by Jane Carolan

The ConDem victory inMay was a victory forblue blooded neo-l i b e ralism over its morepink tinged New Lab o u rc o u n t e rp art. The Blai rand Brown fai l u re tom ove from theeconomics of f i n an c ec apitalism, combinedwith an espousal ofp rivatisation an dre a c t i o n ary socialpolicies saw the Lab o u rc o re support neglected.

These are the people forwhom a Labour Governmentshould have meant a substantialbenefit but Labour was offeringonly more of the same. The newgovernment has a right wing,reactionary neo-con ideologycommitted to ruling in favour of

one class only – its own. Thedeclared Con Dem agenda isnot a rational economic one –from the viewpoint of standardeconomic theory reducingpublic expenditure is theeconomics of the asylum. But ifit is not rational in economicterms, it is entirely rational interms of the stated aim ofshrinking the state.

In short, the post 2nd Wo r l dWar consensus based on thewelfare state of Beveridge report– health care, education, homesfor all and benefits for those inneed – is being ripped apart.Reforms announced so far beginthe process of dismantlinguniversal benefits and endingthe provision of public servicesby a workforce directlyemployed by democraticallyaccountable public bodies.

The NHS is likely to become

a brand name, attached to a fewfailing services for those withoutprivate insurance. Local schoolsprovision by Councils fromnursery level up will be at thebottom of a hierarchy ofeducation dominated byacademies and frees schools inmiddle class enclaves. Thelatter will be bastions ofprivilege. Desperately neededsocial housing for 1.6 million oncouncil waiting lists will simplynot be built - a tragedy for thosewithout homes and for buildingw o r kers without jobs.

Adding to these socialpressures, all forms of welfareare being attacked. Deemedscroungers by the right wingtabloids, those millionssurviving on the poverty line asa result of unemployment,sickness or disability will seetheir inadequate incomes cut

and state provided employmentservices decimated as civilservice jobs are sacrificed.

Across the country, councilsare preparing redundancynotices for essential worke r sfrom classroom assistants tosocial workers, from dinnerladies to home carers.

Even for those of us who livedthrough the Thatcher regime,what is in prospect under thisgovernment is terrifying. Theonly victors are likely to be theprivatised providers of thoseservices deemed too essential tobe scrapped, turning taxpayerspounds into private profit.

The key to winning asufficient consensus to opposethese changes is to demonstratethe value and quality ofpublicly provided provision, noteasy when on a daily basis themedia derides them.

Shouting slogans demanding‘fight back’ are easier thanimmersing unions in communityand workplace basedcampaigns.

continued overleaf

Communists at the TUC Monday 13th September 2010

U n i t y !

Our public services are the key battlegro u n d

T h at ’s enough!Two million wo rke rstook to the streets inF rance last week inp rotest at plans byS arkozy to raise thepension age to 62.

The key to the Fre n c hsuccess in mobilisation isthe thousands of lo c a lcommittees unitingunions and the publ i c.

In paris 100,000 marc h e dbut in 200 cities an dt owns thro u g h o u tF rance there we re larg elocal demonstra t i o n .

by Kevin Halpin

This ye ar ’s TUC is thef i rst after Lab o u r ’sdefeat for 17 ye ars. Wen ow face a gove r n m e n twith the Libera l ss u p p o rting the To ries bidto completely re ve rs ethe social policies an dinstitutions set up sincethe 1945 genera le l e c t i o n .

The agenda this week shows asharp recognition of this, callingfor strong and co-o r d i n a t e daction to defend the publicservices and union rights. Ac t i o nthat will be required as, whilethe TUC will of course attemptto engage with the newgovernment, they will have verylittle success.

The rationale from both newLabour and the Coalition for thecuts is that the country is in thered. This is a myth. PCS andother unions correctly point outthat the origin of Britain’ sfinancial crisis is the banke r s ’bad debts which governmentsubsidised by £1.3 trillion.

The banks continue to make

vast profits and pay obscenesalaries and bonuses. All moneythat they owe to the taxpayerand, combined with scrappingTrident,would clear the deficitand put the country back in theb l a c k .

This is the background againstwhich unions affiliated to theLabour Party are being ballotedfor a new leader.

There has been much debateabout the past records of the fivecandidates. Of course this isimportant (and some were betterthan others) but we must lookforward and ask what they woulddo in the future.

The first test would be to askhow many of them support JohnMcDonnell’s private membersbill (Trade Union Rights andFreedoms); Diane Abbotcertainly does.

Unions are backing differentcandidates for a variety ofreasons, but all affiliated unionshave one thing in common –they support the Labour Pa r t yand the great majority of its MPsf i n a n c i a l l y.

Each union has its ownindividual policies and after this

TUC they will also have acommon policy of how to defendw o r kers in the face of the savageattacks of this government.

These are the policies thataffiliated trade union membersmust expect the new leader ofthe Labour Party and ‘sponsored’M Ps to support and promote.

It is time that the big unionsinsist that Labour will losefinancial and political supportunless it turns to policies thatbenefit working people.

This is a more positiveposition than harking back towhich leadership candidate didwhat and is key to ending thenew Labour strategy that wasinstrumental in losing thegeneral election and the bestchance of avoiding 17 miserableyears of Tory rule, with orwithout the Liberals won’t makemuch difference.

Kevin Halpin was chair of theLiaison Committee for theDefence of the Trade Unions inits heroic days of confrontationwith both Conservative andLabour attempts to shackle theu n i o n s

U n i t y ! TUC Confe rence 20102

Witness the painstaking workof Spanish unions above over thepast six months building up totheir September general strike

But there is no real alternativeto creating campaigningo rganisations based on thecoalition of interests betweencommunities and unions. Notjust on the lowest commondenominator of saving this orthat local service provider –important though that is - butbased on a dialogue and greaterunderstanding of why servicesare being dismantled and whythey must be protected.Campaigns focusing not just onjob cuts, but also on the value tocommunities of public services.Projecting an alternativeeconomic strategy whichincreases rather than decreasespublic spending, taxing banktransactions, the obscene profitsof the financial sector and thewealth of those luxuriating inpersonal billions. Ending waradventures in support of USimperialism and cancellingunaffordable weapons such asTrident replacement. Re b u i l d i n ga manufacturing base throughsubstantial industrial investmentby the state

It's not only about unions asnational organisations publiclyopposing Con Dem policies. It'sabout every trade union branchlooking beyond the grind of dailyworkplace issues and playing aleading role in communities.That's the challenge we mustface up to make our resistance tothe austerity attack a realityrather than rhetoric. Jane Carolan is chair of theUNISON NEC Policy Committeeand a member of the TUCGeneral Council She wrirtes inher personal capacity.

Holding them to account

TUC Confe rence 2010 U n i t y !TUC Confe rence 2010 U n i t y !

Britain for thepeople not theb a n ke r sWednesday 7pm, Mechanics Institute, Princess Stre e tAnita Halpin on unions at the forefront of struggleRob Griffiths on the alternative strategyJane Caro l a n on resisting public sector cutsBill Gre e n s h i e l d s on the People’s Charter

Chair C a rolyn Jones

■manifesto pre s sPolitics and analysis, action and culture making the link between working class power & liberat i o n

The imperial contro v e r s y Challenging the empire apologistsby Andrew Murray £12.95 (£2 p&p) 150pp The education re v o l u t i o n C u b a’s alternative to neoliberalismby Théodore H. MacDonald £14.95 (£2 p&p) 265pp Illustrated Killing no murd e r ? South Wales and the Great Railway Strike of1911 by Robert Griffiths £12.95 (£2 p&p) 126pp illustrated

w w w. m a n i f e s t o p re s s . o rg . u k

Du passé faisons table rase

Groucho is the embodiment of many forms.One of which will be in Paris this week,recovering from the excesses of the Fete deL’ H u m a n i t e. One of the delights of life inFrance is the constant media presence of ourold friend John Monks.

Freed from the obligation to stonewallevery attempt to push Blair’sgovernment in a progressive directionhe is now reincarnated at thes p o kesperson of the European TUC.

Who can forget his grumpinesswhen delegates disobeyed (hats offto the Unison delegation) the diktats of the top table and voted for amotion condemning PFI. Opposition to PFI was seen back then as abetrayal of our obligations to Labour and it was a rare union leaderwho doubted the magic of Gordon Brown’s wand.

But the cosy conventions of Congress House won’t do over thechannel and Monksy often pops up speaking in tones more militantthan we are accustomed to. Latest outing sees him calling for acontinent-wide tax on financial transactions. In the words of theInternationale “Of the past let us make a clean slate”.

Performance appraisalHard Talk on the BBC News channel rarely lives up to its self-promoting title and thus it was when, a few days ago, our gensecappeared before Stephen Sacku r.

Despite Sackur’s rather weak attempts to tempt Brendan into wildpredictions and wordy militancy he kept the discussion grounded infacts and reality. Particularly telling was Brendan’s example of theteacher with a smaller class size seen as “inefficient” in privatesector terms but more efficient when measured against publicservice criteria.

My drinking companion (a former general secretary) remarke dthat where once he sounded like a retread of Monksy he now soundsl i ke his own man. So he must be less than delighted by thispatronizing put down. “Brendan is bright, capable and imaginative,and he is very aware of others. He handles problems very well,finds his way through complex issues and is the source of exc e l l e n tadvice with which he is very generous.”

A free copy of Lenin’s “Two Tactics of Social Democracy” for thefirst person to identify who said it and where.

G ro u c h oPa m p h l e t s ,

flags, badgesand books

f rom www. c o m m u n i s t -p a r t y. o r g.uk

or CPB Ruskin House, 23Coombe Road, Cro y d o n

CRO 1BD

U n i t y ! TUC Confe rence 20104 U n i t y ! TUC Confe rence 2010

by Carolyn Jones

Two years ago, TUCdelegates backed thecall for a Trade UnionRights and FreedomsBill. The Bill aimed tosimplify the proceduresrelating to ballots andnotices so that ademocratic decision tostrike by workers couldnot be overturned by ajudges’ forensicexamination oftechnical legal errors.

The Bill failed to reach thestatute book and injunctions are

increasinglyhitting unions hard.

The Lawful Industrial Action(Minor Errors) Bill (LIAM) wasintroduced by John McDonnellin June 2010. Like the TradeUnion Freedom Bill, LIAM aims

to simplify the requirementssurrounding industrial actionballots and notices. The Billintroduces five mainimprovements:• Small accidental failures inballots will be disregarded• Small accidental failures innotices will be disregarded• Minor errors in theinformation about the result ofthe ballot will be disregarded• Forensic examination ofprocedures will be replacedwith the concept of “substantialcompliance”.• Evidence will be requiredthat “substantial compliance”has not taken place before aninjunction will be granted.

The anti working classeconomic strategy of theConDems is clear and we know

they have a nasty agenda onemployment rights and tradeunion freedoms. It’s vital thelabor movement responds withalternative political, economicand industrial strategies. LIAMprovides for “appropriatemeasures for the protection ofworkers to engage in industrialaction” - as demanded by theILO Committee of experts inresponse to the recent BALPAcase.

If the voice of workers is tobe heard in the increasinglybitter, class-divided battlearound the distribution ofwealth, it’s vital that the Billgets a second reading on 22ndOctober.

Carolyn Jones is director of theInstitute of Employment Rights

Union rights and freedoms: ‘We love Liam!’

w w w. c o m m u n i s t - p a rt y. o rg.uk www. s o l i d n e t . o rg www. m o rn i n g s t a ro n l i n e . c o.uk www. 2 1 s t c e n t u ry m a n i f e s t o. wo rd p re s s . c o m

Johnston Press v NUJ In May 2010 the NUJ had toabandon a strike of journalists when the employer claimed to“employ no journalists”, despite the fact that the Johnston Pr e s swebsite states the company employs 1,900 journalists. The NUJare pursuing their case to the European Court of Human Rights.

N e t wo rk Rail v RMT In April 2010 a High Court injunctionwas granted to Network Rail citing inconsistencies in the strikeballot.

M e t robus v Unite In August 2009 the Court of Appealoverturned a 90% UNITE ballot vote in favour of strike action. TheCourt claimed first, that the union “had not acted as soon asreasonably practicable” in giving bosses the ballot result eventhough the union received the result on 2nd August and informedMetrobus on 3rd. Second, that on the pre-ballot notice UNITE hadstated the employer had 766 on check off (employer kept records)when in effect they had 776.

EDF Energy v RMT In 2009 the RMT issued formal strikenotice to EDF. The uion identified 65 members working in threeworkplaces but EDF won an injunction because the terminologyused to categorise the union wasn’t good enough.

BA v UNITE In December 2009 BA Cabin Crewvoted to strike by a margin of 92.5% on a ballot turnout of 80% of

12,000. The Court granted BA an injunction on the basis that theballot included 811 crew who had since taken redundancy despitethe fact that if the 811 had been excluded, the vote would stillhave been 8 to 1 in favour of action.

BA v BA L PA B A L PA had to abandon a high court battle whenBA claimed the ballot did not meet European law, suggestingB A L PA would be liable for a bill of £1.25 million. BALPAcomplained to the ILO and in March 2010 the ILO recommendedthat UK laws be “reviewed” and appropriate measures consideredto protect the right to take industrial action.