Review by Ray Jones
Information Bulletins 1/2005/12 & 2/2005/12, £5 each inc. P&P (cheques to New Worker) from NCP Lit. PO Box 73, London SW11 2PQ.
THESE TWO Information Bulletins are the speeches and statements arising from the recent meeting of communist and workers’ parties held in Athens and hosted by the Communist Party of Greece (KKE).
That may sound rather dry and, to be frank, boring. But I didn’t find them so. Naturally styles of writing vary — not everyone has the journalistic skills of Rob Gowland of the Communist Party of Australia or our own Andy Brooks, who spoke for the New Communist Party of Britain — but they give interesting snap-shots of the situation in many countries and the attitude of communists there to the world situation.
Although there is broad agreement on the world situation it’s seen from slightly different perspectives and there are differences on the correct way forward within individual countries — which you might expect given that most countries have more than one communist party.
I found the material from former socialist countries useful as inside views of what happened to socialism there.
Harsev Bains, of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), appears to explain and defend the route to communism chosen by Peoples’ China and Vietnam — although he doesn’t mention them by name. He quotes Lenin on the retreat of the New Economic Policy in the early days of Soviet Russia, using the term “state capitalism” and talking of the necessity of using capitalism.
Lenin points out that “state capitalism” in a society where the state is controlled by the workers is quite different from “state capitalism” where the state is controlled by capitalists. Bains seems to think that a strategy of “stages” is applicable to India as well.
John Foster, Communist Party of Britain, ends his interesting piece by calling for more active cooperation between communist and workers’ parties internationally — which unfortunately sits rather awkwardly with his party’s refusal to do so with the NCP, whose proposal for a communist liaison committee still remains on the table.
Thursday, June 01, 2006
Friday, May 05, 2006
THE PARIS COMMUNE
by Caroline Colebrook
NEXT month marks the 135th anniversary of the Paris Commune, when the working class of Paris seized power in their own city and established the world’s first workers’ government. It did not last long and it was drowned in blood by armed forces of the French government.
But it sent a message of liberation and hope to workers throughout the world and a message of fear to capitalists and landowners. Many lessons were learnt from its mistakes and from its successes. Without it, the great socialist revolutions of the 20th century would not have been possible.
THE PARIS of the 1860s and 1870 had been rebuilt by architect Baron Haussmann at the request of Napoleon III, with wide, well-planned boulevards and fine houses.
It was a time of industrialisation and a growing middle class (the original use of the term “bourgeoisie”) with plenty of wealth. But the resulting inflation in prices and rents left Parisian workers desperately hard up – and angry about it.
Paris has a strong revolutionary tradition from the revolutions of 1789, 1830 and 1848. The strong feelings against royalty, wealth and privilege remained – as did the proclaimed revolutionary virtues of Liberté, Egalité, and Fraternité (Liberty, Equality and Brotherhood).
The Parisian workers were also angry when the Emperor Louis Napoleon engaged in an unnecessary war with the Prussians. The French army was undermanned, under-equipped and badly led. On Friday 2nd September it was defeated at the battle of Sedan on the Belgian border. The Emperor was taken prisoner and immediately abdicated.
When the news arrived in Paris a crowd gathered outside the Hôtel de Ville (City Hall). There was a power vacuum and a new republic was declared by Léon Gambetta. A temporary government of National Defence was declared, which included the sitting National Assembly deputies for Paris – since, with the Prussians marching on Paris, there was no time for new elections. This government had no pre-agreed political programme. The Empress Eugénie fled to England.
There were further defeats for the French army as the people of Paris prepared to repel the Prussians, including repairing the old city walls. The National Guard, founded in 1789, still existed and was rapidly expanded by volunteers to 350,000-strong – bigger than the regular French army defending Paris at the time. But it was a very mixed bunch of people from many different backgrounds.
Many workers who had been thrown out of their jobs by the war joined for the pay of 1.50 francs-a-day plus 75 centimes for a wife. Women also joined the National Guard as – cantinières – officially carrying food and drink to the fighters but actually doing a lot of fighting as well. When a guardsman fighting the Prussians fell, often a cantinière would take up his rifle and carry on the fight.
Paris prepared for a siege by bringing in huge quantities of food, including livestock. Commentators at the time remarked at the public parks full of sheep. But even while the people of Paris were preparing to put up a bitter struggle, the temporary government was seeking a peace deal with the Prussians.
Once the siege took hold, there was a news blackout inside Paris. People tried communicating with the outside using carrier pigeons carrying microfilm – a new development then – but only 59 out of 392 got through.
Manned balloons were a little more successful. They presented a huge target but only five out of 65 were shot down. But they were not easy to control and easily blown off course. They landed as far away as Holland, Bavaria and even Norway.
Outside of Paris the war with the Prussians was still going badly for the French, with another major defeat at Metz.
In spite of the all food that had been stored in preparation for the siege it soon brought great hardship. There was no rationing at first so the poor suffered disproportionately as food prices rocketed.
Strange things started to appear on menus, including animals from the zoo. During the siege records show that 65,000 horses, 5,000 cats, 1,200 dogs and an uncounted number of rats were eaten. By January 1871 they introduced bread rationing.
Fuel was also in short supply so people cut down trees and burnt them and their furniture.
Throughout the siege the Prussian bombarded the city with their huge guns, killing 97 but hunger and illness killed many more. In December 1870 the total death toll was 11,865 and in January 1871 it was 19,233.
The people were angry with the temporary French government for not striking back at the Prussians. There were no plans for a strike by the National Guard.
On 18th January the Prussian declared their empire at Versailles. In Paris there was talk of throwing out the government and setting up a commune. On 28th January the French government negotiated an armistice with the Prussians.
Paris felt utterly betrayed. The terms of the armistice allowed the Prussians to enter Paris for two days to celebrate their victory. The people of Paris turned their backs, shut their doors and dressed in mourning. After the Prussians departed they cleaned the streets.
The new National Assembly was pro-royalist and opposed to the republicanism of Paris.
Adolphe Thiers was elected head of the new government and he drew up a peace treaty with Prussians.
He then stopped pay for the National Guard and ordered Parisians to pay back commercial debts and rent arrears they had run up during the siege.
Anger was rising in Paris and on Saturday 18th March Thiers sent General Lecomte with orders for the army to take over the National Guards’ cannon position in Montmartre, overlooking the city. The National Guardsmen were overpowered and locked up.
But the army had forgotten to bring horses to transport the guns out of Paris so they had to wait until the next morning. Very early the next morning a young socialist, Louise Michel, came to deliver a message to the National Guard. She noticed the army had taken over the gun emplacement and raised the alarm throughout Paris.
Later she wrote: “I went down, my rifle under my coat, crying ‘Treason’. A column was forming… Montmartre was waking. The call to arms was sounding out. I was returning indeed, but with the others, to the attack on the heights of Montmartre: we ran up at the double, knowing that at the top there was an army in battle formation. We expected to die for liberty. It was as if we were lifted from the earth.”
Crowds gathered around the soldiers. The people of Paris had paid for those cannons to fight Prussians. They were not going to let the army use them against the city. The people appealed to the soldiers. An officer ordered them to fire on the crowd but the soldiers refused. They turned their rifles upside down.
General Lecompte was arrested, along with General Clément Thomas, an ex-commander of the National Guard.
The cannons fired three blank shots to tell the people of Paris that the guns were still theirs. They began to build barricades. Regular troops retreated to their barracks and the Red Flag replaced the Tricoleur on the Bastille Column.
Confusion reigned – nothing had been planned and no one was in charge.
A crowd stormed the house where the two captive generals were being held and shot them. Thiers realised he had lost control of Paris. He went to the Hôtel de Ville and ordered the government to withdraw to Versailles. They were swift to comply, jumping out of windows, dashing through underground tunnels and clambering into their carriages in their haste to get away. By evening the Red Flag was flying over the Hôtel de Ville.
After they left a new mood of freedom s wept across Paris. Although still no one was formally in charge, streets were swept, cafés stayed open. There was no looting and less crime than normal. The National Guard was paid regularly and public relief was handed out to the poor. Many wealthy people fled, saying they did not like “the control of workmen”. As in previous revolutions, people addressed each other as “citizen”.
Outside Paris, the government waited in Versailles for chaos and collapse.
On 26th March elections were held and two days later the Commune was proclaimed. Red sashes and red flags abounded throughout the city.
A member of the Commune, Jules Vallés, wrote in his newspaper Le Cri du Peuple: “Today is the festive wedding day of the Idea and the Revolution. Soldier-citizens, the Commune we have acclaimed and married today must tomorrow bear fruit; we must take our place once more, still proud and now free, in the workshop and at the counter. After the poetry of triumph, the prose of work.”
Thirty out of the 90 Commune members were working class – a high proportion for that time. There were no formal political parties in the Commune – they were all socialists but aligned in loose groupings: Jacobins, Blanquists and communists. They were all communards.
The Commune gave working people enormous confidence to do things they had never done before or been allowed to do Many other French cities followed suit and set up their own communes, including: Lyons, Marseilles, Toulouse, Narbonne, St Etienne, Le Creusot and Limoges. But they were all quickly crushed by the Versailles government.
Thiers imposed news barrier so that once again people inside Paris were cut off from news from the outside and vice versa. The outside world was told only Thiers’ version of events. He portrayed the Communards as monsters.
The Communards failed to confront the Thiers government or to seize the banks. If they had, they would have been in a stronger position to resist. They were busy planning social reforms but failed to plan to defend the Commune militarily.
The Commune did have arms and men – which Thiers did not have at first. But the Prussians, alarmed at the prospect of working class revolution, allowed Thiers to recruit and train a new army. He had no doubts that this was a civil war.
The Commune had three military leaders: Lullier, Cluseret and Rossell. They were professional soldiers but they were frustrated by a lack of clear military policy. They were impatient with the new democratic procedures and unable to convey the urgent need to organise the defence of Paris. After seven weeks, they quit.
The Commune did launch one attack against Versailles on 3rd to 4th April. Three National Guard column set off proudly and jauntily but they were outmanoeuvred by the Versailles troops and limped back tired, wounded and dirty. Many were killed and 1,200 taken prisoner while Versailles lost only 25 dead and 125 wounded.
The Versailles government and the wealthy who had fled Paris treated the prisoners shamefully – cursing them, beating them and spitting on them.
After this morale in the Commune fell and divisions began to appear. The Commune was also getting a very bad press internationally. The London Times reported: “The men of the Commune do not intend to be disappointed. They have promised themselves to annihilate Paris, its fortunes, its commerce, its population – and they keep their word.
“Never was the work of destruction carried on with a more wicked and brutal perseverance.”
Communards were called “the mob, red insurgents, bandits, anarchists, convicts, scum, moral gangrene, socialists”.
Inside Paris news was communicated by newssheets posted on to walls and by readings at political clubs – often located in churches. Readings were followed by discussion on all manner of topics – including religion, women’s equality, the abolition of marriage and how to win the civil war.
Women played a very active role in all this. One woman speaker told a club meeting: “Yes, you women are oppressed. But just have a little more patience, for the day that will bring justice and satisfaction for our demands is rapidly approaching.
“Tomorrow you will belong to yourselves and not to exploiters. The factories in which you are crowded together will belong to you; the tools placed in your hands will belong to you; the profit that results from your labour, your care, the loss of your health, will be shared among you.”
There were around 90 trade unions active in the city. Workers’ cooperatives were set up – supported by the Commune. The Commune allowed workers employed in factories and workshops that had been abandoned as the owners fled the city to take them over as cooperatives.
Church control of education was abolished. People were given three years to pay off debts run up during the siege. All public officials were elected; there was a cap of 6,000 francs on top salaries and the Commune paid out to redeem all household goods like bedding and clothing that had been pawned. There was free clothing, food and school materials for children.
The famous artist Courbet was a Commune member. He wrote: “I’m enchanted. Paris is a veritable paradise; no police, no outrages, no quarrels, no exactions of any kind. Paris is moving under its own steam as smoothly as you could wish. We must try and always be like this.”
But in the background, the guns of Versailles continued to bombard Paris. The Prussian army, nearly forgotten, was still there. The Prussians supported the Versailles government against the Commune. They were terrified it would inspire socialism in Germany. On 21st May the Versailles army attacked.
The people of Paris put up barricades to defend themselves but though these delayed the advance of the government troops, they did not halt them.
There followed what was called The Week of Blood as the people of Paris fought a bitter but losing battle to defend the freedom of their city.
The troops entered on 21st May Versailles by the Saint-Cloud gate. When news reached the Communards in the Hôtel de Ville the final Commune session ended as members left for the barricades. No one was left behind to direct the fight except Delescluze, the civilian delegate for war.
He sent the following message to the barricades: “Enough of militarism, no more staff officers with gold embroidered uniforms! Make way for the people, the bare-armed fighters! The hour of revolutionary war has struck. The people know nothing of elaborate manoeuvres, but when they have a rifle in their hands and cobblestones under their feet, they have no fear of the strategists of monarchist school.”
It did no good. It left the people of Paris to fight, every man and women for themselves, with no strategic planning or coordination. There were many heroic stands at the barricades, including the Women’s Battalion defence of Place Blanche but the government troops took the city, with utmost brutality.
They shot men, women and children out of hand wherever they took them. Thiers had promised no retaliation but 20,000 Parisians were killed in one week.
The London Times, which had opposed the commune, protested about “the inhuman laws of revenge under which the Versailles troops have been shooting, bayoneting, ripping up prisoners, women and children during the last six days.”
Retreating Communards torched many large public buildings and after this a scare story was put about that women Communards – dubbed Pétroleuses – were starting fires everywhere. This led to many women being shot on sight on suspicion of being incendiaries.
Two hundred Communards made a last stand against a wall in the top corner of Pere Lachaise cemetery. The next day 147 prisoners were taken to the same spot and shot.
The killing continued after the Communards had all been killed or taken prisoner; 34,722 prisoners were put on trial and many executed. It is estimated that between 20,000 and 25,000 were killed one way or another.
The new government erected a new church, Sacré Coeur, on the heights of Montmartre as a religious gesture of atonement for the audacity and sacrilege of the Commune. Now a famous Paris landmark, this church remains unpopular with left-wing Parisians. Theirs was made President of the 3rd Republic in August 1871.
The Paris Commune failed but its lessons echo through history. After it fell Marx and Engels wrote of the necessity for a dictatorship of the proletariat to be established immediately after any socialist revolution to consolidate it and defend it against counter revolution.
Without the lessons of the Commune, the socialist advances of the following century would have been impossible.
An Easter walk to Spain
by Dolly Shaer
During the Easter week-end about 70 men and women went to Perpignan in France and then over the Pyrenees to Figueres in Spain.
The walk was to commemorate and celebrate the way so many of the men and women went to defend the legally elected Spanish Republican government’s fight against the fascist Franco, who was supported by Hitler and Mussolini. They went by train and then climbed over the mountains between France and Spain.
That was 70 years ago in 1936 which was also the year the International Brigades were formed.
The commemoration walk started on Good Friday with a gathering at the National Memorial to the International Brigaders in Jubilee Gardens, London.
We travelled to Perpignan by train as the original fighters did. On Saturday we gathered at the memorial plaque to the Republican fighters at Super-las-Illas on the French side.
A wreath in the Republican colours was laid. There were speeches: one by Serge Barba of the FFREEE (Sons and daughters of Spanish Republicans and Children of the Exodus). This is an organisation of Republicans who fled Spain in 1939 and were never able to return.
After refreshments the walk began. Some walked 10 kilometres and some 15k. A few of us were taken up by mini bus to the frontier between France and Spain at Coll de Mannell.
We had three Brigaders with us: Jack Jones, 93 years old, Jack Edwards 92 and Bob Doyle 90 years old. All of them had gone over these mountains to join the fight.
At the border there is a Monument to Lluis Companys who was the Catalan President during the Republic. He went to France as a refugee and was captured by the Nazis and sent back to Spain and, on the orders of Franco, was executed in Barcelona in 1940. There were speeches and a wreath was laid. We then continued on to Figueres by coach.
On Sunday morning we went to the Castell de Sant Ferran. This is the castle where the Brigaders coming over the mountain were taken after their crossing and started their training. A commemorative plaque was unveiled and a wreath was laid. The plaque is in four languages: French, English, Spanish and Catalan. A meeting was held in the castle with speeches and songs.
At these various places throughout the visit the group was joined by local mayors, dignitaries and representatives of towns and villages and government, who made speeches and welcomed us. There were also representatives of organisations with similar aims as the International Brigades Memorial Trust, the Spanish Amigos and the German Association of the Friends of the International Brigade.
On reflection it is difficult to believe how those men managed that climb up those sheer wooded mountain sides in Alpargatas, in silence joined either by a hand on the shoulder of the man in front or a string connecting each person – in the pitch dark.
It took all night and was fraught with danger. My father had to do it twice because near the top they were fired on and so they had to go down and back up the next night.
I personally found it a very moving experience. The majority of them had never been further south than Brighton; most of them did not speak another language. They had to deal with the CID at Victoria station as they were leaving for their “week-end in Paris” and then the French police through France.
But there are many stories of the French working class showing their solidarity while their governments showed only their Non-intervention betrayal.
During the Easter week-end about 70 men and women went to Perpignan in France and then over the Pyrenees to Figueres in Spain.
The walk was to commemorate and celebrate the way so many of the men and women went to defend the legally elected Spanish Republican government’s fight against the fascist Franco, who was supported by Hitler and Mussolini. They went by train and then climbed over the mountains between France and Spain.
That was 70 years ago in 1936 which was also the year the International Brigades were formed.
The commemoration walk started on Good Friday with a gathering at the National Memorial to the International Brigaders in Jubilee Gardens, London.
We travelled to Perpignan by train as the original fighters did. On Saturday we gathered at the memorial plaque to the Republican fighters at Super-las-Illas on the French side.
A wreath in the Republican colours was laid. There were speeches: one by Serge Barba of the FFREEE (Sons and daughters of Spanish Republicans and Children of the Exodus). This is an organisation of Republicans who fled Spain in 1939 and were never able to return.
After refreshments the walk began. Some walked 10 kilometres and some 15k. A few of us were taken up by mini bus to the frontier between France and Spain at Coll de Mannell.
We had three Brigaders with us: Jack Jones, 93 years old, Jack Edwards 92 and Bob Doyle 90 years old. All of them had gone over these mountains to join the fight.
At the border there is a Monument to Lluis Companys who was the Catalan President during the Republic. He went to France as a refugee and was captured by the Nazis and sent back to Spain and, on the orders of Franco, was executed in Barcelona in 1940. There were speeches and a wreath was laid. We then continued on to Figueres by coach.
On Sunday morning we went to the Castell de Sant Ferran. This is the castle where the Brigaders coming over the mountain were taken after their crossing and started their training. A commemorative plaque was unveiled and a wreath was laid. The plaque is in four languages: French, English, Spanish and Catalan. A meeting was held in the castle with speeches and songs.
At these various places throughout the visit the group was joined by local mayors, dignitaries and representatives of towns and villages and government, who made speeches and welcomed us. There were also representatives of organisations with similar aims as the International Brigades Memorial Trust, the Spanish Amigos and the German Association of the Friends of the International Brigade.
On reflection it is difficult to believe how those men managed that climb up those sheer wooded mountain sides in Alpargatas, in silence joined either by a hand on the shoulder of the man in front or a string connecting each person – in the pitch dark.
It took all night and was fraught with danger. My father had to do it twice because near the top they were fired on and so they had to go down and back up the next night.
I personally found it a very moving experience. The majority of them had never been further south than Brighton; most of them did not speak another language. They had to deal with the CID at Victoria station as they were leaving for their “week-end in Paris” and then the French police through France.
But there are many stories of the French working class showing their solidarity while their governments showed only their Non-intervention betrayal.
Spanish communists on the march!
OVER 200 delegates and observers gathered in Madrid last weekend for the 8th Congress of the Communist Party of the Peoples of Spain (PCPE). Communists from all parts of Spain together with some 20 observers from liberation movements and fraternal parties including the New Communist Party of Britain spoke at this congress that will chart the future of the Spanish communist movement for the next four years.
The PCPE was founded in 1984 during the struggle against the “euro-communist” revisionist trend that dominated the old Spanish Communist Party (PCE) which was legalised when the fascist dictatorship ended with the death of General Franco and the restoration of a “constitutional” monarchy in 1975.
Since then the Spanish political scene has been dominated by the reactionary People’s Party and the social-democratic Socialists, who currently hold the government with the support of the “United Left”, a PCE front.
PCPE membership has grown along with its influence in recent years through its work in the labour movement, its opposition to the proposed EU constitution and the campaign for the withdrawal of all Spanish troops from Iraq that was met when the Socialists won the general election last year. This was reflected in the discussion which focused on the current situation in the world today and the key campaigning issues that face the Spanish working class.
The first demand is for a democratic confederal socialist republic that would recognise and guarantee the rights of the Basques, Catalans and all the other peoples of Spain. Building the left alternative to the class collaborationist policies of the social-democrats and their revisionist allies is another priority, along with the need to build a militant union bloc to challenge the dominance of social democracy in the Spanish labour movement.
“We are especially pleased to be here at this important juncture in your party’s life as we are old friends going back over 20 years,” NCP general secretary Andy Brooks said in his address to the congress. “Both our parties were born from the anti-revisionist struggle within the European communist movement. In those days we were a minority. Today, in the wake of the counter-revolutions in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, our view-point has won general acceptance,” the NCP leader declared. “Let us all work for a global anti-imperialist peace movement to shake the whole rotten edifice of imperialism to the ground and at the same time let us fight together to rebuild the world communist movement for socialist advance in the 21st century,” he concluded.
Many of the fraternal guests marched behind the Spanish communist banners during the massive 60,000 strong May Day march through the Spanish capital that reflected the militancy and strength of the Spanish union movement.
During the Congress Andy Brooks had talks with the PCPE leadership and discussions with a number of other communist parties represented at the congress.
The PCPE was founded in 1984 during the struggle against the “euro-communist” revisionist trend that dominated the old Spanish Communist Party (PCE) which was legalised when the fascist dictatorship ended with the death of General Franco and the restoration of a “constitutional” monarchy in 1975.
Since then the Spanish political scene has been dominated by the reactionary People’s Party and the social-democratic Socialists, who currently hold the government with the support of the “United Left”, a PCE front.
PCPE membership has grown along with its influence in recent years through its work in the labour movement, its opposition to the proposed EU constitution and the campaign for the withdrawal of all Spanish troops from Iraq that was met when the Socialists won the general election last year. This was reflected in the discussion which focused on the current situation in the world today and the key campaigning issues that face the Spanish working class.
The first demand is for a democratic confederal socialist republic that would recognise and guarantee the rights of the Basques, Catalans and all the other peoples of Spain. Building the left alternative to the class collaborationist policies of the social-democrats and their revisionist allies is another priority, along with the need to build a militant union bloc to challenge the dominance of social democracy in the Spanish labour movement.
“We are especially pleased to be here at this important juncture in your party’s life as we are old friends going back over 20 years,” NCP general secretary Andy Brooks said in his address to the congress. “Both our parties were born from the anti-revisionist struggle within the European communist movement. In those days we were a minority. Today, in the wake of the counter-revolutions in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, our view-point has won general acceptance,” the NCP leader declared. “Let us all work for a global anti-imperialist peace movement to shake the whole rotten edifice of imperialism to the ground and at the same time let us fight together to rebuild the world communist movement for socialist advance in the 21st century,” he concluded.
Many of the fraternal guests marched behind the Spanish communist banners during the massive 60,000 strong May Day march through the Spanish capital that reflected the militancy and strength of the Spanish union movement.
During the Congress Andy Brooks had talks with the PCPE leadership and discussions with a number of other communist parties represented at the congress.
The General Strike (part two)
‘We are in danger. A united enemy is knocking at the gate...’
by Mal Howarth
Mal Howarth is a former branch delegate Blidworth Colliery NUM, area executive Nott’s Area NUM and vice president Nott’s NUM.
BEFORE we look at the strike in 1926, we must go back to 1925 because the key to understand it is in this year. When the first Labour government fell and the Tories took office in November 1924, the offensive against the living conditions of the working class was set for a head-on confrontation.
The miners were to take the brunt of the attack. In the Miners’ Federation AJ Cook replaced Frank Hodges. It was on the last day of June 1925 that the miners’ union received notice from the owners of the termination of the National Wages Agreement, which had been in force since 18th June 1924. The notice was to run for the month of July and terminate at midnight on Friday 31st July 1925.
They also wanted the miners to consider an extension of the seven-hour day; the owners stated that “the terms which can be offered under a seven-hour day are necessarily much less favourable than those which could be offered under an eight-hour day.” They wanted an immediate reduction in wages. But to add insult to injury they also wanted the guarantee of a minimum wage to go and in its place a guarantee of profits to take its place.
On Wednesday 29th July 1925 the Prime Minister, Baldwin, told the miners’ union definitely that “the Government would not grant any subsidy” and that “the coal industry must stand on its own economic foundations”.
On Thursday evening instructions were issued for the embargo on coal movements to be put into force. All unions were to comply with the said order and the effect was immediate.
The Prime Minister who had said “no subsidy” was now willing to offer a nine-month’s subsidy in return for which the mine owners would be willing to withdraw their notices and a full inquiry to be held.
The Government had yielded to the threat of an embargo on the movement of coal. It was a great day for the Labour Movement and it was named Red Friday.
The Baldwin government was not ready for an all-out fight with the British working class, that’s why he had offered a subsidy to hold up miners’ wages for nine months. At the time the Chancellor of the Exchequer was Winston Churchill, known for his anti-working class attitude. The capitalist class was preparing for a confrontation.
The warnings had been given from the militants in the labour movement as early as January 1925. AJ Cook’s message to the delegates at the National Minority Movement was: “We are in danger. A united enemy is knocking at the gate … my slogan is ‘be prepared’.”
The question posed at the time was: was it correct to give increased power to the General Council of the TUC that was preparing to use those powers against the interests of the working class?
Virtually no preparations were made for the impending struggle. Baldwin told delegates at the Tory party conference that action against the Communist Party was under consideration. On 12th October 12 leaders of the Communist Party, Minority Movement and Young Communist League had been arrested. This followed the Labour Party conference, whose main activity was to speed up the removal of communists from the Labour Party’s ranks.
Just before the arrests AJ Cook issued one more warning: “I warn the right-wing leaders of our movement to cease their attacks upon the left-wing. They are encouraging every effort of reaction in this country to destroy our militant fighters. If these are beaten, the path lies open for the propertied interest to smash those who call themselves moderate.”
On 25th September 1925 the newspapers announced the formation of a body called the Organisation for the Maintenance of Supplies, known as OMS. This was to be used for organising those citizens who would be prepared to volunteer to maintain supplies and vital services in the event of a general strike.
During the General Strike many of the middle class had been thrown out of their jobs by the strike. They became Special Constables, paid at the rate of £2 6s 3d per week plus 2/6d-a-day for food. This was the pay for strike breaking. In Wales the pit labourer had been locked out because he refused to accept £1 11s 7½d-a-week. The Miners’ Federation first asked for a minimum wage in 1889 and obtained it by a strike; in 1911 the seven-hour day was won by a strike. Nationalisation of the mines was part of their programme in 1898.
The use of a general strike is to make class struggle obvious to those who deny or ignore it. Action is the one form of propaganda more effective than the press. It makes the worker as class conscious as the employer and it teaches him or her to distrust and rid him or herself of reformist socialist ideas and all trade union leaders who are not prepared for inevitable conflict. Employers who are refused the wages reductions they demand seldom go out of business; they solve their difficulties by means of improved efficiency.
The miners were called to wait for the report of the Royal Commission on the coal industry under the chairmanship of Sir Herbert Samuel on 5th September 1925. There were no representatives of organised labour, as in the other inquiries it was to be known as the Samuel Commission. The three other commissioners were General Sir Herbert Lawrence, Sir William Beveridge and Kenneth Lee.
Samuel had extensive family connections in finance; from 1919 he ruled Palestine as British High Commissioner. Beveridge, during the war of 1914-1918, was in the Ministry of Munitions; he was also Director of the London School of Economics.
Lawrence was a partner in a well-known banking house and was also on the board in several other important companies. Lee chaired the great cotton firm, Total, Broadhurst, Lee and Company; he also chaired the District Bank. Some of the concerns on which General Lawrence and Mr Lee sat belonged to the Federation of British Industries.
It is difficult to imagine any small body of persons more completely representative of capitalist interests and more completely trained in approaching matters from the capitalist standpoint.
This report put to the miners was a proposal for reorganising the mining industry, at some future date, together with proposals for a reduction in wages, to take effect at once.
On 13th April 1926 the owners’ and miners’ representatives came together. The owners said they would meet the miners’ district representatives to consider in each case the district minimum. The miners were opposed and it was full deadlock.
The owners in most districts posted notices in the pits to end existing contracts – employment on existing terms would cease on 30th April. It was a lockout; the owners had delivered their ultimatum.
The Conference of Executives at 12.30pm on Saturday 1st May placed before it, for the first time in British working class history, a proposal for a general strike. This was to take effect at midnight on Monday. It was overwhelmingly accepted.
On Monday evening Ramsay MacDonald, leader of the Labour Party, had altered his way of thinking. He state: “As far as we can see we shall go on. I don’t like general strikes. I haven’t changed my opinion. I have said so in the House of Commons. I don’t like it but honestly, what can be done?”
The right-wing opposed preparations for the strike and when this failed they prepared the most rapid capitulation. On the following Monday morning (10th May) in the British Worker a message from the TUC General Council appeared: “All’s well”. In the second week it was: “Stand Firm. Be Loyal to instructions and trust your leaders”.
Then Sir Herbert Samuel put forward some proposals for a settlement, to be known as the Samuel Memorandum. The main points were that the General Strike should be called off; the subsidy to be renewed “for a reasonable time” while negotiations were reopened; a National Wages Board to be set up under an independent chair to seek a settlement, with no revision of wages unless there were assurances that the commission’s reorganising scheme would be adopted. The Miners’ Federation rejected this; Samuel submitted it to the General Council.
On Wednesday 12th May the noon bulletin from the BBC was: “General Strike ceases today”. What had happened to bring this about? The BBC announcer read a message from the King; the TUC General Council had decided to sue for peace and had asked the Prime Minister to meet them.
The General Council was claiming that an honourable understanding had been reached. But the Government stated that it would not compel employers to take back workers who had participated in the strike. It went on to say that dismissals of workers would be inevitable because of the loss of production and that also employers had an obligation to those who had supplied volunteer labour.
In other words blacklegs were to be looked after and trade unionists victimised. The General Council had unconditionally surrendered.
The miners had to face entirely new proposals – and it was not the Samuel proposals that the Prime Minister put forward now the General Strike was over – they were cast on one side. The lockout notices were not withdrawn; the offer of a subsidy was conditional on an immediate 10 per cent wage cut.
The lockout struggle was to last for over seven months. On Monday 29th November 1926 work was resumed in all important coalfields except South Wales, Yorkshire and Durham. The next day South Wales and Yorkshire went back. Durham had a ballot, which showed 49,217 for rejection of the terms and 40,583 in favour – a majority of 8,634 against. But in view of the two-thirds majority needed to reject the terms – which was not secured – Durham County Federation instructed the men to return to work.
We must remember that the future lies in the hands of those who are not disillusioned and our anger and venom must be directed not at individual betrayers, Prime Minister, trade union leaders and so on but against the real enemy: reformist theory and reformist ideas.
The system attracts people who are in any case of “moderate” disposition, and for those who are not, there is an immensely powerful pull towards the development of such a disposition. For those who resist it there is denunciation, often of great virulence from a multitude of sources.
We must also remember that if someone tells you they are on the side of the oppressed, that tells you next to nothing about their politics. If they tell you who they think are oppressed and how, they tell you a lot.
But Rosa Luxemburg put it in a nutshell when she stated: “I know I have to earn my epaulettes in the German movement but I intend to do it on the left-wing where the enemy is actually being engaged and not on the right where the enemy is being parleyed with.”
Thursday, April 20, 2006
1926 -- The General Strike
by Ken Ruddock
THIS YEAR is the 80th anniversary of the General Strike of May 1926, a momentous event in the history of British trade unionism – one with lessons for today’s trade unions and the labour movement in general.
To understand why the General Council of the Trades Union Congress came to call a general strike starting on midnight of 3rd May 1926, with the support of 3,600,000 workers, it is necessary to go back in time to the years of the First World War 1914-1918 and even before.
During the years running up to 1914 there was growing unrest in Europe. The Socialist International agreed that in the event of war, it should be opposed. On the eve of war, mass demonstrations took place up and down the country. Trafalgar Square saw a huge demonstration addressed by labour leaders Keir Hardy and Arthur Henderson in opposition to war.
Before the month was out, the Labour Party decided to support the Tory government’s war, and along with the TUC, decided that “an immediate effort be made to terminate all existing disputes, whether strikes or lock-outs, and wherever new points of difficulty arise during the war a serious attempt should be made by all concerned to reach an amicable settlement before resorting to strikes and lock-outs.”
This left the workers defenceless against the employers’ attacks on wages and conditions, and was soon followed by the “patriotic” Labour leaders signing the “Treasury Agreement” which neutralised the unions for the duration of the war. It brought with it, in some industries, a complete ban on strikes and compulsory arbitration.
However this did not deter the workers entirely and there were a number of unofficial strikes when employers took advantage of the war to break agreements.
During the many struggles in defence of workers’ conditions, a new form of militant unionism grew: that of the shop stewards who, elected as workshop representatives and leaders, became the answer to collaboration with the state machine.
Examples of the strength of this movement are illustrated by the Clyde strike in June 1915, which arose from an anomaly in rates of pay. The Glasgow district committee of the Amalgamated Society of Engineers made an application for an increase of two pence an hour. This was refused with an offer of a halfpenny and the engineering workers in 15 establishments ceased overtime working.
This was opposed by the ASE executive, who, whilst siding with the employers, organised a ballot on the employers’ offer. It was rejected by 8,927 to 829, resulting in an increased offer of one penny and an increase in piece rates was won.
In July 1915 the South Wales miners, part of the Miners’ Federation of Great Britain who had refused to be a party to the “Treasury Agreement”, made demands for a new agreement on wages and conditions from the mine owners, who were taking advantage of the war to improve their own position.
When the employers rejected the demand out of hand, the Miners’ Federation decided by a majority of 42,850 to strike. Despite threats from the Government 200,000 miners stood firm. In less than a week this resulted in the Government over-riding the mine owners and conceding the main demands.
There were other disputes but it was the Clyde strike that had marked the emergence of the shop stewards as the backbone of a new form of workshop organisation. Out of the strike the Clyde Workers’ Committee was formed, with William Gallacher as chairman (Willy Gallacher became a Communist MP after the war).
Workers’ committees sprang up in London, Sheffield and in other centres of industry and in 1916 a national Shop Stewards’ Movement was formed. The shop stewards became the effective defenders of the workers in the face of the inactive union executives.
The Government had introduced a Munitions Act, under which workers virtually lost all rights of protest. In July 1916 over 1,000 workers were convicted under this Act. It was not only in the industrial field that workers were becoming more militant. Rents strikes against rapacious landlords grew.
In 1917 the news of the Russian Revolution added to the revolutionary spirit of the workers.
With the end of the war in 1918, the Labour Party withdrew its Labour Ministers out of the coalition government and won what became known as the Khaki election, because of the returning soldiers taking part.
The change of government did nothing to improve conditions for the workers. It was again left to the workers to fight their own battles with the employers.
On the Clyde the strike was for a shorter working week. The national officials of the unions failed to support it and it ended in a fortnight. Then came the miners, the MFGB demanded a 30 per cent increase, a six-hour day and nationalisation of the mines.
The Government had continued to control the mines after the war and was now facing a strike with exhausted stocks of coal. The miners had formed the “Triple Alliance” with the railway and transport workers, who had also made claims. The Government was faced with a general strike.
The Prime Minister, Lloyd George, offered the miners a Royal Commission on the one hand, and a threat of armed force on the other. The MFGB president, Robert Smillie, caved in to the threat and won a narrow majority for acceptance of the offer.
The commission, presided over by Mr Justice Sankey, subsequently recommended nationalisation. But the Government, despite the promise to implement the commission’s recommendations, refused to comply and provoked a strike in the Yorkshire coalfields during July and August 1919.
The years that followed deserve an article for themselves. The Lancashire cotton workers won a strike for a 48-hour work and a 30 per cent increase in wages when 300,000 of them came out. The railwaymen struck for a week against threatened wage cuts and won improvements against threats from the Government. And it is worth noting that it was only the conservative influence of JH Thomas that prevented the strike widening into a general move forward. Other sections of the labour force, including dockers, made gains.
All these were during the post-war boom, which was coming to an end, bringing with it a rise in unemployment of two million in the slump of 1921. This inevitably brought with it a general attack on workers’ wages and conditions.
The first sections to come under attack from the employers, with the support of the Government, were the coal miners. They had rejected the coal owners’ demands and were locked out. The Miners’ Federation invoked the aid of the Triple Alliance, which called for a strike on 12th April.
Whilst the workers were prepared to take action, the leaders of the Triple Alliance were not enthusiastic and postponed the strike to 15th April. During this delay Frank Hodges, secretary of the Miners’ Federation, took it upon himself to offer a temporary settlement at a meeting of MPs. The following day his unauthorised action was disowned by his executive.
But the damage had been done and the alliance leaders withdrew their support. This day became known as “Black Friday”. The result was catastrophic. Workers felt they had been betrayed. Three of the four leading personalities associated with Black Friday deserted to the other side. Frank Hodges became a director of the Bank of England; JH Thomas left public life, Robert Williams became a spokesman for the National Government. The fourth member was Ernest Bevin.
During the next three years the effect of Black Friday was to undermine the morale of the workers who were left to fight defensive actions. The miners were defeated and six million workers suffered wage cuts. The employers used lockouts to break any resistance. The effect on trade union membership was dramatic.
But by the end of 1923 there were signs of recovery and workers started to regain their fighting spirit with strikes – many unofficial – of builders, agricultural workers, boilermakers, dockers and seamen.
January 1924 saw the election of the first Labour government under the leadership of Ramsay MacDonald. During an official strike of railwaymen that was taking place at the time, MacDonald showed no sympathy with Aslef, the union leading the strike. This action eventually won some concessions in spite of disunity from the National Union of Railwaymen, which instructed its members to continue working.
The year continued with more unofficial disputes in the shipyards and railway shops. In London the tramway workers struck for higher wages; the busmen joined them and the Tube men were considering sympathetic action. McDonald declared he would invoke the Government’s Emergency Powers Act, which empowered him to declare a state of emergency. Only the simultaneous ending of the strike prevented military intervention.
For some time militant workers had been moving to the left. They had created the National Minority Movement at a conference in London in August that year, with the veteran Tom Mann as president and Harry Pollitt – who had gained a reputation representing the boilermakers as a delegate to Labour Party conferences – as secretary.
By this time Harry Pollitt had become secretary of the Communist Party. The movement had grown in the South Wales and Fife coalfields and had secured the election of AJ Cook as secretary of the MFGB, replacing Hodges after his forced resignation.
In September a new spirit could be seen in the trade unions. Whilst the Labour government had been defeated in the October election, the September TUC congress adopted an Industrial Workers’ Charter; gave the General Council new powers to intervene in disputes, and to draft a scheme for linking the unions into a united front for improving workers living standards. The council was also instructed to call a special congress to decide on industrial action if there was a danger of war.
By 1925 the British capitalists were facing a desperate economic struggle to regain their world position. Prime Minister Baldwin had declared that “all workers in this country have got to take reductions in wages to help this country get on its feet”.
The Miners’ Federation, always the first to come under attack, refused the mine-owners’ demands and received the “complete support” of the TUC General Council, which appointed a special committee to cooperate with the miners in resisting this attack.
The committee, with the support of the railway and transport workers, drew up plans for an embargo on all coal transport in the event of a miners’ lockout. A special conference of union executives endorsed the plan on the day before the mine-owners’ deadline: 30th July.
The Government, unprepared for such action, retreated and announced a nine-month subsidy to enable a Royal Commission to conduct an inquiry. The mine-owners withdrew their proposed lockout. That day is now known as Red Friday.
The General Council declared that the defeat of the Government was “an immense stimulus to every trade unionist”. But communists warned that “the capitalist class will prepare for a crushing attack on the workers” and continually called for preparations to repel such an attack.
The capitalist state had, following its setback on Red Friday, started preparations for a counter attack by forming an “unofficial” Organisation for the Maintenance of Supplies” with a Central Council made up of high-ranking admirals, generals and retired officials of the state, for the purpose of organising strike-breaking “black legs”, special constables and fascist elements.
This organisation, known as OMS, became an official arm of the state, supporting the capitalist employers. Winston Churchill, at the time Chancellor of the Exchequer, made it clear that their action on Red Friday had only been intended to give the Government time to prepare its counter attack.
There was little reaction to all of this from the TUC’s General Council. But the September congress in Scarborough showed the fighting mood of the workers with a vote of 3,082,000 to 79,000 in favour of revolutionary opposition to British imperialism. The conference declared that the aim of the unions, in conjunction with the Labour Party was for the workers’ overthrow of capitalism and pledged itself to strengthen workshop organisation.
Despite these brave words, the congress saw the election of two men associated with Black Friday – JH Thomas and Ernest Bevin. They were joined by WM Citrine as General Council secretary following the death of Fred Bramley. This moved the balance of force on the General Council to the right.
At the following Labour Party conference Thomas and Bevin associated with MacDonald in a counter demonstration to the Scarborough congress. Pressure was put on the unions not to elect communists to the Labour Party.
The Government saw the green light and within a fortnight had jailed 12 Communist Party leaders after the biggest state trial since the Chartist days.
The Miners’ Federation, concerned at the turn of events, made efforts to form an industrial alliance of key unions to prepare for the conflict, which were wrecked by the withdrawal of Thomas’s NUR.
The Royal Commission on the coal industry headed by Sir Arthur Samuel, later to become a lord, produced a report in March 1926, which was vague in its view on recognition of the coal industry under state control. But it was strong in its view that miners should accept longer hours and lower wages.
The miners’ delegate conference on 10th April disillusioned the General Council by standing firm and so did the Minority Movement conference held in late March, attended by 883 delegates representing a million trade unionists, supporting their fight.
The mine owners immediately declared they would only negotiate on a district basis, and gave notice of a lockout for 20th April. They demanded wage reductions so severe that even their president, Evan Williams, admitted the resulting wages would be “miserable”.
In response the TUC General Council regained its backbone in support of the miners and on 27th April decided at last to draft plans for large scale action if necessary.
Negotiations continued the following night of 29th April and the following day. But it became clear that the Government, having completed its preparation, was determined to provoke a conflict. The General Council’s negotiators, of which Thomas was a leading member, reported to union executives the following morning and a vote was taken endorsing a General Strike order by unions representing over 3,600,000 members to fewer than 5,000.
They announced that specified unions would strike as from midnight Monday 3rd May.
They planned that specified trades would be called out in two sections. The first included all transport, printing, iron and steel foundries, heavy chemicals and building workers (except those working on housing and hospitals). The maintenance of food and health services was to be covered by the unions concerned.
Whilst these preparations were going ahead, the General Council still maintained that they had a right to negotiate for the miners, even if it meant a reduction in wages.
But when the Natsopa members refused to print an anti-union leading article in the Daily Mail and went on strike, Baldwin demanded that if negotiations were to continue, the General Council should withdraw the notice of a General Strike. This he made impossible, and despite the misgivings of the General Council, the dye was cast and at midnight on Monday 3rd May an army of a million workers struck.
The next day the TUC communiqué said: “We have from all over the country reports that have surpassed our expectations. Not only the railwaymen and transport men, but all other trades came out in a manner we did not expect immediately. The difficulty of the General Council has been to keep the men in what we might call the second line of defence rather than call them out.”
There were no passenger trains, no newspapers. The Communist Party issued a typewritten Workers’ Bulletin. The General Council, always on the defensive, only produced its own news-sheet, the British Worker, after the Government had produced an official British Gazette.
The trades councils and councils of action speedily organised in many parts of the country, so effective that in some major towns nothing moved without a permit from the trades council. The International Federation of Trade Unions declared its moral and financial support if needed.
The second day of the strike, the London taxi-drivers stopped work. The National Union of Journalists (Glasgow) refused to Blackleg. The National Unemployed Workers’ Committee Movement – already suffering from the employers’ attacks – offered assistance to the trades councils and strike committees.
The Independent Labour Party called on its branches to support the strike. The Communist Party issued a statement in the British Worker with the slogans:
1) All together behind the miners;2) Nationalisation of the mines3) Resignation of Baldwin; formation of a Labour government.
By this time the police were more aggressive with baton charges against strikers in crowds in the streets and making summary arrests. Communist MP Saklatvala was sentenced to two months imprisonment for a speech on May Day.
Days four and five of the strike saw all electrical stations in London on strike, with the withdrawal of electricity from the House of Commons. The Government issued an indemnity to troops for any action considered necessary to maintain order.
There were more battles with police in many towns such as Liverpool and Hull. In London there were 36 arrests. Local strike committees made arrangements with the Cooperative organisation for the supply of food. Communist Isabel Brown was sentenced to three months imprisonment.
On day six, Purcell, the leader of the General Council’s strike organising committee, declared that the Government had issued warrants for the arrest of himself and Ernest Bevin, who was then secretary of the Transport Workers’ Union and a member of the General Council. Other sources reported that the Government had decided to arrest members of the General Council and local strike committees, to call up the army reserve and to repeal the Trades Disputes Act.
At a high mass, Cardinal Bourne declared the General Strike to be a sin against God.
JH Thomas said: “I have never disguised that I did not like the principle of a General Strike.”
On day seven the General Council negotiated with the Cooperative Wholesale Society for credits to the trade unions. It also called for a five per cent levy on all workers not yet on strike.
Day eight saw the General Council issue the strike order for all engineering and shipbuilding workers not yet affected by the strike. Despite increased arrests – 100 in Glasgow and another 25 in Hull – the BBC announced: “There is as yet little sign of a general collapse of the strike.”
And yet on the same day the General Council accepted a rehashed Royal Commission report by Sir Herbert Samuel and called off the strike without any guarantees of any kind, and in the face of miners’ opposition. The General Council of the TUC presented itself at Downing Street at 12 noon on 12th May and informed Baldwin that “the General Strike is being terminated today”.
The General Council had not only treacherously abandoned the miners but had left the trade unions individually to negotiate their members’ return to work, with only a vague understanding from Prime Minister Baldwin that they would return to work on the same conditions as at the start of the General Strike.
The result was a Government official communiqué saying that they would not compel employers to take back workers who had taken part in the in the strike and that the Government had not taken on itself any such obligation.
The individual unions instructed their members to stay out until agreement with employers was reached, which took another four days. The miners refused to accept defeat and fought on until December.
Despite its defeat, the General Strike was the greatest act of defiance against the British capitalist class. It showed a unity of the working class never seen before and which could be built again, provided the lessons of the fallibility of social democratic leadership are understood.
Friday, April 14, 2006
Gay in China
by Ray Jones
On 16th December 2005 gay men and lesbians held their first national celebration in People’s China. Gay bars, clubs, spas, bathhouses and other meeting places are thriving in the large cities and there is a strong on-line gay community.
Gays in China have adopted the rainbow flag and call each other tongzhi (comrade - people who share the same ideals).
Things have certainly come along way since 1997 when gay behaviour in public places ceased to be legally classed as hooliganism. And it was only in April 2001 that homosexuality was deleted from the list of mental disorders.
In effect homosexuality has been legalised but the situation is still far from perfect. The Government has not yet accepted the need for official gay partnerships, although many expect them to do so before long, and prejudice against gays is still strong.
Opinion on gays in China is contradictory. China has been depicted as on a par with ancient Greece in its acceptance of homosexual activity and it seems the case that they have rarely been systematically persecuted there as they have been in other countries.
Chinese literature has many examples of homosexual love stories and poetry – which horrified the Jesuit missionaries when they arrived. Almost all the emperors of the Western Han dynasty (206 BC-25 AD), for example, are reported to have had male lovers.
In China people generally think that sex is sex and that the gender of the partners makes little difference. There has traditionally been no concept of homosexual activity being sinful from a religious perspective as we have had in the West.
But the Confucian tradition pulls in the other direction. At the heart of Confucianism is devotion to the family and therefore it’s three main crimes are, disobeying your parents, not supporting your parents and, the worst, not continuing the family line.
This last point is of course particularly relevant to gays. Many gay men and lesbians can’t face telling their parents and are overwhelmed with guilt. In a sense the pressure for small families may compound the problem – if you only have one child and they turn out to be gay?...
Most gay people feel forced to try to live a heterosexual life style which often results in misery. And with a gay population estimated to be between 39 million and 52 million that’s a lot of misery.
Sadly it was during the Cultural Revolution (1966-76) that gays in China faced their worst persecution and were labelled mentally ill and hooligans. But today homosexuality is becoming more accepted again and their life-style actually fits in with the government’s drive to reduce the population.
As China continues to move forward, as parents become less dependant on their children in old age, as the gay movement grows and as the government continues to listen, things will continue to improve.
On 16th December 2005 gay men and lesbians held their first national celebration in People’s China. Gay bars, clubs, spas, bathhouses and other meeting places are thriving in the large cities and there is a strong on-line gay community.
Gays in China have adopted the rainbow flag and call each other tongzhi (comrade - people who share the same ideals).
Things have certainly come along way since 1997 when gay behaviour in public places ceased to be legally classed as hooliganism. And it was only in April 2001 that homosexuality was deleted from the list of mental disorders.
In effect homosexuality has been legalised but the situation is still far from perfect. The Government has not yet accepted the need for official gay partnerships, although many expect them to do so before long, and prejudice against gays is still strong.
Opinion on gays in China is contradictory. China has been depicted as on a par with ancient Greece in its acceptance of homosexual activity and it seems the case that they have rarely been systematically persecuted there as they have been in other countries.
Chinese literature has many examples of homosexual love stories and poetry – which horrified the Jesuit missionaries when they arrived. Almost all the emperors of the Western Han dynasty (206 BC-25 AD), for example, are reported to have had male lovers.
In China people generally think that sex is sex and that the gender of the partners makes little difference. There has traditionally been no concept of homosexual activity being sinful from a religious perspective as we have had in the West.
But the Confucian tradition pulls in the other direction. At the heart of Confucianism is devotion to the family and therefore it’s three main crimes are, disobeying your parents, not supporting your parents and, the worst, not continuing the family line.
This last point is of course particularly relevant to gays. Many gay men and lesbians can’t face telling their parents and are overwhelmed with guilt. In a sense the pressure for small families may compound the problem – if you only have one child and they turn out to be gay?...
Most gay people feel forced to try to live a heterosexual life style which often results in misery. And with a gay population estimated to be between 39 million and 52 million that’s a lot of misery.
Sadly it was during the Cultural Revolution (1966-76) that gays in China faced their worst persecution and were labelled mentally ill and hooligans. But today homosexuality is becoming more accepted again and their life-style actually fits in with the government’s drive to reduce the population.
As China continues to move forward, as parents become less dependant on their children in old age, as the gay movement grows and as the government continues to listen, things will continue to improve.
Friday, March 31, 2006
Peace in an Irish town
by Theo Russell
At Sinn Féin’s Ard Fheis in Dublin last month the New Worker interviewed Gerry Machlochlainn, a Sinn Féin councillor in Derry City and former Sinn Féin representative in Britain, about the changes Derry has seen with the end of the conflict and the impact of the Good Friday Agreement in the north of Ireland. The following is his assessment of the changes seen in recent years:
MAJOR ADVANCES have taken place in Derry, such as the removal of British troops and military paraphernalia from the streets. There are still some listening and observation posts in the Rosemount district as well as a British army barracks but the military presence is far less visible.
Sinn Féin is much stronger in Derry and in the local elections in May 2005 achieved its largest ever vote. Although the party emerged with the same number of council seats, it closed the gap with the Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP), for whom Derry is their main base in the Six Counties.
Sinn Féin now has ten councillors against 14 for the SDLP and six unionist seats (the overwhelming majority of Derry being Catholic and nationalist).
Under direct rule Derry suffered from a lack of investment and poor infrastructure and was very low in spending priorities. Sinn Féin is pushing an all-Ireland development agenda and a balanced regional approach in the northwest of Ireland, involving the counties of Donegal in the Republic and Derry, Limavady and Strabane in the Six Counties. The party has received a very positive response to its development policies.
Now the SDLP is also supporting "north-south development", and the government in Dublin is also talking about developing the northwest. Levels of poverty in Derry neighbouring and Donegal are still unacceptably high.
While the Irish Republic is one of the wealthiest countries in the world, with a GDP second in Europe to Luxembourg, it is also the most unequal in Europe.
The impact of globalisation has meant the export of traditional jobs such as clothing, textiles and other more recent industries to developing countries.
The "race to the bottom" and the cheapest labour mean that the future lies in building a high skills and highly paid economy, by developing educational and intellectual structures and developing a social response.
Currently economic development is reliant on multi-national companies. What is needed is to develop an indigenous economy with some contribution from foreign direct investment.
One area where reform has not been delivered is policing. The SDLP is now paying the price for accepting the new Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) and joining the policing board. People can see how the PSNI engage in blatant acts, carrying out very public raids on republicans under the guise of investigating "serious crime", and can see their provocations against young people leading to confrontations.
In the summer of 2005 The PSNI decided to issue charges for the annual march commemorating the 1981 Hunger Strike, saying that a 20-minute procession through a republican area was illegal.
Thirty people, including several Sinn Féin councillors, face being convicted of an offence for walking down their own street. All this because the deadline for requesting permission had been missed!
This is in comparison to the PSNI setting up road-blocks and sealing off nationalist areas to allow Orange Order marches in Belfast and other towns.
Communities in Derry are vulnerable without an acceptable police service. Petty criminals are tolerated by the PSNI and used as paid informers. Republicans and nationalists are very angry about this.
Poverty and degradation are a legacy of the conflict, Irish drinking culture, drugs, these need a multi-faceted approach. Community restorative justice structures are active in the city but there’s still a huge gap to be filled.
The voluntary community sector is very active and there is a thriving social economy with projects including community-based enterprises, a shopping centre and leisure centre set up by ex-prisoners.
More children are learning the Irish language than ever – several hundred at Irish schools and Conradh na Gaeilge is building a £2 – £3 million Irish language and cultural centre serving Derry.
But there are still interface problems. Young people on both sides take part in "recreational rioting" and in the Unionist community they are being exploited by loyalists. A Catholic family on the protestant Fountain estate and a protestant family who were friendly with Catholics have had bomb attacks.
Young people in both communities are also involved in disgraceful behaviour and this is a challenge for Sinn Féin – we need to ensure that the Fountain doesn’t feel under siege. This involves a fast response to confrontations, and trying to mobilise the communities and get people to take responsibility to end the dangers to young people and to the political situation in Derry.
The unionist community has five Democratic Unionist Party councillors and one Official Unionist Party councillor, all of them anti-Good Friday Agreement. There is no effective challenge to the rejectionists, but civic unionism – business, the church and non-political – is engaging in a very significant way with nationalists.
On the issue of marches, the Apprentice Boys of Derry have entered into negotiations with others, including nationalists, and agreements have been reached to allow marches to happen without major disruption.
There is an important lesson for other parts of Ireland that agreement can be reached through talking. But there isn’t yet a permanent long-term solution and the marches still cause major disruption for residents and businesses, and the business community is pressing for changes.
There is no significant support for "dissident" republicans in Derry. There is a range of opinion in the nationalist community on the recent changes and Sinn Féin’s policies, but there is overwhelming support for taking the process forward through political and democratic measures.
These micro-groups are not representative and are totally discredited, and they are in effect disrupting their own community.
At Sinn Féin’s Ard Fheis in Dublin last month the New Worker interviewed Gerry Machlochlainn, a Sinn Féin councillor in Derry City and former Sinn Féin representative in Britain, about the changes Derry has seen with the end of the conflict and the impact of the Good Friday Agreement in the north of Ireland. The following is his assessment of the changes seen in recent years:
MAJOR ADVANCES have taken place in Derry, such as the removal of British troops and military paraphernalia from the streets. There are still some listening and observation posts in the Rosemount district as well as a British army barracks but the military presence is far less visible.
Sinn Féin is much stronger in Derry and in the local elections in May 2005 achieved its largest ever vote. Although the party emerged with the same number of council seats, it closed the gap with the Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP), for whom Derry is their main base in the Six Counties.
Sinn Féin now has ten councillors against 14 for the SDLP and six unionist seats (the overwhelming majority of Derry being Catholic and nationalist).
Under direct rule Derry suffered from a lack of investment and poor infrastructure and was very low in spending priorities. Sinn Féin is pushing an all-Ireland development agenda and a balanced regional approach in the northwest of Ireland, involving the counties of Donegal in the Republic and Derry, Limavady and Strabane in the Six Counties. The party has received a very positive response to its development policies.
Now the SDLP is also supporting "north-south development", and the government in Dublin is also talking about developing the northwest. Levels of poverty in Derry neighbouring and Donegal are still unacceptably high.
While the Irish Republic is one of the wealthiest countries in the world, with a GDP second in Europe to Luxembourg, it is also the most unequal in Europe.
The impact of globalisation has meant the export of traditional jobs such as clothing, textiles and other more recent industries to developing countries.
The "race to the bottom" and the cheapest labour mean that the future lies in building a high skills and highly paid economy, by developing educational and intellectual structures and developing a social response.
Currently economic development is reliant on multi-national companies. What is needed is to develop an indigenous economy with some contribution from foreign direct investment.
One area where reform has not been delivered is policing. The SDLP is now paying the price for accepting the new Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) and joining the policing board. People can see how the PSNI engage in blatant acts, carrying out very public raids on republicans under the guise of investigating "serious crime", and can see their provocations against young people leading to confrontations.
In the summer of 2005 The PSNI decided to issue charges for the annual march commemorating the 1981 Hunger Strike, saying that a 20-minute procession through a republican area was illegal.
Thirty people, including several Sinn Féin councillors, face being convicted of an offence for walking down their own street. All this because the deadline for requesting permission had been missed!
This is in comparison to the PSNI setting up road-blocks and sealing off nationalist areas to allow Orange Order marches in Belfast and other towns.
Communities in Derry are vulnerable without an acceptable police service. Petty criminals are tolerated by the PSNI and used as paid informers. Republicans and nationalists are very angry about this.
Poverty and degradation are a legacy of the conflict, Irish drinking culture, drugs, these need a multi-faceted approach. Community restorative justice structures are active in the city but there’s still a huge gap to be filled.
The voluntary community sector is very active and there is a thriving social economy with projects including community-based enterprises, a shopping centre and leisure centre set up by ex-prisoners.
More children are learning the Irish language than ever – several hundred at Irish schools and Conradh na Gaeilge is building a £2 – £3 million Irish language and cultural centre serving Derry.
But there are still interface problems. Young people on both sides take part in "recreational rioting" and in the Unionist community they are being exploited by loyalists. A Catholic family on the protestant Fountain estate and a protestant family who were friendly with Catholics have had bomb attacks.
Young people in both communities are also involved in disgraceful behaviour and this is a challenge for Sinn Féin – we need to ensure that the Fountain doesn’t feel under siege. This involves a fast response to confrontations, and trying to mobilise the communities and get people to take responsibility to end the dangers to young people and to the political situation in Derry.
The unionist community has five Democratic Unionist Party councillors and one Official Unionist Party councillor, all of them anti-Good Friday Agreement. There is no effective challenge to the rejectionists, but civic unionism – business, the church and non-political – is engaging in a very significant way with nationalists.
On the issue of marches, the Apprentice Boys of Derry have entered into negotiations with others, including nationalists, and agreements have been reached to allow marches to happen without major disruption.
There is an important lesson for other parts of Ireland that agreement can be reached through talking. But there isn’t yet a permanent long-term solution and the marches still cause major disruption for residents and businesses, and the business community is pressing for changes.
There is no significant support for "dissident" republicans in Derry. There is a range of opinion in the nationalist community on the recent changes and Sinn Féin’s policies, but there is overwhelming support for taking the process forward through political and democratic measures.
These micro-groups are not representative and are totally discredited, and they are in effect disrupting their own community.
Wednesday, March 29, 2006
End the Occupation -- Solidarity with the Iraqi people (update)
Statement of Communist and Workers’ Parties on the occasion of the 3rd Anniversary of the War against Iraq
End of occupation - Solidarity with the Iraqi people
The war against Iraq, launched by the US imperialism and its allies has been going on for three years now.
Around the 18th March, on the occasion of the anniversary of the war, there will be demonstrations and protests all over the world against the ongoing occupation.
We call upon the working people to strengthen their struggle and solidarity with the Iraqi people and to stop the threat of new military imperialist interventions in the region.
As communist and workers' parties struggling for peace, social justice, progress and socialism, we support the legitimate right of the Iraqi people to resist occupation.
We reiterate our firm solidarity with their struggle for the end of occupation, for the restoration of the sovereignty and independence, for the liberation and integrity of their country.
We demand the immediate withdrawal of all occupation forces as a prerequisite for a democratic and sovereign Iraq, legal action against the crimes of the invaders and full compensation for the damage they caused.
The parties
Communist Party of Albania
Algerian Party for Democracy and Socialism
Communist Party of Argentina
Communist Party of Armenia
Communist Party of Australia
Communist Party of Bangladesh
Communist Party of Belarus
Workers' Party of Belgium
Communist Workers' Party of Bosnia and Herzegovina
Brazilian Communist Party
Communist Party of Brazil
Communist Party of Britain
New Communist Party of Britain
Bulgarian Communist Party Georgi Dimitroff
Communist Party of Bulgaria
Communist Party of Canada
Communist Party of Cuba
AKEL, Cyprus
Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia
Communist Party in Denmark
Communist Party of Denmark
Communist Party of Estonia
Communist Party of Finland
Communist Party of Macedonia
Unified Communist Party of Georgia
German Communist Party
Communist Party of Greece
Hungarian Communist Workers’ Party
Communist Party of India
Communist Party of Ireland
Workers’ Party of Ireland
Communist Party of Israel
Party of the Italian Communists (PdCI)
Jordanian Communist Party
Workers Party of Korea
Socialist Party of Latvia
Socialist Party of Lithuania
Communist Party of Luxembourg
Party of the Communists of Mexico
Popular Socialist Party of Mexico
Communist Party of Malta
New Communist Party of the Netherlands
Palestinian Communist Party
Philippine Communist Party (PKP-1930)
Communist Party of Poland
Portuguese Communist Party
Communist Party of Romania
Socialist Alliance Party Romania
Communist Party of Soviet Union
Communist Party of the Russian Federation
Communist Workers' Party of Russia - Party of the Russian Communists
New Communist Party of Yugoslavia
Communist Party of Slovakia
South African Communist Party
Communist Party of Peoples of Spain
Communist Party of Sweden
Communist Party of Syria
Syrian Communist Party
Communist Party of Tadjikistan
Communist Party of Turkey
Communist Party of Ukraine
Union of Communists of Ukraine
Communist Party of Venezuela
24th March 2006
End of occupation - Solidarity with the Iraqi people
The war against Iraq, launched by the US imperialism and its allies has been going on for three years now.
Around the 18th March, on the occasion of the anniversary of the war, there will be demonstrations and protests all over the world against the ongoing occupation.
We call upon the working people to strengthen their struggle and solidarity with the Iraqi people and to stop the threat of new military imperialist interventions in the region.
As communist and workers' parties struggling for peace, social justice, progress and socialism, we support the legitimate right of the Iraqi people to resist occupation.
We reiterate our firm solidarity with their struggle for the end of occupation, for the restoration of the sovereignty and independence, for the liberation and integrity of their country.
We demand the immediate withdrawal of all occupation forces as a prerequisite for a democratic and sovereign Iraq, legal action against the crimes of the invaders and full compensation for the damage they caused.
The parties
Communist Party of Albania
Algerian Party for Democracy and Socialism
Communist Party of Argentina
Communist Party of Armenia
Communist Party of Australia
Communist Party of Bangladesh
Communist Party of Belarus
Workers' Party of Belgium
Communist Workers' Party of Bosnia and Herzegovina
Brazilian Communist Party
Communist Party of Brazil
Communist Party of Britain
New Communist Party of Britain
Bulgarian Communist Party Georgi Dimitroff
Communist Party of Bulgaria
Communist Party of Canada
Communist Party of Cuba
AKEL, Cyprus
Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia
Communist Party in Denmark
Communist Party of Denmark
Communist Party of Estonia
Communist Party of Finland
Communist Party of Macedonia
Unified Communist Party of Georgia
German Communist Party
Communist Party of Greece
Hungarian Communist Workers’ Party
Communist Party of India
Communist Party of Ireland
Workers’ Party of Ireland
Communist Party of Israel
Party of the Italian Communists (PdCI)
Jordanian Communist Party
Workers Party of Korea
Socialist Party of Latvia
Socialist Party of Lithuania
Communist Party of Luxembourg
Party of the Communists of Mexico
Popular Socialist Party of Mexico
Communist Party of Malta
New Communist Party of the Netherlands
Palestinian Communist Party
Philippine Communist Party (PKP-1930)
Communist Party of Poland
Portuguese Communist Party
Communist Party of Romania
Socialist Alliance Party Romania
Communist Party of Soviet Union
Communist Party of the Russian Federation
Communist Workers' Party of Russia - Party of the Russian Communists
New Communist Party of Yugoslavia
Communist Party of Slovakia
South African Communist Party
Communist Party of Peoples of Spain
Communist Party of Sweden
Communist Party of Syria
Syrian Communist Party
Communist Party of Tadjikistan
Communist Party of Turkey
Communist Party of Ukraine
Union of Communists of Ukraine
Communist Party of Venezuela
24th March 2006
Plunder at Home, Plunder Abroad
The world's leading imperialist powers, Britain and the United States, are fond of accusing other governments and institutions of corruption.
Recently it was Kenya, before that the Palestinian Authority, Zimbabwe and the whole of Africa. US senator Paul Volcker led the onslaught on the United Nations over the oil for food programme.
Kofi Annan, his son, and even our own George Galloway MP were targetted, but the real aim was to undermine the UN itself as a body speaking on behalf of the world's nations.
But what is the record of the two guardians of democracy and freedom?
US journalist Ed Harriman has exposed corruption and criminality In Iraq on a staggering scale.The US-run Coalition Privisional Authority (CPA) handed huge contracts to a handful of US firms with no competition. The CPA's inspector general found that $8.8 billion spent by the Iraqi Interim Government was not properly accounted for - more than the Mobutu stole from Zaire in 32 years. Millions simply disappeared from the Iraqi Central Bank, and $800m was handed out to US commanders without even being counted. A US contractor was overpaid by $2,825,755, another given $25 million in cash with no record.
Nineteen billion new Iraqi dinars turned up on a plane sent to Lebanon by the Iraqi interior minister, and $1.4bn was flown to the Kurdish regional capital Irbil where it vanished. Ministers and officials distributed millions in cash to their friends, relatives or private militias. No records were kept of Iraqi oil exports, and in flagrant breach of Security Council Resolution 1483 oil income was not placed in development accounts. Christian Aid protested that the distribution of Iraq's money should have been subject to international oversight, but nobody listened. $18.4 billion approved by the US Congress for Iraq ended up being spent on fighting the resistance. Reconstruction funds went on the war, while in Iraq hospitals and schools were derelict, electricity intermittent, and water supplies polluted.
The war in Iraq cost Britain and the US £105 billion, paid for by the working people of those countries. But this figure is dwarfed by the estimated £3 trillion in Iraqi oil wealth.In 1972 Saddam Hussain nationalised the oil industry and the US and British oil giants were excluded from the country. After the occupation, executives from BP, Shell, Exxon Mobil and Halliburton gathered in London to share out the oil contracts.The 2005 Iraqi constitution, written by the US occupiers, requires major sectors of the economy to be privatised, and guarantees foreign companies a major role.
This is the real reason for the invasion and occupation, and why the occupiers had to search desparately for a just cause.And what about Britain itself? New Labour and the Treasury are overseeing 'legal' corruption involving billions in public funds. A BBC investigation has revealed billions being wasted on management consultants in the public sector.These companies and civil servants have lied to MPs and the punlic, while in almost every case leaving a worse financial situation than they found. In 2004 consultants across the public sector cost almost £2 billion. In recent years Surrey and Sussex Healthcare Trust has been overrun by consultants from Quo Health, McKinseys and Secta. A chief executive from Quo Health was appointed at a salary of over £300,000, but the trust's deficit grew to £62m. The contract was terminated early.McKinseys carried out "a holistic financial and activity diagnostic." Then consultants from Secta were "franchised" by the Department of Health to run the trust under a new Chief Executive.A deficit of £3m became £11.5m. The former trust chairman said "the whole process of the franchise failed completely." But according to Secta, "services were substantially improved."Secta's contract also was terminated early, but the company refused to say how much they were paid off on grounds of "commercial confidentiality".
Members of the Patients Forum were told that £150,000 was spent on private operations, but found under the Freedom of Information act the true figure was £2.8m.Local MP Mike Penning said Secta "goes around in circles to try and make sure you do not get the facts," and the government was "ploughing more and more and more into Trusts to oversee the management, which we're already paying for in the first place."An HM Revenue and Customs employee told the BBC 'advisors' had been doing his job for much higher pay. "When you look at the car park, you see expensive cars and clearly they can't belong to civil servants - you know, Mercedes, BMWs and Porsches."The National Audit Office questioned the use of consultants at the Department for Education and Skills, citing "ineffective outcomes, cost overruns, poor value for money and lack of propriety."
When Labour MP Austin Mitchell, a member of the Public Accounts Committee, asked the DfES how much was spent on consultants, he was told "about £4.4m a year." But an internal audit he was refused access to gave the true figure: £20-£30m.Mitchell says "the estimate they gave me was really untrue and they were trying to con me. They lied."The BBC investigation reveals corruption, waste and dishonesty involving billions in taxes paid by working people, and the contempt with which elected and public representatives are treated by the Whitehall mandarins overseeing this 'legal' robbery.
Such corruption and injustice is endemic. NHS hospitals are now among the dirtiest in the whole of Europe, east and west. The number of hospital cleaners has fallen by half since contracting out started in 1979.
Private lobbyists operate at every level of parliament & government, and research bodies on GM crops are packed with representatives of agribusiness and food retailers. The NHS, teaching and local government are subject to endless monitoring and restructuring overseen by consultants.
Of course corruption is rife in many developing countries, where the most respectable British companies openly admit to handing out lavish bribes. There is just as much corruption in Britain and the rest of Europe, where it is more effectively hidden.
But this corruption pales into insignificance when set against the vast wealth plundered from the developing nations by imperialism, through debt, privatisation, unequal trade, and now though war and re-colonisation.
Recently it was Kenya, before that the Palestinian Authority, Zimbabwe and the whole of Africa. US senator Paul Volcker led the onslaught on the United Nations over the oil for food programme.
Kofi Annan, his son, and even our own George Galloway MP were targetted, but the real aim was to undermine the UN itself as a body speaking on behalf of the world's nations.
But what is the record of the two guardians of democracy and freedom?
US journalist Ed Harriman has exposed corruption and criminality In Iraq on a staggering scale.The US-run Coalition Privisional Authority (CPA) handed huge contracts to a handful of US firms with no competition. The CPA's inspector general found that $8.8 billion spent by the Iraqi Interim Government was not properly accounted for - more than the Mobutu stole from Zaire in 32 years. Millions simply disappeared from the Iraqi Central Bank, and $800m was handed out to US commanders without even being counted. A US contractor was overpaid by $2,825,755, another given $25 million in cash with no record.
Nineteen billion new Iraqi dinars turned up on a plane sent to Lebanon by the Iraqi interior minister, and $1.4bn was flown to the Kurdish regional capital Irbil where it vanished. Ministers and officials distributed millions in cash to their friends, relatives or private militias. No records were kept of Iraqi oil exports, and in flagrant breach of Security Council Resolution 1483 oil income was not placed in development accounts. Christian Aid protested that the distribution of Iraq's money should have been subject to international oversight, but nobody listened. $18.4 billion approved by the US Congress for Iraq ended up being spent on fighting the resistance. Reconstruction funds went on the war, while in Iraq hospitals and schools were derelict, electricity intermittent, and water supplies polluted.
The war in Iraq cost Britain and the US £105 billion, paid for by the working people of those countries. But this figure is dwarfed by the estimated £3 trillion in Iraqi oil wealth.In 1972 Saddam Hussain nationalised the oil industry and the US and British oil giants were excluded from the country. After the occupation, executives from BP, Shell, Exxon Mobil and Halliburton gathered in London to share out the oil contracts.The 2005 Iraqi constitution, written by the US occupiers, requires major sectors of the economy to be privatised, and guarantees foreign companies a major role.
This is the real reason for the invasion and occupation, and why the occupiers had to search desparately for a just cause.And what about Britain itself? New Labour and the Treasury are overseeing 'legal' corruption involving billions in public funds. A BBC investigation has revealed billions being wasted on management consultants in the public sector.These companies and civil servants have lied to MPs and the punlic, while in almost every case leaving a worse financial situation than they found. In 2004 consultants across the public sector cost almost £2 billion. In recent years Surrey and Sussex Healthcare Trust has been overrun by consultants from Quo Health, McKinseys and Secta. A chief executive from Quo Health was appointed at a salary of over £300,000, but the trust's deficit grew to £62m. The contract was terminated early.McKinseys carried out "a holistic financial and activity diagnostic." Then consultants from Secta were "franchised" by the Department of Health to run the trust under a new Chief Executive.A deficit of £3m became £11.5m. The former trust chairman said "the whole process of the franchise failed completely." But according to Secta, "services were substantially improved."Secta's contract also was terminated early, but the company refused to say how much they were paid off on grounds of "commercial confidentiality".
Members of the Patients Forum were told that £150,000 was spent on private operations, but found under the Freedom of Information act the true figure was £2.8m.Local MP Mike Penning said Secta "goes around in circles to try and make sure you do not get the facts," and the government was "ploughing more and more and more into Trusts to oversee the management, which we're already paying for in the first place."An HM Revenue and Customs employee told the BBC 'advisors' had been doing his job for much higher pay. "When you look at the car park, you see expensive cars and clearly they can't belong to civil servants - you know, Mercedes, BMWs and Porsches."The National Audit Office questioned the use of consultants at the Department for Education and Skills, citing "ineffective outcomes, cost overruns, poor value for money and lack of propriety."
When Labour MP Austin Mitchell, a member of the Public Accounts Committee, asked the DfES how much was spent on consultants, he was told "about £4.4m a year." But an internal audit he was refused access to gave the true figure: £20-£30m.Mitchell says "the estimate they gave me was really untrue and they were trying to con me. They lied."The BBC investigation reveals corruption, waste and dishonesty involving billions in taxes paid by working people, and the contempt with which elected and public representatives are treated by the Whitehall mandarins overseeing this 'legal' robbery.
Such corruption and injustice is endemic. NHS hospitals are now among the dirtiest in the whole of Europe, east and west. The number of hospital cleaners has fallen by half since contracting out started in 1979.
Private lobbyists operate at every level of parliament & government, and research bodies on GM crops are packed with representatives of agribusiness and food retailers. The NHS, teaching and local government are subject to endless monitoring and restructuring overseen by consultants.
Of course corruption is rife in many developing countries, where the most respectable British companies openly admit to handing out lavish bribes. There is just as much corruption in Britain and the rest of Europe, where it is more effectively hidden.
But this corruption pales into insignificance when set against the vast wealth plundered from the developing nations by imperialism, through debt, privatisation, unequal trade, and now though war and re-colonisation.
Thursday, March 23, 2006
Reg Birch -- a life remembered
Review
by Ken Ruddock
Reg Birch:Engineer, trade unionist, communist by Will Podmore, Bellman Books, London 2004. Pbk, illus, 308pp, £8.00.
There are many books written about the history of the trade unions and the working class covering the period up to and during the Second World War, but there are very few that deal with the ongoing struggle that many of us took part in and who remember the part that Reg Birch took – a leading part.
The sub-title says it all – engineer, trade unionist, communist. He was all three in one.
Leaving school at the age of 15 in 1929, he became an apprentice toolmaker and joined the Amalgamated Engineering Union (AEU). Ten years later he became a shop steward.
He joined the Communist Party of Great Britain in 1939 but parted company with it in 1968. By that time the CPGB had drifted away from its revolutionary principles, downgraded the importance of the industrial struggle and had adopted The British Road to Socialism (BRS) as its programme. Reg, like many other militant comrades, had long opposed the BRS as a left-social democratic programme and the style of work that followed, which in his words divided the CPGB into “thinkers” and “doers”, of full-time officers and passive dues payers.
Reg had great faith in the industrial working class, in its ability to defeat the capitalist employers in struggle, given the right leadership. He served the union as a branch officer, branch president, shop stewards’ convenor, and member of its London District Committee. Then he became its district organiser, executive councilman, and secretary of the Confederation of Shipbuilding and Engineering Unions.
Much of his time was spent in conflict with employers in the aircraft industry, in which the unions were militant and well organised in those days and this is covered at length in the book.
In 1968 Reg decided that it was necessary to form an “honest” communist party, a Marxist-Leninist party. And so the Communist Party of Britain (Marxist-Leninist) was formed, with himself as chairman, a post he held until he retired in 1985.
Some communists in engineering joined its ranks. Others, who later helped found the New Communist Party of Britain in 1977, felt that Reg’s move was premature.
But, under Reg’s leadership, the London North district committee of the AEU was not only concerned with national problems. It also had an international outlook and went on record in opposition to the repression of the Palestinian people.
It opposed the United States aggression against Vietnam – in fact Reg was in Hanoi during the bombing of Vietnam in December 1972. He had made many friends in his travels: Chou En-Lai in China and Enver Hoxha, leader of the Party of Labour of Albania amongst them.
Whilst the book of 308 pages is the story of Reg Birch, there is also included a chapter devoted to his wife Dorothy, a fighter in her own right and a great support to Reg. It is packed with anecdotes and stories about industrial struggle including a hilarious account of the AUEW’s presentation to the Trade and Industry Sub-Committee of the House of Commons in 1975.
Reg Birch was an outstanding union leader who fought for the class all his life which is why he is remembered with affection by many who knew him but did not necessarily agree with everything he said. His controversial decision to form the CPB (ML) in 1968 and the political line it subsequently developed can be studied in this text which includes some key Birch speeches and CPB(ML) pamphlets.
This is invaluable reading for all interested in the history of the class and the British communist movement. It can be bought in any bookshop or directly from: Bread Books, PO Box 1806, Coventry, CV6 1YJ. Please add £2.00 for p&p if ordering it directly.
by Ken Ruddock
Reg Birch:Engineer, trade unionist, communist by Will Podmore, Bellman Books, London 2004. Pbk, illus, 308pp, £8.00.
There are many books written about the history of the trade unions and the working class covering the period up to and during the Second World War, but there are very few that deal with the ongoing struggle that many of us took part in and who remember the part that Reg Birch took – a leading part.
The sub-title says it all – engineer, trade unionist, communist. He was all three in one.
Leaving school at the age of 15 in 1929, he became an apprentice toolmaker and joined the Amalgamated Engineering Union (AEU). Ten years later he became a shop steward.
He joined the Communist Party of Great Britain in 1939 but parted company with it in 1968. By that time the CPGB had drifted away from its revolutionary principles, downgraded the importance of the industrial struggle and had adopted The British Road to Socialism (BRS) as its programme. Reg, like many other militant comrades, had long opposed the BRS as a left-social democratic programme and the style of work that followed, which in his words divided the CPGB into “thinkers” and “doers”, of full-time officers and passive dues payers.
Reg had great faith in the industrial working class, in its ability to defeat the capitalist employers in struggle, given the right leadership. He served the union as a branch officer, branch president, shop stewards’ convenor, and member of its London District Committee. Then he became its district organiser, executive councilman, and secretary of the Confederation of Shipbuilding and Engineering Unions.
Much of his time was spent in conflict with employers in the aircraft industry, in which the unions were militant and well organised in those days and this is covered at length in the book.
In 1968 Reg decided that it was necessary to form an “honest” communist party, a Marxist-Leninist party. And so the Communist Party of Britain (Marxist-Leninist) was formed, with himself as chairman, a post he held until he retired in 1985.
Some communists in engineering joined its ranks. Others, who later helped found the New Communist Party of Britain in 1977, felt that Reg’s move was premature.
But, under Reg’s leadership, the London North district committee of the AEU was not only concerned with national problems. It also had an international outlook and went on record in opposition to the repression of the Palestinian people.
It opposed the United States aggression against Vietnam – in fact Reg was in Hanoi during the bombing of Vietnam in December 1972. He had made many friends in his travels: Chou En-Lai in China and Enver Hoxha, leader of the Party of Labour of Albania amongst them.
Whilst the book of 308 pages is the story of Reg Birch, there is also included a chapter devoted to his wife Dorothy, a fighter in her own right and a great support to Reg. It is packed with anecdotes and stories about industrial struggle including a hilarious account of the AUEW’s presentation to the Trade and Industry Sub-Committee of the House of Commons in 1975.
Reg Birch was an outstanding union leader who fought for the class all his life which is why he is remembered with affection by many who knew him but did not necessarily agree with everything he said. His controversial decision to form the CPB (ML) in 1968 and the political line it subsequently developed can be studied in this text which includes some key Birch speeches and CPB(ML) pamphlets.
This is invaluable reading for all interested in the history of the class and the British communist movement. It can be bought in any bookshop or directly from: Bread Books, PO Box 1806, Coventry, CV6 1YJ. Please add £2.00 for p&p if ordering it directly.
Monday, March 20, 2006
End the Occupation -- Solidarity with the Iraqi People
Statement of Communist and Workers’ Parties on the occasion of the 3rd Anniversary of the War against Iraq
End of occupation - Solidarity with the Iraqi people
The war against Iraq, launched by the US imperialism and its allies has been going on for three years now.
Around the 18th March, on the occasion of the anniversary of the war, there will be demonstrations and protests all over the world against the ongoing occupation.
We call upon the working people to strengthen their struggle and solidarity with the Iraqi people and to stop the threat of new military imperialist interventions in the region.
As communist and workers' parties struggling for peace, social justice, progress and socialism, we support the legitimate right of the Iraqi people to resist occupation.
We reiterate our firm solidarity with their struggle for the end of occupation, for the restoration of the sovereignty and independence, for the liberation and integrity of their country.
We demand the immediate withdrawal of all occupation forces as a prerequisite for a democratic and sovereign Iraq, legal action against the crimes of the invaders and full compensation for the damage they caused.
Communist Party of Albania
Algerian Party for Democracy and Socialism
Communist Party of Argentina
Communist Party of Armenia
Communist Party of Australia
Communist Party of Bangladesh
Communist Party of Belarus
Workers' Party of Belgium
Communist Workers' Party of Bosnia and Herzegovina
Brazilian Communist Party
Communist Party of Brazil
New Communist Party of Britain
Bulgarian Communist Party Georgi Dimitroff
Communist Party of Bulgaria
Communist Party of Canada
Communist Party of Cuba
AKEL, Cyprus
Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia
Communist Party in Denmark
Communist Party of Denmark
Communist Party of Estonia
Communist Party of Finland
Communist Party of Macedonia
Unified Communist Party of Georgia
German Communist Party
Communist Party of Greece
Hungarian Communist Workers’ Party
Communist Party of India
Communist Party of Ireland
Workers’ Party of Ireland
Communist Party of Israel
Party of the Italian Communists (PdCI)
Jordanian Communist Party
Workers Party of Korea
Socialist Party of Latvia
Socialist Party of Lithuania
Communist Party of Luxembourg
Party of the Communists of Mexico
Popular Socialist Party of Mexico
Communist Party of Malta
New Communist Party of the Netherlands
Palestinian Communist Party
Philippine Communist Party (PKP-1930)
Communist Party of Poland
Portuguese Communist Party
Socialist Alliance Party Romania
Communist Party of the Russian Federation
Communist Workers' Party of Russia - Party of the Russian Communists
New Communist Party of Yugoslavia
Communist Party of Slovakia
South African Communist Party
Communist Party of Peoples of Spain
Communist Party of Sweden
Communist Party of Syria
Syrian Communist Party
Communist Party of Tadjikistan
Communist Party of Turkey
Communist Party of Ukraine
Union of Communists of Ukraine
Communist Party of Venezuela
16th March 2006
End of occupation - Solidarity with the Iraqi people
The war against Iraq, launched by the US imperialism and its allies has been going on for three years now.
Around the 18th March, on the occasion of the anniversary of the war, there will be demonstrations and protests all over the world against the ongoing occupation.
We call upon the working people to strengthen their struggle and solidarity with the Iraqi people and to stop the threat of new military imperialist interventions in the region.
As communist and workers' parties struggling for peace, social justice, progress and socialism, we support the legitimate right of the Iraqi people to resist occupation.
We reiterate our firm solidarity with their struggle for the end of occupation, for the restoration of the sovereignty and independence, for the liberation and integrity of their country.
We demand the immediate withdrawal of all occupation forces as a prerequisite for a democratic and sovereign Iraq, legal action against the crimes of the invaders and full compensation for the damage they caused.
Communist Party of Albania
Algerian Party for Democracy and Socialism
Communist Party of Argentina
Communist Party of Armenia
Communist Party of Australia
Communist Party of Bangladesh
Communist Party of Belarus
Workers' Party of Belgium
Communist Workers' Party of Bosnia and Herzegovina
Brazilian Communist Party
Communist Party of Brazil
New Communist Party of Britain
Bulgarian Communist Party Georgi Dimitroff
Communist Party of Bulgaria
Communist Party of Canada
Communist Party of Cuba
AKEL, Cyprus
Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia
Communist Party in Denmark
Communist Party of Denmark
Communist Party of Estonia
Communist Party of Finland
Communist Party of Macedonia
Unified Communist Party of Georgia
German Communist Party
Communist Party of Greece
Hungarian Communist Workers’ Party
Communist Party of India
Communist Party of Ireland
Workers’ Party of Ireland
Communist Party of Israel
Party of the Italian Communists (PdCI)
Jordanian Communist Party
Workers Party of Korea
Socialist Party of Latvia
Socialist Party of Lithuania
Communist Party of Luxembourg
Party of the Communists of Mexico
Popular Socialist Party of Mexico
Communist Party of Malta
New Communist Party of the Netherlands
Palestinian Communist Party
Philippine Communist Party (PKP-1930)
Communist Party of Poland
Portuguese Communist Party
Socialist Alliance Party Romania
Communist Party of the Russian Federation
Communist Workers' Party of Russia - Party of the Russian Communists
New Communist Party of Yugoslavia
Communist Party of Slovakia
South African Communist Party
Communist Party of Peoples of Spain
Communist Party of Sweden
Communist Party of Syria
Syrian Communist Party
Communist Party of Tadjikistan
Communist Party of Turkey
Communist Party of Ukraine
Union of Communists of Ukraine
Communist Party of Venezuela
16th March 2006
Monday, March 06, 2006
Sinn Fein faces tough decisions with confidence
by Theo Russell
SINN Féin delegates from all over Ireland met in Dublin on 17th –19th
February to prepare for a new round of negotiations which will decide
the fate of the Good Friday Agreement (GFA), imminent elections in
northern and southern Ireland, and to debate the complex issues thrown
up by the peace process.
Gerry Adams reminded delegates in his presidential address that the
background to last year’s Ard Fheis was a political impasse threatening
to send the peace process into freefall.
Since then the IRA has completed de-commissioning, the Robert McCartney
murder and Northern Bank robbery are no longer live issues, and the
British government has restored the salaries and facilities of Sinn Féin
MPs at Westminster.
Sinn Féin has successfully driven the peace process forward, despite
interference from British ministers, the machinations of British
intelligence and the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) Special
Branch, the abdication of commitments by the Dublin government, and the
intransigence of the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP).
But the party has no illusions about the prospects for finally
implementing the GFA, and is adopting a tough stance. In his report on
the talks chief negotiator Martin McGuinness said: "We are entering a
critical phase of our peace strategy. The future of the Good Friday
Agreement is on the line."
This time, however, Sinn Féin is quite prepared to see it fall. But that
does no mean a return to conflict. McGuinness quoted delegate Declan
Kearney, who said that even if the GFA collapsed, "Its substance has
been secured as the minimal threshold for anything that might replace or
supersede it."
Far from seeking to hold on to the Northern Ireland assembly and
executive at any cost, Sinn Féin is pressing Northern Ireland Secretary
Peter Hain to call the DUP’s bluff by setting a six week deadline for
the talks.
If no deal is reached then Sinn Féin wants London and Dublin to
implement the provisions of the GFA, even without DUP participation,
which is technically possible. Otherwise, the assembly should be
scrapped and the salaries of MLAs withdrawn, effectively ending the
DUP’s veto over the peace process.
In the unlikely event of a deal being done, Sinn Féin hopes to see the
assembly and executive restored, the complete demilitarisation of the
north, the transference of policing and justice powers, the repeal of
repressive legislation, the release of the remaining republican
prisoners, and a solution to the issue of "OTRs" – republicans still "on
the run".
Sinn Féin is also demanding the repeal of legislation allowing the
Northern Ireland Secretary to suspend the political institutions, and
changes to legislation to prevent the abuses of procedures employed by
the DUP to disrupt the work of the and executive.
‘Toytown Assembly’
There are also attempts to restore the GFA bodies on a watered-down
basis. The DUP want a phased return of the institutions, starting with a
"toytown assembly" but no Executive.
The moderate nationalist Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP) has
proposed restoring the assembly, but with British-appointed and
unelected commissioners in place of executive ministers.
Both proposals would mean re-negotiating the GFA, something Sinn Féin
is implacably opposed to. Sinn Féin is confident that even if the GFA
falls the party will strengthen its democratic mandate throughout
Ireland, and that eventually even the DUP will have to embrace change.
One ongoing problem is the Independent Monitoring Commission; a body
set up by London and Dublin outside the terms of the GFA. The IMC has
consistently attempted to discredit Sinn Féin by questioning the
integrity of the IRA’s actions.
When the British government stripped Sinn Fein MPs of £400,000 in
parliamentary allowances in March last year it was at the recommendation
of the IMC, which claimed the IRA had been behind the Northern Bank
robbery.
The IMC has also sought to undermine the Independent international
Commission on Decommissioning, the official body overseeing the
disarming of the Northern Ireland paramilitaries headed by Canadian
general Jean de Chastelain, by appearing to give an alternative
"official" version of events.
At the Ard Fheis Martin McGuinness demolished the IMC’s credibility,
reporting that it had failed to clarify allegations of IRA involvement
in incidents in July and August last year.
"It is my view that the incidents in question did not even happen," he
said. "In one particular bizarre line they report six unreported
assaults – just think about that for a minute – they say they considered
six unreported assaults!"
McGuinness made it clear that "unless the issue of the IMC is
addressed, this latest round of political discussions will run aground.
The IMC can be summed in one word. Balderdash! It is time they were
decommissioned."
Difficult challenges
The development of the peace process has also thrown up many difficult
decisions and challenges for Irish republicans. Gerry Adams told the Ard
Fheis: "The decisions by the IRA were undoubtedly deeply difficult for
many," and added: "There are republicans still trying to come to terms
with it many months later.
"Indeed undoubtedly there are some who believe that the IRA has made a
mistake. They are entitled to their opinion but to no more than that. No
one should harbour the notion that the republican struggle can be
advanced any further by an armed campaign.
"This leadership is firmly opposed to such a departure. I have made it
clear from the republican perspective – the war is over."
But he added: "Unfortunately, powerful elements within the British
system have both a war mentality and the resources to sustain this. For
them the peace process is war by other means."
Other issues on which doubts are still held by some republicans are a
possible coalition with other parties in the Irish Republic, and what
Adams called "the deeply problematic issue" of policing in the six
counties. Sinn Féin’s leadership were clear on both matters.
Several motions ruling out joining a future Dublin coalition
government, with parties who are rightly regarded as corrupt and
reactionary, were defeated. One motion warned that entering a coalition
would "dilute our revolutionary politics".
Gerry Adams said that if the party has the mandate and can secure a
coalition government and policies consistent with its republican
objectives: "We will look at being in government in the south. Our sole
purpose of going into government is to bring about the maximum amount of
change."
But a delegates’ motion demanding the repeal of the Offences Against
the State Act as a pre-condition before any coalition talks was carried.
The 1939 Act set up the non-jury Special Criminal Court, which tries
terrorist cases in the republic.
Sean Crowe, TD (Dáil member) for Dublin South-West, urged delegates not
to limit the party’s options in advance of the general election, saying:
"I do not know if government is ready for me, but I am ready for
government."
And Martin McGuinness pointed out that as education minister in a
coalition with unionists in Belfast, he had implemented the crucial
decision to abolish the eleven-plus exam, adding that to completely rule
out participation in a coalition "would be grossly irresponsible".
Ten motions opposing participation in policing in the north, some
placing conditions such as the achievement of a sovereign united Ireland
or a timetable for British withdrawal, were defeated.
Gerry Kelly, spokesperson on policing and justice, spoke for the Ard
Chomhairle (executive committee) when he said: "Whatever happens in
negotiations, key issues such as policing and justice cannot be put on
the shelf to be dusted down when we achieve a united Ireland. We must
develop further our all-Ireland vision for justice and policing."
He welcomed legislation initiated by Peter Hain committing London to
the transfer of policing and justice powers to a future administration
at Stormont, but said this on its own was not enough for Sinn Féin to
agree to joining the Northern Ireland policing board.
Among other things this would require guarantees for a genuinely
accountable policing service, and a commitment from the DUP to the
transfer of powers.
Another problem thrown up by the British is the decision to give MI5
the lead in intelligence gathering in the north from next year,
effective even after policing powers have been transferred.
Kelly said it was "unacceptable for organisation which has set itself
against policing and political change throughout the course of this
process to be given an expanded role," and said Sinn Féin would be
challenging this in the latest round of talks.
A new relationship with unionism
One of five challenges facing Sinn Féin in the next year outlined by
Gerry Adams was "developing an entirely new relationship with unionism".
He said: "There are many good people within unionism, people who care
about their community, people who want to see stability, peace and
prosperity, people in the PUP, the DUP and the UUP who have worked with
Sinn Féin in committees and at councils."
Adams said: "Partition has failed the very community it was designed to
safeguard. It has failed unionists. Unionist working class communities
are ravaged by unemployment and educational under achievement. This is
bad for everyone."
Another major issue at the Ard Fheis was the growing economic and
social divide in the Irish Republic in spite of a decade of
unprecedented growth. Adams said: "There are also – to the Irish
government’s great shame – tens of thousands living in poverty... 15 per
cent of all children live in consistent poverty, while one in four
children are at risk of poverty."
He said: "After 15 years of growth it is a disgrace that people are
left waiting for days on hospital trolleys, people can’t afford a home
to live in, and the transport system is gridlocked."
"This state gives taxpayers’ money to a thriving private health sector.
Those who can afford to pay avail of the best that is available in the
private system, including access to private beds in public hospitals.
Health privatisation is a reality in the 26 Counties."
Adams condemned a tax regime that allows 41 of the top 100 individual
earners in to pay less than five per cent income tax, while ordinary
working people start paying tax at 42 per cent on anything over €29,400
(£21,000).
He said the present Fianna Fáil-People’s Democrat government was
systematically destroying agriculture and what was left of the fishing
industry. "They privatise our public highways and give their friends
permission to erect toll booth, after toll booth, after toll booth."
The latest round of investigations into corruption in the Republic, the
Mahon Tribunals, has exposed yet another scandal payments by corrupt
developers to crooked politicians. Adams contrasted the establishment
parties’ recent re-adoption of a "republican" image with the caustic
comment that "for many of these people they probably think of the GPO
(the headquarters if the 1916 Easter Rising) only as a place to buy
brown envelopes".
And he condemned the (Irish) Labour Party - originally founded by James
Connolly – for using the issue of immigration to adopt "populist
policies, which risk setting one group of workers in the existing
workforce, against another group of migrant workers".
Adams said: "Sinn Féin welcomes new communities of all nationalities to
our country. We reject racism and discrimination in any form. It is good
that many people are coming here to work. Immigrant workers are not the
problem. The problem is unscrupulous employers who exploit immigrant
workers with low pay and poor conditions."
TD Aengus Ó Snodaigh said that Irish justice minister Michael McDowell
was "hell bent on expanding and privatising the prison estate and
inflating prison spending," and planned to "turn the prison system into
a massive money-making opportunity for his profiteering buddies" by
building a "private super-prison" in north Dublin.
Sinn Féin economic policy
As an alternative to these corrupt and divisive policies, Sinn Féin has
published an All-Ireland Enterprise and Job Creation Policy setting out
the party’s objectives.
These include: the right to join unions, strike and picket; protection
of natural resources and the environment; limits to market competition;
universal public services; direct progressive taxation; and reduced
dependence on foreign investment.
The document says no attempt should be made to abolish rights to
private ownership or inheritance unless "necessitated by the common
good". It also proposes the "extending the euro throughout the whole
island as a necessary step in paving the way for reunification".
It calls for continued opposition to the EU Services Directive, which
allows private companies to undercut public service providers by
employing people on the salaries of their country of origin.
While citing the Nordic countries, with high taxes and public spending
but highly competitive economies, as a model for development, the
document also says: "We plan to build on the achievements of the most
successful socialist economies, and to learn from the mistakes of
unworkable and unsuccessful economies."
It notes that Northern Ireland "tops the list on practically every
deprivation indicator in the UK", and says: "The six county economy is
unsustainable by itself, and abnormally dependent on subsidy and the
public sector for employment," – especially on the numbers employed by
the Northern Ireland Office and Ministry of Defence.
The paper calls for a progressive reform of the tax system and
increased corporation tax in the 26 Counties from the 12.5 per cent to
17.5 per cent. In his keynote address Gerry Adams said: "Sinn Féin would
effectively tax high earners and increase taxes on capital gains,
property speculation and corporate profits."
But he warned the party: "Expect more attacks on Sinn Féin, including
totally unprincipled efforts to vilify us in the time ahead. Don’t be
distracted by this nonsense." Sinn Féin faces major decisions and a
mountain of work in the coming period, but as always the party’s morale
is high and its leadership is confident about achieving its long-term
goals.
As Adams told delegates: "Our objective is an all-Ireland parliament for
all the people of Ireland." And in the words of Martin McGuinness: "Sinn
Féin’s objective is to defend and consolidate the advances already made.
To open up new arenas of negotiations and struggle and to continue to
build the bridge to our ultimate objective – a united democratic and
socialist republic."
SINN Féin delegates from all over Ireland met in Dublin on 17th –19th
February to prepare for a new round of negotiations which will decide
the fate of the Good Friday Agreement (GFA), imminent elections in
northern and southern Ireland, and to debate the complex issues thrown
up by the peace process.
Gerry Adams reminded delegates in his presidential address that the
background to last year’s Ard Fheis was a political impasse threatening
to send the peace process into freefall.
Since then the IRA has completed de-commissioning, the Robert McCartney
murder and Northern Bank robbery are no longer live issues, and the
British government has restored the salaries and facilities of Sinn Féin
MPs at Westminster.
Sinn Féin has successfully driven the peace process forward, despite
interference from British ministers, the machinations of British
intelligence and the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) Special
Branch, the abdication of commitments by the Dublin government, and the
intransigence of the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP).
But the party has no illusions about the prospects for finally
implementing the GFA, and is adopting a tough stance. In his report on
the talks chief negotiator Martin McGuinness said: "We are entering a
critical phase of our peace strategy. The future of the Good Friday
Agreement is on the line."
This time, however, Sinn Féin is quite prepared to see it fall. But that
does no mean a return to conflict. McGuinness quoted delegate Declan
Kearney, who said that even if the GFA collapsed, "Its substance has
been secured as the minimal threshold for anything that might replace or
supersede it."
Far from seeking to hold on to the Northern Ireland assembly and
executive at any cost, Sinn Féin is pressing Northern Ireland Secretary
Peter Hain to call the DUP’s bluff by setting a six week deadline for
the talks.
If no deal is reached then Sinn Féin wants London and Dublin to
implement the provisions of the GFA, even without DUP participation,
which is technically possible. Otherwise, the assembly should be
scrapped and the salaries of MLAs withdrawn, effectively ending the
DUP’s veto over the peace process.
In the unlikely event of a deal being done, Sinn Féin hopes to see the
assembly and executive restored, the complete demilitarisation of the
north, the transference of policing and justice powers, the repeal of
repressive legislation, the release of the remaining republican
prisoners, and a solution to the issue of "OTRs" – republicans still "on
the run".
Sinn Féin is also demanding the repeal of legislation allowing the
Northern Ireland Secretary to suspend the political institutions, and
changes to legislation to prevent the abuses of procedures employed by
the DUP to disrupt the work of the and executive.
‘Toytown Assembly’
There are also attempts to restore the GFA bodies on a watered-down
basis. The DUP want a phased return of the institutions, starting with a
"toytown assembly" but no Executive.
The moderate nationalist Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP) has
proposed restoring the assembly, but with British-appointed and
unelected commissioners in place of executive ministers.
Both proposals would mean re-negotiating the GFA, something Sinn Féin
is implacably opposed to. Sinn Féin is confident that even if the GFA
falls the party will strengthen its democratic mandate throughout
Ireland, and that eventually even the DUP will have to embrace change.
One ongoing problem is the Independent Monitoring Commission; a body
set up by London and Dublin outside the terms of the GFA. The IMC has
consistently attempted to discredit Sinn Féin by questioning the
integrity of the IRA’s actions.
When the British government stripped Sinn Fein MPs of £400,000 in
parliamentary allowances in March last year it was at the recommendation
of the IMC, which claimed the IRA had been behind the Northern Bank
robbery.
The IMC has also sought to undermine the Independent international
Commission on Decommissioning, the official body overseeing the
disarming of the Northern Ireland paramilitaries headed by Canadian
general Jean de Chastelain, by appearing to give an alternative
"official" version of events.
At the Ard Fheis Martin McGuinness demolished the IMC’s credibility,
reporting that it had failed to clarify allegations of IRA involvement
in incidents in July and August last year.
"It is my view that the incidents in question did not even happen," he
said. "In one particular bizarre line they report six unreported
assaults – just think about that for a minute – they say they considered
six unreported assaults!"
McGuinness made it clear that "unless the issue of the IMC is
addressed, this latest round of political discussions will run aground.
The IMC can be summed in one word. Balderdash! It is time they were
decommissioned."
Difficult challenges
The development of the peace process has also thrown up many difficult
decisions and challenges for Irish republicans. Gerry Adams told the Ard
Fheis: "The decisions by the IRA were undoubtedly deeply difficult for
many," and added: "There are republicans still trying to come to terms
with it many months later.
"Indeed undoubtedly there are some who believe that the IRA has made a
mistake. They are entitled to their opinion but to no more than that. No
one should harbour the notion that the republican struggle can be
advanced any further by an armed campaign.
"This leadership is firmly opposed to such a departure. I have made it
clear from the republican perspective – the war is over."
But he added: "Unfortunately, powerful elements within the British
system have both a war mentality and the resources to sustain this. For
them the peace process is war by other means."
Other issues on which doubts are still held by some republicans are a
possible coalition with other parties in the Irish Republic, and what
Adams called "the deeply problematic issue" of policing in the six
counties. Sinn Féin’s leadership were clear on both matters.
Several motions ruling out joining a future Dublin coalition
government, with parties who are rightly regarded as corrupt and
reactionary, were defeated. One motion warned that entering a coalition
would "dilute our revolutionary politics".
Gerry Adams said that if the party has the mandate and can secure a
coalition government and policies consistent with its republican
objectives: "We will look at being in government in the south. Our sole
purpose of going into government is to bring about the maximum amount of
change."
But a delegates’ motion demanding the repeal of the Offences Against
the State Act as a pre-condition before any coalition talks was carried.
The 1939 Act set up the non-jury Special Criminal Court, which tries
terrorist cases in the republic.
Sean Crowe, TD (Dáil member) for Dublin South-West, urged delegates not
to limit the party’s options in advance of the general election, saying:
"I do not know if government is ready for me, but I am ready for
government."
And Martin McGuinness pointed out that as education minister in a
coalition with unionists in Belfast, he had implemented the crucial
decision to abolish the eleven-plus exam, adding that to completely rule
out participation in a coalition "would be grossly irresponsible".
Ten motions opposing participation in policing in the north, some
placing conditions such as the achievement of a sovereign united Ireland
or a timetable for British withdrawal, were defeated.
Gerry Kelly, spokesperson on policing and justice, spoke for the Ard
Chomhairle (executive committee) when he said: "Whatever happens in
negotiations, key issues such as policing and justice cannot be put on
the shelf to be dusted down when we achieve a united Ireland. We must
develop further our all-Ireland vision for justice and policing."
He welcomed legislation initiated by Peter Hain committing London to
the transfer of policing and justice powers to a future administration
at Stormont, but said this on its own was not enough for Sinn Féin to
agree to joining the Northern Ireland policing board.
Among other things this would require guarantees for a genuinely
accountable policing service, and a commitment from the DUP to the
transfer of powers.
Another problem thrown up by the British is the decision to give MI5
the lead in intelligence gathering in the north from next year,
effective even after policing powers have been transferred.
Kelly said it was "unacceptable for organisation which has set itself
against policing and political change throughout the course of this
process to be given an expanded role," and said Sinn Féin would be
challenging this in the latest round of talks.
A new relationship with unionism
One of five challenges facing Sinn Féin in the next year outlined by
Gerry Adams was "developing an entirely new relationship with unionism".
He said: "There are many good people within unionism, people who care
about their community, people who want to see stability, peace and
prosperity, people in the PUP, the DUP and the UUP who have worked with
Sinn Féin in committees and at councils."
Adams said: "Partition has failed the very community it was designed to
safeguard. It has failed unionists. Unionist working class communities
are ravaged by unemployment and educational under achievement. This is
bad for everyone."
Another major issue at the Ard Fheis was the growing economic and
social divide in the Irish Republic in spite of a decade of
unprecedented growth. Adams said: "There are also – to the Irish
government’s great shame – tens of thousands living in poverty... 15 per
cent of all children live in consistent poverty, while one in four
children are at risk of poverty."
He said: "After 15 years of growth it is a disgrace that people are
left waiting for days on hospital trolleys, people can’t afford a home
to live in, and the transport system is gridlocked."
"This state gives taxpayers’ money to a thriving private health sector.
Those who can afford to pay avail of the best that is available in the
private system, including access to private beds in public hospitals.
Health privatisation is a reality in the 26 Counties."
Adams condemned a tax regime that allows 41 of the top 100 individual
earners in to pay less than five per cent income tax, while ordinary
working people start paying tax at 42 per cent on anything over €29,400
(£21,000).
He said the present Fianna Fáil-People’s Democrat government was
systematically destroying agriculture and what was left of the fishing
industry. "They privatise our public highways and give their friends
permission to erect toll booth, after toll booth, after toll booth."
The latest round of investigations into corruption in the Republic, the
Mahon Tribunals, has exposed yet another scandal payments by corrupt
developers to crooked politicians. Adams contrasted the establishment
parties’ recent re-adoption of a "republican" image with the caustic
comment that "for many of these people they probably think of the GPO
(the headquarters if the 1916 Easter Rising) only as a place to buy
brown envelopes".
And he condemned the (Irish) Labour Party - originally founded by James
Connolly – for using the issue of immigration to adopt "populist
policies, which risk setting one group of workers in the existing
workforce, against another group of migrant workers".
Adams said: "Sinn Féin welcomes new communities of all nationalities to
our country. We reject racism and discrimination in any form. It is good
that many people are coming here to work. Immigrant workers are not the
problem. The problem is unscrupulous employers who exploit immigrant
workers with low pay and poor conditions."
TD Aengus Ó Snodaigh said that Irish justice minister Michael McDowell
was "hell bent on expanding and privatising the prison estate and
inflating prison spending," and planned to "turn the prison system into
a massive money-making opportunity for his profiteering buddies" by
building a "private super-prison" in north Dublin.
Sinn Féin economic policy
As an alternative to these corrupt and divisive policies, Sinn Féin has
published an All-Ireland Enterprise and Job Creation Policy setting out
the party’s objectives.
These include: the right to join unions, strike and picket; protection
of natural resources and the environment; limits to market competition;
universal public services; direct progressive taxation; and reduced
dependence on foreign investment.
The document says no attempt should be made to abolish rights to
private ownership or inheritance unless "necessitated by the common
good". It also proposes the "extending the euro throughout the whole
island as a necessary step in paving the way for reunification".
It calls for continued opposition to the EU Services Directive, which
allows private companies to undercut public service providers by
employing people on the salaries of their country of origin.
While citing the Nordic countries, with high taxes and public spending
but highly competitive economies, as a model for development, the
document also says: "We plan to build on the achievements of the most
successful socialist economies, and to learn from the mistakes of
unworkable and unsuccessful economies."
It notes that Northern Ireland "tops the list on practically every
deprivation indicator in the UK", and says: "The six county economy is
unsustainable by itself, and abnormally dependent on subsidy and the
public sector for employment," – especially on the numbers employed by
the Northern Ireland Office and Ministry of Defence.
The paper calls for a progressive reform of the tax system and
increased corporation tax in the 26 Counties from the 12.5 per cent to
17.5 per cent. In his keynote address Gerry Adams said: "Sinn Féin would
effectively tax high earners and increase taxes on capital gains,
property speculation and corporate profits."
But he warned the party: "Expect more attacks on Sinn Féin, including
totally unprincipled efforts to vilify us in the time ahead. Don’t be
distracted by this nonsense." Sinn Féin faces major decisions and a
mountain of work in the coming period, but as always the party’s morale
is high and its leadership is confident about achieving its long-term
goals.
As Adams told delegates: "Our objective is an all-Ireland parliament for
all the people of Ireland." And in the words of Martin McGuinness: "Sinn
Féin’s objective is to defend and consolidate the advances already made.
To open up new arenas of negotiations and struggle and to continue to
build the bridge to our ultimate objective – a united democratic and
socialist republic."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)