of UNISON, said last weekend that there was a "catalogue of private sector companies, who have gone into the public sector thinking they can make a quick buck and failing miserably. Our members and the public have suffered as a result of their greed", he said.

He added that it's time the gloves came off in the battle against privatisation.

Mick Griffiths, a UNISON activist in Yorkshire, and a Socialist parliamentary candidate in last week's election, welcomes these belated warnings but thinks it's going to need more than fine words to stop Blair's privatisation plans.

Mick said: "We stopped privatisation in the NHS trust I work for through a determined battle involving unions and the local community. But as the experience of the Dudley hospital workers shows - who had over 80 days of strike action to try and stop services being privatised - it's going to need more than local battles.

"This is a full-frontal attack and a day of action or a demo won't be sufficient. We need co-ordinated national action, including strike action, to save our public services."

 

The Socialist 15 June 2001 [Top] [Home] [News] [The Socialist] 

Join the Socialist Party   To get the full story subscribe to The Socialist

 

Kirklees nursery nurses

Labour's Low Pay Scandal

ON 16 JUNE, nursery nurses in Kirklees, Yorkshire will once again be taking to the streets to collect more signatures in support of their local pay claim. They have already collected nearly 4,000 names and spirits are high amongst the members. This time they'll be attracting the public with a bouncy castle as well as other local child-centred attractions. JILL HINCHCLIFFE, one of the organisers and a UNISON member explains the background to the dispute:

"Kirklees nursery nurses' current grades are an insult to this professionally qualified, highly committed group of staff working in education. We supported teachers to gain pay rises and celebrated with teaching assistants when they won a new pay structure and job descriptions.

"Imagine our continued disappointment, frustration and anger as Kirklees council overlooks us again. We are not even sure that those who employ us actually know what our jobs entail.

Letters addressed to the education director and the chair of the education committee have all had unsupportive and negative responses. There has not been one word of sympathy or understanding on our behalf from those who employ us, being told instead that nursery nurses must wait for a national pay claim. What pay claim?

"Other councils have finally recognised the value and expertise that nursery nurses offer in educating young people and have rewarded them with a career/pay structure that reflects their continued professionalism. Not Kirklees council!

"Instead, nursery nurses are forced to campaign to gain the recognition they deserve, with the support of the public they serve, who have been wonderful."

 

At this week's UNISON conference, there are resolutions calling for national action around school support staff and nursery nurses. The recent demo of nursery nurses in Glasgow shows that more and more of these workers are finding their voice.

It is up to UNISON to ensure that it is heard and new pay structures are put in place for these workers who can only earn a maximum of just under £12,000 a year.

Mike Forster

 

The Kirklees nursery nurses have drawn up a charter for a better deal. Copies of the charter are available from: Kirklees UNISON, 20 Queen Street, Huddersfield HD1 2SP. Tel: 01484 223577. Please send messages of support to the same address

 

The Socialist 15 June 2001 [Top] [Home] [News] [The Socialist] 

Join the Socialist Party   To get the full story subscribe to The Socialist

 

What we think

Union Leaders Belated Warnings To Labour

NEW LABOUR'S second term will be more turbulent than the first, particularly in its dealings with the unions. Even before the election, clear signs emerged of strains and tensions over the unions' financial links to Labour and, without recent precedent, a number of major strikes occurred during the election period

Following the election, major union leaders belatedly issued warnings to Labour about its plans to privatise public services - trying to counter New Labour's propaganda war that the only way to effectively run public services is through private companies.

Clearly, the union leaders, who did everything not to rock the boat for Labour during the election, are now panicking about how to respond to Blair's offensive.

Dave Prentis of UNISON, John Edmonds of the GMB and Bill Morris of the TGWU unions were joined by Ken Livingstone in saying that private companies won't run public services more effectively. This is all very true as our report on page 3 makes clear.

But appeals to Blair to be reasonable or arguments about the economic madness of privatisation won't work. Clearly, Blair's cabinet is ideologically driven to carry out this massive sell-off of public assets.

Even although we are opposed to compensation for Fat Cat shareholders, it would cost the government less to buy back Railtrack at its full current value than it would for them to carry on subsidising it. Opinion poll after opinion poll shows an overwhelming majority oppose privatisation and want most public utilities renationalised.

But also part of the government's agenda is that Blair, Brown and the rest are preparing the way for a breaking of public-sector union organisation.

Witnessing the potential power of London Underground and postal workers in recent disputes, New Labour wants to cut off at source any potential flashpoints in its second term.

Despite the anti-union laws and the fragmentation of various sectors, like health and rail, making it very difficult to effectively organise national or widespread action, workers have shown they can organise to resist Labour's plans and deliver a bloody nose to the bosses.

Blair's chief cheerleader in the unions, Sir Ken Jackson of the AEEU has echoed the idea raised by cabinet ministers that strikes should be outlawed in essential services.

Such threats will backfire on New Labour. Even if the union leaders are only prepared to mount token protests and resistance to privatisation plans, the mood of the workforce is far angrier.

Public-sector workers, unlike 1997, did not greet the re-election of Labour with any enthusiasm. Instead, there was a recognition that it was going to be four or five years of more of the same.

There have been a number of significant struggles against NHS privatisation in Wakefield (which was successful) and the Dudley healthworkers who despite 80 days of strike action were left stranded by their union leaders.

To avoid public-sector workers being picked off area by area. That's why it is essential for those at the union conferences and union members in the areas to raise the idea of preparing nationally co-ordinated action, including strike action, to stop Blair's privatisation crusade.

 

The Socialist 15 June 2001 [Top] [Home] [News] [The Socialist] 

Join the Socialist Party   To get the full story subscribe to The Socialist

 

Advance For Socialist Candidates

THE GENERAL election saw good increases for Socialist candidates. The total Socialist Party vote in England and Wales (whether standing as Socialist Alliance or Socialist Alternative) was 10,363 - an average of just over 740 per candidate.

This is more than double the average vote our candidates received in the 1997 general election, when the average vote per candidate was 369.

Socialist Party councillor Dave Nellist received the highest vote of any socialist candidate in Britain with 2,638 votes.

In Walthamstow and Hayes and Harlington, Socialist Alternative candidates Simon Donovan and Wally Kennedy received 806 votes and 645 respectively.

This was a remarkable achievement, despite being denied the Socialist Alliance nomination by the Socialist Workers' Party.

In total, the Socialist Alliance in England and Wales received 57,533 votes - an average of 587 across the 98 seats it stood in.

Similarly, the Scottish Socialist Party (SSP) doubled its average vote. In 1997 it achieved an average of 466 votes per candidate. The SSP got 72,518 votes. Its average was 1,007 in the 72 seats it stood in - representing 3.1% of the total votes cast in Scotland.

Seven members of the International Socialists (the Scottish section of the Committee for a Workers' International [CWI]) stood as candidates gaining 6,553 of those 72,000 votes.

Arthur Scargill's Socialist Labour Party (SLP), however, paid the price for its refusal to enter an electoral alliance and saw its vote drop. The SLP vote of 57,075 represented an average of just over 487, compared to its average vote of 793 in 1997.

Overall, across Britain the combined Left vote of Socialist Alternative, Socialist Alliance, SSP and SLP came to 188,814. This was achieved in just over 200 seats.

If that average had been maintained while standing in all 659 seats it would have ensured the Socialists secured 2.6% of the vote across Britain. This compares to about 72,000 votes from about 100 candidates in 1997.

 

The Socialist 15 June 2001 [Top] [Home] [News] [The Socialist] 

Join the Socialist Party   To get the full story subscribe to The Socialist

 

New Labour Turns Away Liverpool Voters

The lowest turnout In the general election was registered in Liverpool Riverside at a mere 34%. Not far behind was neighbouring Walton where 43% voted.

Peter Taaffe

This seat was won by Labour candidate Peter Kilfoyle, who wails: "Britain was in danger of emulating the United States, where less than half the voters participated in the presidential elections" [The Independent, 9 June]. What an annihilating condemnation of the policies of Labour's right wing, nationally and in the city! Kilfoyle is one of the architects of the low turnout.

In the mid-1980s, Kilfoyle - who was then Labour leader Kinnock's 'hitman' - ruthlessly expelled socialists and Marxists from the Labour Party. Their crime? Marxists played a key role in implementing socialist policies which actually benefited the working class of the city, including the marvellous house building programme, the construction of sports centres and parks and the increased job opportunities for disadvantaged young people, particularly young black workers from the Liverpool 8 area.

The right wing claimed that Militant, now the Socialist Party, was an 'electoral albatross'. Yet, never before or since, has there been a greater involvement of the people of Liverpool as when socialist, Marxist and 'Militant' ideas held sway.

In the May 1983 council elections, Labour's vote increased by an astonishing 40% - 22,000 extra votes - laying the basis for the epic and successful struggle to return the city's resources stolen by Thatcher. The turnout - remember, in a council election! - in the Broad Green constituency was 44%. In the general election, one month later, there was a swing to the Tories nationally but in Liverpool there was a 2% swing to Labour.

The only 'Tory' seat that was won by Labour in the election was in Broad Green, where Terry Fields, a Marxist and supporter of Militant, was elected on a 72% turnout!

In the 1984 council elections the turnout was 50%, 10% higher than in 1983, and Labour's vote soared to over 90,000, compared to 54,000 in 1982 and 77,000 in 1983!

The events at council level were discussed in every home, pub and club. Even in 1986, when the witch-hunt against socialists and Marxists was at its height, the turnout and the number of votes for Labour were massively above what right wingers in the city now receive.

The Liverpool Echo declared at the time: "There is not a shadow of doubt that Liverpool's town hall election results were a success for Militant... Nowhere else were the local issues more sharply defined and more important than in Liverpool... No Scouser could have been under any illusion that a vote for Labour in the city yesterday was a vote for Militant".

Incapable of defeating socialist and Marxist ideas on the electoral plane the ruling class, with the connivance of Kinnock and Kilfoyle, resorted to mass purges, which ripped the heart out of the fighting socialist Liverpool Labour Party.

The pitiful turnouts in the general election in the city represent a rejection of the alternatives of the three major capitalist parties. Liverpool council is now in the firm grip of right-wing reactionary Liberals. This is the epitaph of right-wing New Labour in Liverpool.

They have converted the Labour Party into a capitalist party. The magnificent tradition laid down by the struggles of the Liverpool working class in the 1980s will be only renewed and taken further by creating a mass socialist alternative.

 

The Socialist 15 June 2001 [Top] [Home] [News] [The Socialist] 

Join the Socialist Party   To get the full story subscribe to The Socialist

 

Northern Ireland: The No Choice Election

DAVID TRIMBLE'S position as leader of the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) hangs in the balance after his party's disastrous showing in the Westminster election. In 1997 the UUP took ten seats, many with substantial majorities.

Peter Hadden, Belfast

This time Trimble came away with five, losing three seats to Ian Paisley's Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) and two to Sinn Fein. The fact that the UUP managed to recapture South Antrim and North Down is cold comfort.

Nor can Trimble take much comfort from his own victory in Upper Bann. His 15,000 lead over the DUP in 1997 was cut this time to 2,000. In two of the other seats won by the UUP the victorious candidates were run even closer by the DUP.

In any case he will find little support among his own party at Westminster. Three of the four colleagues elected with him are opposed to the Good Friday Agreement and would probably support a challenge to his leadership

SDLP eclipsed

DESPITE MANAGING to hold their three seats, this was an even worse election for the Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP). Sinn Fein made dramatic gains, doubling their seats tally to four. For the first time ever they overtook the SDLP in terms of votes.

The rise of Sinn Fein at the expense of the SDLP seems set to continue. The SDLP are an aging party with few activists on the ground. Sinn Fein ran Seamus Mallon close in South Armagh and are poised to take this seat when he retires at the next election. John Hume's Foyle seat could also go the same way.

The other clear trend in these elections was the grinding down of all the political forces that have tried to stand against the four major parties. At the outset of the peace process a partial opening up of politics took place. New voices began to emerge and were initially seen by many as a breath of fresh air.

But the 'peace process' has been a process of sectarian polarisation. With the annual confrontations over parades - really a battle between nationalism and unionism over territory - and with a more confident nationalism confronting a Protestant population that feels itself increasingly on the back foot, the sectarian gulf has widened as never before.

Sectarianism

THE GOOD Friday Agreement set these divisions in political stone. Now in this election we are seeing a political catching up with the increased sectarian divide. Over 90% of the vote was shared between the SDLP, Sinn Fein, the UUP and DUP.

These trends - to a four-party system within which the outlines of a future two-party system with a single dominant nationalist party and a hard-line unionist party based on the growth of the DUP and some realignment with hardliners in the UUP - place a huge question mark over the Good Friday Agreement.

Trimble is likely to face a leadership challenge and may be replaced. This does not mean that the Assembly will collapse immediately. The DUP, despite their posturing, are comfortable with their ministerial positions and work with Sinn Fein on a daily basis.

Even if there is another suspension of the Assembly, the parties, Sinn Fein included, have no other strategy but to try to get it back on the road in some form.

But, as these election results remind us, the Agreement is unworkable in the long term. Sooner or later the sectarian divisions, which are maintained by the power sharing structure and which are daily reinforced by the four parties in the Executive, will tear the whole thing apart.

A workers' alternative

IT IS now urgent that an alternative to the twin monoliths of unionism and nationalism is built. For working-class people in Northern Ireland this was a no choice election.

The four major parties may have been at each others' throats on their favoured constitutional issues. Yet, they all sit together in the Executive and carry out the same policies.

They all support privatisation, PFI and the range of pro-market policies carried out by Tony Blair. The only "choice" they offer working class people is the same exploitation but under different flags.

As in Britain there was a landslide, in this case a sectarian landslide. And also as in Britain it wasn't enthusiasm either for politicians or for their policies that produced this result. It was the lack of any alternative to represent the real interests of working-class people.

If the Assembly survives for a period, working-class supporters of parties like the DUP and Sinn Fein will get an even more bitter taste of their pro-market, pro-business policies. If the only alternative is an even more right-wing party this will not significantly dent their support.

But a new working-class party, fighting for a socialist way forward, could offer an alternative to those who are repelled by sectarian politics and to those who have voted for one of the main parties but who will be disgusted by their Blairite policies.

The three hospital campaigners who stood in the local elections in South Down (see below) gave a concrete example of how such an alternative could be built.

Trade unionists, community activists and socialists must now set about ensuring that a real challenge to the new sectarian monolith is in place by the time of the next Assembly elections.

A Bright Spot On The Political Landscape AS WE go to press local election results are confirming the shift from the UUP to the DUP and from the SDLP to Sinn Fein. They mean that a challenge to David Trimble's leadership is almost certain. There are suggestions that South Belfast MP Martin Smith will oppose him at an Ulster Unionist Council meeting on 23 June. This is in advance of Trimble's own deadline of 1 July for IRA decommissioning. He has already submitted a resignation letter from his position as First Minister if there is no substantial movement on decommissioning by that date. The one bright spot on this polarised political landscape is that it appears likely that Raymond Blaney, one of the Save the Down Hospital campaigners who stood for Down Council will get elected. He appears to have taken about 10% of the first preference votes and should get enough transfers to elect him. Raymond is a former UNISON activist and has been the driving force beyond the mass campaign to prevent the loss of acute hospital services in County Down.

 

The Socialist 15 June 2001 [Top] [Home] [News] [The Socialist] 

Join the Socialist Party   To get the full story subscribe to The Socialist

 

Election 2001: A Dramatic Shift In Outlook

SUPERFICIALLY THE general election changed nothing in British politics. New Labour was returned by a landslide for the second time. Yet in reality, the election signified a dramatic shift in the outlook of people in Britain.

Hannah Sell, Socialist Party Campaigns Organiser

Turnout in the election plummeted by 12.5% to 59%. Four out of ten electors refused to vote. For the first time since 1923 the number of people who voted for the government was outnumbered by those who refused to vote.

Turnout fell most dramatically in working class, traditionally Labour supporting areas. Jack Straw, the new Foreign Secretary, tried to explain the appalling turnout away as showing the 'politics of contentment'.

Much more accurate was Paddy Ashdown's comment that voters weren't suffering from apathy but from antipathy to politicians.

The election took place against the background of strikes in the Post Office, and riots in Oldham, Leeds and Aylesbury. The Fire Brigades Union conference, meeting during the campaign, foreshadowed future developments when they passed a motion to start supporting 'non-Labour' election candidates.

Turnout fell most sharply among 25- to 35-year-olds, many of whom will have first voted in 1997. Millions of people, predominantly working class, refused to vote because they felt betrayed by New Labour's continuation of Tory policies in office.

Increased socialist support

ONE OF the most commonly expressed attitudes during the election campaign was 'what's the point of voting, they're all the same anyway'. This anger led to a semi-conscious 'boycott' of the elections by millions.

However, a glimpse of what could have happened if there had been a major party fighting a radical campaign was demonstrated in Wyre Forest. Not only did a retired doctor decisively defeat a Labour minister, on the issue of local NHS cuts, but turnout was substantially higher than elsewhere - at 68%.

The increased support for socialist candidates was also significant. The Scottish Socialist Party and the Socialist Party in England and Wales doubled their average votes compared to 1997. Other Socialist Alliance candidates also received some good results.

Even the Socialist Labour Party, whose share of the vote fell, had some creditable results. Dave Nellist, Coventry Socialist Party councillor, received the highest vote of any socialist candidate.

New Labour's support amongst the working class fell but the election confirmed New Labour's popularity with another section of the population - the capitalists. New Labour is now the first choice of the majority of the capitalist class in Britain.

Every national newspaper (except the Telegraph) supported New Labour in this election.

This is hardly surprising, as Michael Heseltine commented in The Observer following the election: "Tony Blair talks about a third way, but that is rubbish. What he has done is consolidate the Tory revolution with a social democratic government. So you get new titles, new phrases, new language but the policies are the policies that the Tories forced the Labour Party to accept in the 80s and 90s. He has paid the Conservatives the greatest compliment of all by being like them without sounding like them."

Many workers, particularly older ones, voted New Labour to give them a second chance. However, hopes that New Labour will deliver in their second term are going to be cruelly shattered.

More privatisation

UNDER PRESSURE, the government may be forced to increase health and education spending. However, this will be linked to increased privatisation. During the election, Blair was blatant about his intentions to step up privatisation in the next four years.

In their election manifesto, New Labour talk about their vision for the next few years saying that "a spirit of enterprise should apply as much to the public sector as to business". In other words they want to bring private companies in to run more and more of our few remaining public services.

The manifesto even talks about surgical units in the NHS being managed by the private sector. As The Guardian pointed out on May 16: "Policy advisers close to Downing Street are proposing as a centrepiece of a Labour second term that private contractors routinely run swathes of publicly owned services, including clinical health services, school management and most aspects of local government.

If New Labour imagines that its parliamentary majority will mean that they are guaranteed an easy ride; they are making a big mistake. Virtually everyone who works in the public sector is opposed to further privatisation. NHS consultants have come out against the Private Finance Initiative. Under pressure from their members Bill Morris (general secretary of the Transport and General Workers' Union) and Dave Prentice (general secretary of UNISON) have, in the days after the election, been forced to publicly condemn New Labour's privatisation plans.

Unfortunately, this does not mean that they are willing to lead a serious struggle to defeat the government's plans. However, there will be mass opposition to further privatisation of services and the trade union leaders will come under huge pressure to act.

Tory catastrophe

WHILST NEW Labour will face mass opposition to their policies amongst the population, inside Westminster's hallowed halls they are virtually unopposed. The Tories had a catastrophic general election.

It is clear that the Tory 'wets', such as Heseltine and Clarke, hope that the scale of the defeat will reverse the rightward march of the Tory Party.

However, they face a major obstacle - the membership of the Tory Party - who are overwhelmingly dyed in the wool Thatcherites. As a result the Tory Party is heading towards a vicious internal conflict which is likely to lead to splits. It is difficult to see how they can recover from their current crisis. Even the election of a 'moderate' Tory leader may not be enough to rescue them.

Kennedy has declared that the Liberal Democrats are "the opposition now". He correctly states that the election was not about which party would form the next government, that was already clear, but about who would form the opposition.

The Liberal Democrats aim to be the second party of capitalism in Britain, a safe second eleven. Wherever they have been in power in local authorities they have shown just how 'safe' they are, by carrying through the same programme of cuts and privatisation as the other parties.

However, there is no doubt that they gained in this election by appealing to 'Old Labour's' ground. They talked about increased spending on public services and of being the 'voice of the voiceless'. In the next period they could gain some electoral support on the basis of this kind of rhetoric.

However, opposition to Blair will come in the stormy struggles that are going to take place in the workplaces, in communities and on the streets against New Labour's policies.

The Communication Workers Union conference that took place during the election campaign gave a glimpse of the opposition New Labour's privatisation schemes will face.

Additionally, when the effects of the US recession hits Britain, it will mean huge increases in unemployment and poverty. The easy ride that New Labour has had to date will be over.

Socialist alternative needed

IT'S NOT automatic that discontent with New Labour will lead to an increase in support for the Left.

The votes that the Nazi British National Party received in Oldham (almost 12,000 across two constituencies) give a warning, how, if no alternative is on offer, the far right can capitalise.

However, the main trend in Britain is to the Left. The vast majority of the population is far to the left of all of the major parties.

Renationalisation of privatised utilities is supported by the vast majority - even the Daily Mail called for renationalisation of the railways. The experience of privatisation has forced renationalisation onto the agenda.

At present, it is only a minority who go further and consciously look for a socialist solution. But, on the basis of experiencing a second Labour term their numbers will grow dramatically.

 

The Socialist 15 June 2001 [Top] [Home] [News] [The Socialist] 

Join the Socialist Party   To get the full story subscribe to The Socialist

 

Gothenburg EU Summit:

Resist The Bosses' Europe!

US PRESIDENT George W Bush's arrival in Sweden's second city, Gothenburg, on 14 June will trigger three days of demonstrations against imperialism and the European Union (EU), which holds its summit on 15-16 June.

Laurence Coates, Rattvisepartiet Socialisterna (RS), CWI, Sweden

Demonstrators are expected from all over Scandinavia, with contingents from other European countries too. Danish and Norwegian transport workers are among those sending big contingents to 'GBG 2001'.

This is the latest in a chain of international protests against capitalist institutions like the EU, International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organisation, which took on a whole new significance with the Seattle demonstrations of November 1999.

The EU is a capitalist bloc formed by multinationals in Europe and politicians representing the interests of the rich. Their agenda is cuts, 'job flexibility', deregulation and privatisation.

The CWI (Committee for a Workers' International) is fighting for another Europe, a workers' Europe - a democratic socialist Europe.

Mobilisation

THE CWI'S Swedish section, RŠttvisepartiet Socialisterna (RS), is among 50 parties and organsiations mobilising for Gothenburg from around Scandinavia. CWI sections in Germany, the Czech Republic, Holland, Belgium and Britain are also sending people.

Elin Gauffin, Vice-chair of RS, explains: "There are a million reasons to protest in Gothenburg. Bush tore up the Kyoto protocol which in itself was a half-hearted proposal to limit the greenhouse gas emissions that are destroying the planet. He's in the pockets of the big oil and car companies."

After meeting Bush for talks, the EU heads of government, including right-wing billionaire Silvio Berlusconi, Italy's new prime minister, will discuss proposals for a European army or Rapid Reaction Force to take effect in 2003, and plans to sign up as many as 13 new EU members mostly in Eastern Europe.

"The capitalist governments of Europe use EU enlargement as an additional argument for their new army. Socialists are completely against enlargement which is just a recolonisation of Eastern Europe - where everything is up for sale," says Elin Gauffin

The CWI contingent in Gothenburg will carry placards demanding: "Jobs not bombs - No to the EU's army" to get across the message that a new arms race is about to kick-off, with Bush's plans for a new missile shield and the militarisation of the EU.

This will demand huge sums of money which could be spent on schools, hospitals and decent housing.

Fortress Europe

ANOTHER ISSUE which the CWI contigent will feature is opposition to the Schengen agreement which Sweden and Norway joined this year - raising a new wall against refugees. Although outside Schengen, the New Labour British government has introduced some of the most draconian anti-asylum laws in Europe.

The right of asylum is under serious attack. Already one million immigrants in Schengen's database are refused entry into EU. "We stand for the right of asylum which is fast disappearing in Europe," says Okoth Osewe, a member of RS.

The bosses and the establishment parties have not hesitated in playing the 'race' or 'asylum card' to divert attention from the capitalist roots of society's problems and divide the working class.

The rise of Haider in Austria and the coming to power of Berlusconi and Bossi for a second time in Italy should act as a dire warning.

While the Gothenburg demos will probably not reach the same massive size as Genoa's G8 protests in July, they show that the anti-capitalist movement is gaining in strength and self-confidence.

 

The Socialist 15 June 2001 [Top] [Home] [News] [The Socialist] 

Join the Socialist Party   To get the full story subscribe to The Socialist