AS TONY Blair jetted his way through the Gulf area, meeting Kuwaiti sheikhs, lecturing to British squaddies and kissing Iraqi children in one big photo-opportunity, evidence was growing that he and US president Bush lied about Saddam's weapons of mass destruction (WMD).
If it's shown that Blair lied to parliament and the whole population to justify war then it could significantly damage Blair and New Labour - resignations are likely. Labour MPs are demanding a statement from Blair and a public inquiry into the scandal, which could be supported by the Tories.
Government ministers have distorted weapons inspectors Blix's findings on WMD, produced plagiarised and doctored dossiers and 'spun' intelligence agency reports to give the impression that Iraq had the capability to use WMD against other countries.
Many more MPs would have voted against the war without assurances that Saddam's WMDs were a threat. Blair could have found it impossible to back the war.
These lies were used to justify a war which sent 32 British soldiers to their deaths, killed or injured thousands of Iraqis and reduced Iraq to chaos.
Of course Blair is constantly lying to ordinary workers. In fact the whole New Labour project is based on lies. We're told that PFI is good for our hospitals and schools, that foundation hospitals won't mean a two-tier heath service and that workers don't need protection from bosses like TAG whose workers were sacked by text message. All lies.
Now Blair has lied to MPs and representatives of the establishment and threatened the intelligence services' credibility, he could be seen as a liability to the system he represents. Even a Labour MP compares this current crisis to the Watergate affair which brought down US President Nixon.
Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said it wasn't "crucially important" that there was no "literal" evidence, but most people would think that if the Americans can't find evidence or even manufacture it, the real reason for the war was for strategic power, economic domination, and oil.
The ruling class find it harder now than previously to justify going to war - more people are aware of international issues and sceptical about their motives.
That's why millions were prepared to protest on the streets both before and during the war. Never before has such opposition to a war been expressed on that scale worldwide.
Our movement, unlike many Labour MPs, never believed Blair's lies about the war. Hence the need to "sell" the idea of war with reasons such as getting rid of an evil dictator, installing democracy or the threat of WMDs.
With rising opposition at home, Blair was under pressure to justify a pre-emptive attack on Iraq. Two dossiers were produced to convince Labour MPs and get public support for the war.
In fact Downing Street 'spun' intelligence reports to try to prove there were WMDs in Iraq which threatened Britain and other countries. Blair said that these weapons could be used within 45 minutes of an order when the evidence to back this up was weak and uncorroborated.
Likewise Blair's absurd statements of possible links between Al-Qa'ida and Baghdad were never backed by the intelligence agencies. Blair and his Labour government are clearly prepared to lie to defend the bosses' system. We say:
THERE WILL be a third special FBU conference in Glasgow on 12 June, to discuss the latest offer. The London region of the union is recommending rejection of this offer, which will be discussed at branch meetings this week.
This follows the last special conference where the leadership managed to get the majority of delegates to agree to go into negotiations with the employers on the Burchill proposals.
In a special bulletin, the London region outline why they think this should be rejected. It points out that pay rises "beyond 4% are dependent upon implementation of cuts" it also says that there is no concrete pay formula on the table "beyond 2006".
It points out that the agreement endorses at national level the "end of national standards for fire cover" (ie the arrangement which stops the closure of fire stations and the reduction of staff in effect without the union's agreement).
But the national union also warns of the need at the same time to fight these IRMP proposals (see right) at a local level.
A number of other points about the agreement are also made and the bulletin concludes with the statement that the: "Deal does not provide the sort of detail or guarantees that FBU members require".
Many firefighters after a year long struggle, where twice as many planned strike days were cancelled as actually took place are understandably looking forward to the end of the dispute and the re-establishment of some sort of stability into their working lives.
But it is also clear the government and the local authority employers will use this deal, if it is accepted, to attempt to push through major changes to the way the fire service is run.
This would all be to the firefighters' detriment.
The proposals are a recipe for localised struggles and the danger is that without a national fight, some will be won and some won't. If that is the case, as other groups of workers have found, the employers will try to make lower conditions in some areas the norm for all firefighters.
Of course if the deal were to be accepted, the union must strive to maintain unity in the struggle against any threatened cuts.
However, the deal should be rejected and the campaign for a living wage should be restarted.
BY THE end of 2003, fire authorities across the country will have complied with one of the government's most contentious new directives, Integrated Risk Management Plans (IRMP). This has great implications for the future of the fire service.
At the moment the fire service works to the National Standards of Fire Cover. These have graded risk categories: A, B, C, D and rural. This means a fire in an 'A' risk area attracts two pumping appliances within five minutes and a third in eight minutes, whereas a fire in a rural risk category attracts one pump in twenty minutes (or more).
These standards and other fire safety acts pay greater heed to the protection of property than the protection of life.
The government commissioned the Fire Cover Review, also known as the Pathfinder Report, which issued an interim report in Spring 2002. This was tested live for three years in eleven metropolitan, urban, rural and semi-rural brigades.
They found that significant changes were needed to tip the scales towards the protection of life. The review recommended massive investment in the fire service to provide more stations, appliances and personnel.
But the government has buried the review. They've used our strike to hide away a report which exposed their policies of decades of under-investment.
The government and fire service employers recognise the need for change but refuse to accept the need for increased investment. Their version, Predictive Mobilising, means they will trawl up the 'facts' that suit their argument and use them to shift personnel and appliances to respond to incidents that have yet to happen.
So rather than ensuring a greater level of protection for all, the area that personnel had just left would be left depleted of its fire cover.
Another idea of 'modernisation' is to vary the response to buildings with automatic fire alarm and suppression systems. An office block with an activated fire alarm might in future receive a response of two personnel in a car rather than a pumping appliance.
Only last week fire crews in West Sussex attended an automatic fire alarm call and rescued 37 people from a smoke-filled building. This would not have been possible with just two personnel and the subsequent delayed response of the required appliances.
The employers say their plans will provide safer communities and a more flexible (cheaper) response and point to 'exhaustive' consultation with public and other bodies. But the government gives public opinion only the most cursory of nods before being completely ignored. Consultation means they have to consult, not negotiate.
We fight for the real aims of the IRMP - increased and improved public safety. Without that, the public will all be at an increased risk of death and loss from the government's push towards swingeing cuts, under the false guise of modernisation.
NATFHE, the lecturers' union, passed a number of Left-wing resolutions at their annual conference in Blackpool.
Conference affirmed support for the firefighters, with ex-president Tina Downes paying tribute to the FBU's stand against the likes of Prescott, who effectively want to ban public sector strikes and impose settlements.
Conference also passed an emergency motion urging NATFHE members to support campaigns and activities to fight racism and discrimination and agreed to mobilise for a national demonstration against the BNP in Burnley in May 2004.
Andrew Price, NEC and Socialist Party member, moved the composite emergency motion on the invasion of Iraq, condemning Bush and Blair's motives and explaining the real reasons for the invasion: "In the interests of imperialism, notably over oil."
Andrew was continuously interrupted by clapping from delegates and his praise for trade union members and students who walked out on the first day of war was particularly well-received.
Other motions were passed in support of union members who are victimised as a result of defending any refugee or any student victimised or threatened with deportation. Craig Lewis, delegate from Wales, condemned the press for demonising asylum seekers.
The main issues facing the union and lecturers in further education in the coming year will be the campaign for pay parity with school teachers by 2004.
Conference supported a motion from Inner London and the West Midlands calling for "substantial strike action" should parity with school teachers not be a reality by September 2004 in England.
In Wales pay negotiations are now separate from England. The Welsh region successfully carried a motion in the FE sector conference which endorsed an action plan.
Should talks break down and three days of strike action in September do not persuade the Welsh employers to meet our claim for parity, action will be quickly escalated to indefinite strikes, which the conference agreed to support with £50 per day sustentation [strike allowance].
In the higher education sector conference the recent government white paper was condemned. These plans will actually increase student debt and restrict access to higher education.
Top-up fees were forcefully opposed and the conference re-affirmed their total opposition to charging students any fees and demanded the restoration of full maintenance grants.
South West and Northern region's motion was agreed, calling for a vigorous campaign to fight the proposals in the white paper, inviting the participation of the NUS, other trade unions, MPs and local councillors.
The next twelve months will be crucial in further and higher education, in the fight for decent pay and conditions for staff and a decent education for students.
In the conference hall, delegates and parts of the leadership showed a willingness to fight for the union's members. This must be turned into effective action.
HEALTH WORKERS at Whipps Cross Hospital in East London were on strike for two days last week as they fought for a living wage. Employed by giant multinational contractors ISS, they are paid less than even the low wages of NHS staff whose jobs were privatised originally.
Preliminary meetings with the employers were planned as we went to press but workers at the inspiring picket line rally on 28 May spoke to the socialist.
"We get £4.62 an hour. But we have to feed 24 patients and we have to clean the ward. It's too much work and we only get peanuts money. We're too tired to work overtime to make any more money. The company sucks our blood.
"We haven't got only one manager, we've got 20 managers. They all tell us what to do. One says: 'This ward is very dirty', one says: 'You have to clean the beds', one says: 'You have to clean the fridge' and all you can say is: 'yes, yes, yes'."
"WE'RE ON strike for the future of the hospital and the whole of east London. Whipps Cross is a big hospital and people do care for other people here. We want a fairer wage and we're making a stand. If people carry on letting things go by, everyday people, people like me and you will just be walked over. You can see by the turnout here today that people do believe in our campaign and we're all here as a team."
"WE DON'T get fair pay. We should all get a decent wage and decent rights. They treat us badly, if we come in a bit late they just send us home. So we're fighting for our rights. We all work very hard here and we don't get paid properly."
"MY NAME'S Trevor and I've worked in the hospital since 1978. When I had an accident five years ago Tarmac [the previous contractors] weren't interested.
If I had an accident tomorrow ISS would just try to sweep it under the carpet. We need more money . I get £321 a fortnight and it isn't enough. I think ISS are as bad as the Prime Minister - they get all the money and we get poverty wages."
"Carillion have a contract worth £50 million with the Northern Lincolnshire and Goole hospitals trust. This includes hospitals in Grimsby, Scunthorpe and Goole. At the moment there are nine different sets of terms and conditions for the domestic, portering and catering staff at the hospitals.
"We put in a claim for a starting rate of £5.02 an hour for everyone, with NHS terms and conditions. Carrillion have come back with two offers, neither worth much and they were devisive.
"There was a 90% majority for strike action in the original ballot. And the two offers have been rejected resoundingly by 5:1.
"We've just finished our last five days of strike action, which was solid. The shop stewards committee is meeting this week to decide on the next course of action. We're not asking for much so the mood is to continue with our action. Carrillion haven't offered us anything."
Donations and messages of support to Scunthorpe UNISON Health Branch, Scunthorpe General Hospital, Cliff Gardens, Scunthorpe, DN15 7BH
AIRPLANES WERE grounded, trains didn't run and the roads and motorways were gridlocked as France's workers walked out.
Schools for the tenth time this year were closed as teachers went on strike. Elsewhere, workers in the public sector and in private industry joined in the action.
Huge demos took place in Paris (250,000) and many cities and towns throughout France (Marseille 240,000).
The strikers are demanding that the right-wing prime minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin drop his attacks on pensions, stop privatisations and scrap his plans to decentralise education.
Raffarin, like many of his European counterparts, wants to slash social spending on pensions in order to reduce taxes on big business. That is why a popular slogan on placards in Paris was "Our pensions before their profits."
He also wants to privatise much of the state-owned sector just like the Tories did in Britain. But public sector workers made clear their opposition on stickers and placards: "Electricity and Gas at the service of everyone, not the profits of a few."
With a right-wing President and government the French ruling classes are hoping to tough it out with the trade unions. Raffarin has made it clear he's not going to cave-in like the then prime minister Alain Juppe did in 1995/96 when faced with mass protests. "The street does not rule" he declared. However, a placard in Rouen declared defiance: "Raffarin - the school students are in the street."
Bernard Thibault, leader of the CGT trade union federation, said: "If employees decide, we will have strikes, demonstrations, rallies, the whole palette of union initiatives, as long as needed."
Already the government has backed down on the issue of decentralisation of education, hoping that it can take the heat out of the teachers' action and thereby concentrate on pushing through its attacks on pensions.
Whether or not the movement will escalate is in the balance but the mood on the streets of Paris was summed up by the most prominent demand of the strikers: "For an all-sectors general strike".
In Austria today transport and public services were disrupted as workers walked out against Chancellor Schüssel's pension bill. Schüssel's ruling right-wing coalition has attacked the trade unions who are resisting his attacks.
AN ATTACK on workers' pensions by French Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin has combined with other issues, particularly education decentralisation, to fuel a massive response by workers throughout France.
This movement has surpassed the struggles of 1995, when the then Prime Minister, Alain Juppé, tried to impose similar measures but was forced to back down by three weeks of public sector strikes. It is presently escalating, with the possibility of a confrontation developing on the scale of 1968 - when ten million workers went on strike, threatening the survival of the capitalist system.
Two single days of protest action in February and April were followed by large May Day demonstrations, in which 300,000 people participated. The movement then took a huge leap forward with a day of strikes and demonstrations on 13 May by up to two million workers in 115 towns and cities. A majority of public sector workers were involved in that mobilisation - at least 57%.
It included a strike and demonstration in Marseille in which 200,000 people participated, leading the newspaper Libération to describe that city as both "dead" and "living" on that day; dead, because there was no public transport and little traffic, yet alive, because of the swarms of people on the streets.
Public sector workers are enraged by the right-wing government's plan to worsen their pensions. Among other measures, they will have to work for 40 years instead of 37.5 to get full pension entitlement.
But the movement has gone beyond the specific attacks that triggered it, into a mass response to the threat that 'neo-liberal' policies pose to all French workers. Not only does everyone use public services, but in France, a quarter of the workforce is in the public sector and half of all households have at least one family member working for it, so it is not surprising that most workers support the movement.
Some sections of public service workers involved in the strikes, such as in the rail, post and energy sectors, would not be affected by the present pension cut plans, but they are bringing their own concerns over privatisation, job losses and cuts into the movement.
Teachers are not directly affected by the decentralisation proposals for schools (they apply to non-teaching staff) but they are leading the struggle against them, realising it is a fundamental attack on state provision of services. They rightly see the measures as a path towards cuts and privatisation.
Private sector workers, who were hardly involved in the 1995 strikes, are participating this time. In recent years they have suffered tens of thousands of job losses, poorer working conditions and low pay. They know they're in line for further attacks on their own pension rights.
Contingents from the private sector were present on the 13 May demonstrations, including a quarter of the Michelin tyre workers, many car workers and 900 metal workers from Alstrom.
Many strikers decided to extend the action by staying out on 14 May, as metro, bus and rail workers did in the Paris region. Following 13/14 May, a series of days of mobilisation have taken place, with education workers in the forefront. These actions have involved substantial numbers, such as the 700,000 people who turned out in 70 towns and cities on 19 May.
A massive demonstration of over one million people took place on Sunday 25 May in Paris (see last week's Socialist), with demonstrations taking place elsewhere too on the same day, such as one of 50,000 in Marseille. Not prominent at first, school and college students are increasingly entering the struggle, angered at government propaganda that their teachers are acting against their interests by preventing exams from taking place.
The next major mobilisation, the tenth since the movement began, has been called for Tuesday 3 June, by four trade union federations and will involve workers from hospitals, education, transport, post, telecom, gas, electricity and the Bank of France. It will also include private sector workers, who are increasingly involved in the struggles.
Given the present mood, it is likely to reach general strike proportions in some cities and maybe nationally. Already in many towns and cities, as many as one in ten of the population have directly participated in protests and a recent poll showed that two-thirds of French people support them.
TRADE UNION federation leaders have been struggling to keep themselves at the head of the movement while at the same time trying to stop it from developing into a general strike. Not having any perspective that differs much from the failed policies of the Socialist Party (PS) and Communist Party (PC) leaders, they fear further development of the mass movement and the prospect of it developing along the lines of 1968.
Leaders of the CFDT (one of the three main union federations in the public sector), have signed up to Raffarin's 'reforms' to great anger from their rank and file. Large contingents of CFDT workers took part in the 25 May demonstration, furious following their leadership's capitulation.
The other two main federations in the public sector, the CGT and Force Ouvrière (FO), are still trying to head the movement but a general strike is "not called for", according to the leadership of the CGT.
Marc Blondel, the leader of Force Ouvrière, was quoted in the newspaper Le Monde as dismissing a general strike and saying it is of a "political, insurrectionary nature"!
But they are under intense pressure from below, and dragged along by it, have been forced to back or call for the repeated days of mobilisation, while also trying to make sure there are days in between to stop continuity of action and a momentum building up.
However, at present the movement is growing rapidly, and with a large layer of workers recognising the need for a general strike of public and private sector workers, the prospect of one is inherent in the situation.
In the face of the scale of this movement, there is great tension in Raffarin's government. Following the 1995 climb-down of Juppé, Raffarin is under pressure to push through his cuts programme from a capitalist class fearful of reduced income and profits.
Their fear stems from an economic situation that is far worse than in 1995, as a result of a collapse in the growth rate (a fall "as steep as the upper slopes of the Eiffel Tower" according to one commentator), which is linked to the developing crisis in the world economy. The public spending deficit has gone over the Eurozone limit of 3% of GDP and the economy is likely to be shown as being in recession when full figures are known. The government wants workers to pay the price of the crisis through conducting a rapid assault on the welfare state.
However, terrified at the growing strike movement, some government ministers have warned of the danger of trying to do too much, too quickly, which has already led to a postponement of university autonomy legislation and discussions on deferring it for schools. This is with the aim of trying to achieve their main objective, pension cuts.
The union leaders, desperate for the government to negotiate a deal that they can try to pass off as a significant concession, may yet find a way to derail the movement.
But French workers are at present extremely confident, combative and intent on pursuing the battle further. When Raffarin arrogantly stated: "The street doesn't rule," workers responded with warnings such as: "Raffarin should remember that the street elected him" and that "revolutions start in the street".
Workers in many areas are reviving a tradition of holding open rank and file 'general assemblies', meeting daily in some cases to vote on continued action and to discuss strike plans. They vary from assemblies based on one establishment, to cross-sector bodies involving public and private sectors, as exists in Rouen, Clermont-Ferrand and Marseille.
Activists in Gauche Révolutionnaire (GR - the French section of the Committee for a Workers' International, the socialist international organisation to which the Socialist Party is affiliated), are playing a leading role in their local workers' assemblies and realise the key role these bodies can play in building for a general strike. They call for a determined plan to develop them and argue that they should be delegate-based with all delegates subject to recall, cross-linked between the public and private sectors and linked up between regions and nationally.
Following the move to the right of the PS and PC, GR also recognises the need for a new mass workers' party. The PS has verbally moved to the left under pressure of the movement and backed the 25 May demonstration, but would be attempting its own cuts programme if it was in power, as Schr-der's Social Democratic Party is presently doing in Germany.
The French Trotskyist organisations LCR and Lutte Ouvrière had a combined vote of over 10% in the first round of the Presidential elections last year, yet have so far failed to capitalise on that support and to adopt programmes that can take the present workers' struggles forward and lay the basis for a new party.
With the French government digging in, the need for an indefinite general strike is urgent. Workers need to link up their struggles and pose a workers' alternative to the rule of Raffarin and Chirac on the right and also to the left representatives of the capitalist system.
A general strike would reveal the potential power that the working class holds in society and would raise the need for a government of workers' representatives. This could proceed to introduce public ownership of the major companies and banks and a socialist plan of production, to lay the basis for a socialist society that would guarantee decent services and living standards for all.
ALMOST TWO million Peruvian workers and peasants are on indefinite strike demanding higher wages and lower taxes. Teachers, peasants, health workers, the judicial employees, social security employees, building workers, have all joined the strike and protests
The economic and social bankruptcy and the failure of the governing elite to solve the most urgent problems facing the mass of the population have provoked an explosive strike by the working class and the most downtrodden which has paralysed the country.
In all of the main regions of the country mass, violent protests have broken out. The state of emergency has only enraged workers on strike.
They are fighting Toledo's 'neo-liberal' policies of privatisation and looting of the natural resources of the country by the multinational companies, as demanded by the IMF and Washington.
ALBERTO FUJIMORI [Peru's president in the 1990s] was a nightmare for the working class and poor and Toledo is no different. There is massive corruption in government institutions, parliament, the judicial system, armed forces and the church. 80% of the population are now opposed to Alejandro Toledo - the same proportion that now are opposed to the parliament and judicial system.
In Peru, 54% of the population now live below the official poverty line. Poverty has driven more than 2.5 million workers out of the country in economically enforced emigration. At the same time 80% of the wealth of the country is concentrated into the hands of only 2% of the population.
According to official figures 530,000 workers are unemployed and 2,821,000 under employed. The World Bank estimates that 45% of the urban population is working in the 'informal sector', ie street sellers. The crushing poverty of the majority and the wealth of the ruling class are the main ingredients for Peru's social explosion.
The most brutal effects of the economic crisis is seen in agriculture and amongst the peasants. No agricultural product is profitable apart from the coca leaves which is used to enrich the drug traffickers and which are also controlled by the state and the banks.
The country's natural resources are estimated to be sufficient to feed 25 million people each year but the agro-economy is in total ruin. On 58% of cultivated lands the 'chaki taclla' is still used as the main tool. This is a wooden instrument developed in the epoch of the Incas and driven by foot power!
PERU IS a clear example of the historical failure of the parasitical capitalist and landlord classes to develop the national economy and raise the standard of living of the working class, the peasants and especially the indigenous peoples.
The most repeated promise in the election campaign of Toledo was "the change". But this government has changed nothing and has now put the military on the streets to repress the demands made by the workers.
While capitalism continues the poor, the working class and the peasants will continue suffering conditions of misery living under the boot of the local political elite and imperialism.
The current struggles in Peru have shown once again that the working class has the cohesion and strength to fight to change its conditions of life.
However, if concessions are won through struggle, given the capitalist crisis, it will be only for a short time before the ruling class return to further attacks including the use of military repression.
The only alternative is to establish a government of workers and poor peasants with a socialist programme whose first measure would be to take control of production, nationalise the major national and international monopolies under democratic workers' control and management, refuse to pay the foreign debt and break with the IMF, imperialism and capitalism.
A socialist Peru, with an appeal to the working class and other oppressed peoples of the continent to finish with neo-liberal governments and capitalism and begin the construction of a Socialist Federation of Latin America is the answer to the current crisis.
IN 1990 10 million Peruvians lived below the poverty line. By 2000 this had grown to 14 million. Of these 24% live in 'conditions of extreme poverty'.
Around 50% of the population are either unemployed or under-employed and 55% try to survive on only $1.25 a day.
25% of Peruvian children under five years of age suffer from chronic malnutrition - in the rural areas this figure rises to 40%!
Some reports estimate that of the 6.8 million rural inhabitants 78% live in poverty, of which 67% live in conditions of extreme poverty.
In the rural areas; 52% of houses do not have toilets installed, 68% of schools have no drinking water and 95% lack toilets, 90% of schools have no electricity supply.
UNICEF estimated in 2000 that every year 100,000 students abandon primary schools and that in secondary education this figure rises to 200,000.
Two million children are forced into child labour to supplement the family income.
THIS IS the second time that Toledo has resorted to emergency powers since winning the presidency in July 2001.
In June last year, a general strike and mass protests erupted across the country after the government sold two state-owned electricity generating companies in Arequipa to a Belgian firm.
A state of emergency was declared and police set about protesters injuring hundreds and killing one person.
IN EVIAN, France, representatives of the world's most powerful capitalist nations discussed many issues, including globalisation, weapons of mass destruction (WMD), North Korea and the Middle East.
They were greeted in Evian and nearby towns by tens of thousands of anti-capitalist and anti-globalisation protesters, many travelling across Europe to give these imperialists a 'warm welcome'.
This year's summit met after the war on Iraq and with widespread fears on the world economy. For Bush and Blair, the 'revelation' that there may not have been WMD in Iraq couldn't have come at a worse time, with Chirac who voiced concern regarding the war, hosting the summit.
Political commentators ask "will this prompt better relations" between the two wings of imperialism and the international ruling class? Tony Blair certainly seems desperate to heal the rift between Britain and the war's 'opponents', mainly Germany and France. Blair said "world leaders should bury their differences over Iraq and work together in issues such as African poverty and freeing up world trade."
"Freeing up" trade is what the G8 is all about, carving up the world, liberalising the economy so multinationals can increase their exploitation of the working class worldwide.
Chirac, hailed as a progressive by many for his 'anti-Iraq war' stand, wages uninterrupted war against France's working class, in a huge battle over pension reforms and cutbacks. Germany's leader, Schroeder, at a special conference of the Social Democratic Party (SPD) last weekend, passed a new package of reforms to relax job protection laws and cut unemployment benefits.
After the huge anti-war protests and the ongoing anti-capitalist movement, the G8 leaders know that wherever they meet they'll be greeted by a sea of protest. This movement however has many strands of thought, with a great deal of confusion amongst the leadership and participants.
There were some incidents of clashes with the police - who didn't attack the main demos but concentrated on harassing some smaller protests.
In a town near Evian, some anarchists attacked a 350-strong meeting of the Parti Socialiste. (France's main social democratic opposition party, who are trying to gain from the opposition to Chirac over the pensions and cutbacks but whose leaders admit that they'd do the same!)
The leading spokespersons of the anti-capitalist movement, though, seem afraid of putting a clear socialist alternative.
The world's problems are caused by capitalism, which can't be pressurised into being more caring as some spokespersons imply. That system has to be consciously overthrown by the working class on the basis of a mass party armed with a Marxist programme.
The CWI and the socialist youth group ISR are an integral part of the movement. We are trying to win the best of the protesters, through our actions and most importantly our political ideas, to see the need to build mass revolutionary socialist parties and a mass Marxist international. Another world is possible - a socialist world is necessary!
SOCIALIST PARTY (CWI in Ireland) member Carmel Gates has been elected President of NIPSA, Northern Ireland's largest trade union.
The election at the recent union conference gave Carmel victory with almost 17,000 votes against 11,500 for the right wing candidate. Her vote is one of the largest ever achieved by a candidate for this post.
Another Socialist Party member, Padraig Mulholland, came within a few hundred votes of winning the vice-presidency, standing against a former President and the strongest candidate the right wing could put up.
The conference marked a significant shift to the left. It endorsed the outgoing left executive's decision to donate £40,000 to the firefighters' union FBU, involved in months of sporadic strike action. Only one lone voice was raised against the donation from the floor. Another motion passed backed airport security workers sacked a year ago for striking against poverty wages - a donation to their hardship fund was promised.
The right wing were defeated on a motion trying to reverse the outgoing left executive's decision to cut the amount of travel expenses paid for union executive meetings. The same people who wanted to increase the amount of money paid to themselves in expenses had voted against paying strike pay to social workers currently taking industrial action across Northern Ireland.
On international issues, a motion on the Middle East, which called for a socialist federation of the region, was passed unanimously. This from a union that purports to he non-political!
Unfortunately elections to the general council (Executive) held this January had given the right wing a majority. Now we must use Carmel's position as President and the five other Socialist Party members on the general council to rebuild the left in the union so that it can win a majority in next year's election.
THE RECENT decision by the United Nations (UN) to send troops to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) is the latest in a series of interventions on the continent of Africa, ostensibly to quell ethnic conflicts and avert a "humanitarian nightmare".
In the case of DRC they have left it late since the current civil war has been raging for years and has already claimed up to five million lives. The recent massacre of 400 people in Bunia took place in full view of 700 UN troops who did nothing to stop it.
The conflict in DRC is a war for territory and thereby for access to the massive mineral riches of this impoverished, yet potentially wealthy, country.
It is conducted by various militia forces, mostly the degenerated remnants of 'radical' guerrilla armies which fought to overthrow the US-backed puppet regime of Mobuto - who fled the country in 1995. Neighbouring states linked to former colonial powers are involved, each laying claim to its own share of the spoils.
WHY IS it that the West, having turned a blind eye to these events for almost a decade has only now decided to intervene?
Western governments are concerned that the spiralling conflicts will interfere with the supply of minerals like diamonds, cobalt, coltan, etc, as well as destabilising the surrounding states.
This is typical of the post-independence relationship between the imperialist countries and the nominally independent former colonies.
After world war two the European powers faced with revolution by the colonial masses - the struggle for national and social liberation - had been forced to negotiate settlements with nationalist movements.
Where possible, moderate, pro-capitalist leaders had been installed to head off the more radical elements in the movement. Where this strategy failed, they resorted to conscious destabilisation often fomenting ethnic conflict or military coups to get the kind of pliant leaders who would not threaten Western interests.
Throughout the period of direct colonial rule, Africa had been prevented from developing their own industries, making them almost totally dependent on imports of Western consumer goods. At the same time the African states relied on revenue from raw materials and agricultural exports to fund their domestic economies.
The prices of both imports and exports were determined by the world markets which were dominated by the industrialised nations. Very rapidly, huge deficits accumulated.
WORKING WITHIN the capitalist system, it was only possible to bridge the gap by taking out huge loans from those same Western nations who also dictated the interest rates and repayment levels.
The neo-colonial states were locked into a spiralling crisis of ballooning fictitious debt. Rather than stopping the debt repayments the easier option for governments was to unload the burden onto their own people.
The ruling elite resorted to state repression to stay in power. While spending on health, education and public services was slashed in line with the IMF programmes, military and police budgets were increased, with Western arms and security firms providing the hardware.
As the African economies fell into deeper crisis, more stringent conditions were placed on aid programmes and debt restructuring.
THE IMF and World Bank, the chief agents of imperialism's financial dominance, forced them to open up their domestic markets to more and more foreign competition. They were also forced to sell of their state-owned sectors, with Western companies first in the queue.
The effects of these mass privatisation have been devastating. In Angola for instance, water was once provided as a free service. Now it has to be paid for. Those who can't afford to pay are disconnected. This has led to an increase in dysentery, cholera and other water-born diseases as people now have to resort to contaminated sources.
The UN has estimated that $35 billion a year - only 3.5% of the incomes of the world's 200 richest individuals - is sufficient to ensure safe drinking water, adequate sanitation, primary healthcare and basic education in Africa.
Most African countries have to export food to gain hard currency. Malawi, whose people are facing starvation, was even advised by the World Bank to sell off its surplus grain stocks as part of its debt restructuring.
While Africa is forced to allow untrammelled access to its markets, the West continues to maintain tariffs on imports, while subsidising its agricultural production. African producers are always at a disadvantage in the so-called 'free market'.
The resulting increase in poverty, lowering of life expectancy and collapse in infrastructure is taking society backwards.
AT THE G8 summit in France, aid to Africa was trumpeted, amongst others, by Tony Blair. But underpinning their pious speeches, is how best to protect the interests of the imperialist nations.
The whole history of post-independence Africa is an object lesson in the impossibility of building stable, democratic, developed economies on the basis of capitalism. Only the working class fighting behind the banner of socialism can unite the oppressed masses in a struggle to end the centuries of super-exploitation and dictatorship.
THE TOP 200 corporations (41% US-based) account for 27.5% of world economic activity (but employ only 0.78% of the world's workforce).
Of the 100 largest economies in the world, 51 are corporations; only 49 are countries (based on a comparison of corporate sales and country GDPs).
By controlling much of production and trade these giant corporations can push down the value of raw materials and products produced in poorer countries, destroying local manufacturing and markets.
Africa now accounts for just 1% of world economic output and 2% of world trade. Many African countries have economies smaller than a town in Britain of 60,000 people.
Multinationals also determine prices in Western markets. Thus the price of coffee exported from producer countries accounts for less than 7% of the eventual cost of coffee to Western consumers.
MUCH OF aid and 'debt relief' is inextricably linked to allowing US and Western companies to expand their trade into previously restricted local markets.
Even the IMF admit that the Clinton/Bush Africa Growth and Opportunity Act, instead of providing African countries preferential trade, actually costs Africa more than $500 million a year.
External debt in sub-Saharan Africa has increased 400% since the IMF/World Bank introduced 'External Debt Programmes'. African countries spend $14.5 billion each year repaying debt.
The US government has allocated $40 billion for the 'war on terror' but has only spent $1 billion on a Heavily Indebted Poor Countries initiative.
And while preaching the virtues of free market capitalism Bush has ensured that US farmers receive huge subsidies, thus undermining local farming production. Annual subsidies to Western farmers amounts to $350 billion compared to an annual aid budget to Africa from the G8 countries of $13 billion.
THE POP entrepreneur and 'Band Aid' charity organiser, Sir Bob Geldof, has praised George Bush's pledge to generously fund an anti-AIDS campaign in Africa.
Some 28 million Africans are HIV positive and two million died from the disease last year. However, it seems that one-third of Bush's £15 billion pledge will fund campaigns promoting sexual abstinence, rather than family planning, in accordance with his Republican Christian funda-mentalist backers.
Moreover, the US administration supports the highly profitable, pharmaceutical multinationals (top ten US drug makers made $37 billion profits in 2001) whose retroviral drugs such as Fluconazole (costing $500-$1,000 a month) for treating HIV/AIDS are beyond the pockets of poor countries and most Africans - 180 million of whom live on less than $1 a day.
When the South African government attempted to import cheaper generic versions of these drugs the multinationals banded together in a court action in 2001 (later abandoned) to stop their import.
Even now the US insists that any poor country seeking a waiver on a multinational drug patent must take their case to the US-dominated World Trade Organisation.
TONY WOODLEY'S victory as general secretary of the Transport and General Workers Union (TGWU) is a big defeat for Tony Blair and the Blairites in the trade unions.
Blair's preferred candidate, Jack Dromey, was heavily defeated - which confirms that anyone seen to have the Prime Minister's backing in union elections can kiss goodbye to their chances of getting elected.
Woodley's victory, coupled with his public statements, will raise expectations amongst workers everywhere and not just amongst TGWU members, that some union leaders are prepared not just to talk radical but to put their promises into action.
Woodley says that he will, as general secretary, campaign for an increase in the national minimum wage which he declares as poverty pay. He has said that his priority is the repeal of the anti-union laws which "tie one hand behind our backs" when fighting the employers.
And, he told The Independent: "No other country outlaws solidarity action, places so many obstacles in the way of lawful industrial action, or makes trade union recognition almost a privilege instead of a right".
In a phrase that will resonate with many, he says that: "There is no guarantee that if you fight for your rights you will win but if you don't then you never will".
He rejects the idea that the way to build the unions is just by offering better services (a method used unsuccessfully by the right-wing). This is borne out by the growth in trade unions like the RMT and the NUT who have been in battles with the employers.
But he also points out that the battle to win concessions for his members is not down purely to the industrial front - it will take politics as well.
He has promised to let the TGWU conference decide on whether the union should support the euro or not "because of the political issues involved".
Another commitment he makes is opposing the so-called partnership deals between the unions and the bosses - a much-loved issue for the TUC.
His attitude to New Labour is summed up by his promise to organise a 'council of war' with other Left leaders to produce a united front against New Labour. If nothing comes of that, then his plan B is withdrawing financial support from constituencies where Labour MPs are opposed to TGWU policies.
UNFORTUNATELY TONY Woodley says that the campaign to break the link between Labour and the unions is a right-wing agenda. We do not believe that this is the case at all.
How will the success of "bringing Labour back into the Party" be measured? Will it be when the anti-union laws are repealed by a Labour government or when the minimum wage is raised substantially?
What will be the line in the sand which says the campaign to win Labour back to its roots has failed?
The TGWU gives £1 million every year to the Labour Party. The unions as whole have paid a colossal £250 million in the last 25 years. What have they got in return?
Unfortunately precious little. On the contrary, working people have faced a diet of cuts, privatisation and the obscenity of the PFI as well as New Labour keeping intact Thatcher's vicious anti union laws.
It will be nigh-on impossible for Woodley to convince his members, never mind anyone else, to rejoin a Labour Party with the Blairites still firmly in control.
Trade unionists are voting with their feet and leaving the Labour Party in droves. The socialist believes that he, along with most of the trade unions' new Left leaders, is mistaken on this vital issue. And bitter historical experience will only underline that this is the case.
What did the Labour Party do for the sacked Liverpool dockers? What has the Labour government done for the Friction Dynamics workers in north Wales, 300 of whom were sacked three years ago after organising a legal ballot and strike action.
This futile attempt will come to nothing. Nevertheless Woodley's election marks a new situation with the unions and their historic link with the Labour Party, at the same time as Blair is looking more vulnerable than ever.
The election of left trade union leaders, the so called "awkward squad", is an indication of the changes taking place on the shop floor and in the unions. However this new leadership is yet to be tested by events, but Woodley's victory is another nail in the coffin of New Labour and its supporters in the trade unions.
TONY WOODLEY'S decisive victory over the other three candidates was a real kick in the teeth for the national full-time officials.
Woodley had 66,958 votes. Yet the regional secretaries had made it clear they would not back him. The regional barons' preferred candidate, Barry Camfield, was trounced into third place with just 28,346. Jack Dromey, No 10's favourite candidate, got 45,136 votes.
Throughout both elections Tony Woodley emphasised the need to reclaim the union for its members. For too long control freakery has ruled but if he is to be able to deliver he will need a general executive council that will work with him instead of the right-wing clique dominating it.
"UNFORTUNATELY SALARIES not paid. Please do not contact office. Full details to follow later today." This outrageous text message told workers at The Accident Group (TAG) they were being made redundant.
As a TAG worker commented: "It's a hell of a way to find out you're out of a job." Angry staff, fearing they would never get paid, ransacked TAG's office in Birmingham in protest. They reportedly walked out with £80,000 worth of computers and equipment.
TAG were the definitive ambulance-chasing insurance firm; asking people whether they've had any accidents and descending like vultures on anyone with a limp or a walking stick.
New Labour gave this mainly non-union employer a boost when it stopped giving legal aid for personal injury claims, replacing it with laws that let solicitors operate on a "no win, no fee" basis. Now like another such firm Claims Direct, TAG didn't win enough cases and couldn't reach an agreement with the banks.
TAG's slogan was: "Where there's blame there's a claim". Mark Langford, founder and chairman of the company, is believed to be 'worth' £40 million and living a wealthy lifestyle, organising spectacular charity balls. At the very least this 'charitable' businessman ought to ensure that unpaid back wages are paid.
The trade unions should clearly blame this 'no job, no wages' boss for his atrocious behaviour. They should use this example to campaign to build up new membership amongst such unorganised workers and to show other workers the stupidity of the capitalist system.
Mark, from north London sent us this article after looking at the Socialist Party's website.
"I GO on your website a lot while I am at work. I wish there was more of it.
I've actually joined the union now, the TGWU. I got on fine here until last week when I noticed some tension with my boss. I'd left your website on my computer, which didn't go down well when she discovered it.
I don't think a worker can ever be too secure in a job. There is always a conflict of interest between bosses sand employees. That's why all employees should always stick together. We don't own the company.
I read through the TGWU rights of workers. After 12 months employment you can sue an employer for unfair dismissal. So after 11 months an employer can unfairly dismiss you. This is what has happened here. If someone's face doesn't fit you're sacked.
In January a guy was sacked with no written or verbal warnings. The reason was: "He was hopeless and annoying". He'd been working there for six months. What does he put on his CV? He was sacked on a whim - how does that affect his life?
Our company employs 800 very low-paid, mainly Portuguese manual workers. They speak no English.
The operations managers in charge of them abuse them and treat them like crap. They earn £4.50 an hour. My managing director (MD) has told me he's terrified of unions - imagine if that workforce got unionised.
So far only two of us have joined the TGWU and we work in the head office. I've not mentioned anything to my boss but if ever any threat is held over me I'll tell them we've got over a million members and 30,000 officials. The company's not as big as that.
I'll say: "See you in the tribunal - you get your lawyers, I've got mine."
Recently the MD was talking to us about a company that sacked all its workers in England, moved to India and then took on new employees at a quarter of the price. He said: "Who can blame them?" This became a catch phrase in our office.
A couple of weeks ago we were called into a meeting to hear about the shock resignation of one of the maintenance staff. He was in charge of eight people who no-one had ever seen. Turns out none of those people actually existed but he picked up their wages anyway.
The directors and the managers said this was a scandal. But my colleague told me how much this employee actually earned - less than £1,000 a month. He has a wife and kids and sometimes worked until 9pm.
So I say to our MD and all the other generous employers out there. If you make someone work from 6am until 9pm and pay them less than £1,000 a month and then find out they are ripping you off. When you call meetings to say how appalling this is, all I can say to you is: "Who can blame them?" and good luck to them.
Keep up the good work. The socialist ideas cut through all the crap of the media and the gutter press."
To hear an audio version of this document click here.
What the Socialist Party stands for
The Socialist Party fights for socialism – a democratic society run for the needs of all and not the profits of a few. We also oppose every cut, fighting in our day-to-day campaigning for every possible improvement for working class people.
The organised working class has the potential power to stop the cuts and transform society.
As capitalism dominates the globe, the struggle for genuine socialism must be international.
The Socialist Party is part of the Committee for a Workers' International (CWI), a socialist international that organises in many countries.
To hear an audio version of this document click here.
http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/articles/13775