Socialist Outlook

Socialist Viewpoint, International, Socialist Outlook and their supplements, 1984–2002

Which way for socialists in the

· Socialist Outlook no. 16, February 15 1992 · 729 words

Feb. 15, 1992 No. 16 July 18-19 Manchester Polytechnic Students Speakers include Arthur Scargill, Tony Benn MP Details: Carolyn Sikorski, 53a Geere Road, London E15 pany maintain that they're los ing a great deal of money - E5 million plus every year.

They've put investment into this plant, but as far as we're concerned it hasn't been investment of the right kind.

We've had four different management teams on this site since 1981-82 and they've all said exactly the same thing we're losing money hand over fist and we've got to redress it.

But having made their mis. takes, they redress it by asking our people to make the sacrifice They rather point to the fact that there are between 200 and 250 management and so-called 'management review their site using a fleet of 83 com. pany cars.

At the same time as demanding compulsory redundancies, a lot of work previously done in-house has been suocontracted out. One of the strikers' de mands 1s that this work 15 brought back to Openshaw.

Solidarity unstintingly given in the past to other workers in the struggle like the miners,

Trial of strength

It is going to be a long fight, a trial of strength', but the atmosphere on the daily 50-strong picket mne is one or quiet actermination.

The basic trade union principle of 'one out, all out' is being bravely upheld in East Manance for the whole movement.

Messages of support and donations to: Dave Hughes, Prince Edward Avenue, Denton, Manchester M34 1AF.

THIS DEEP and no deeper'. So says George Bush on arms Cuts.

In the depths of recession, Bush is prepared to go where for a few million bucks to prop up the USA's creaking public services means cutting the US bombdumptoa measly 4,000 nuclear But when Russian President Boris Yeltsin, having retargeted his missiles, proposed senal back to 2,500 nuclear weapons Bush, under pressure from the military lobby and US arms manufacturers, ob jected.

Even these machinations of the superpowers seem almost sensible by comparison with the pronouncements of British Defence Secretary Tom King. The Tories aren't quibbling about now many messies to cut back. They are in the ment programme.

* make absolutely clear the Government's commitstrategic nuclear deterrent force for the 1990s and beyond.' He isn't quite sure why or how many warheads he wants, but he definitely needs the first-strike submarines, even if it will cost f2 million a day for the next twenty years.

This has now been taken even further by John Major, who has made the issue of ordering a fourth Trident a key election pleage, challenging Labour to say if they would cancel it.

Like Bush, the Tories are caught in a quandary. They can't think of a coherent argument to justify their garganHome News *108) Copin Sena Senses something to make our way of life worth protecting... tuan defence budget, but their own politics, inherited from the Cold war, make it difficult to cut. But it leaves them wide open to a 'welfare not warfare' attack from anyone with an ounce or poutical hous The system, first ordered by Jim Callaghan in 1978, has been modified during the '80s to become more and more dangerous. Tom King has talked about reducing the payload of warheads on the system. But given that the full potential is the equivalent of around 4,000 BILLIONS Dear Mr Major: now that you've spent so much on defence to protect our way of life, maybe you could do Hiroshimas, he can afford to, despite John Major's latest revelation that Trident is a 'minimum deterrent.

Timid Labour Once again, Kinnock's crew has shown that it will miss out on any electoral opportunity if it risks the wrath of the Tory tabloids. Martin O'Neil, Labour's almost unheard-of defence spokesperson, has merely said that only three submarines will be ordered.

As a contribution to disarmament, increasing Britain's first strike capacity by only 3,000 Hiroshimas rather than 4,000 is hardly impressive. But only a handful of MPs have consistently defended the anti-nuclear policies that were common ground in the Labour movement a few years ago.

organising a left input into the no-policy elections are planning to put Labour on the spot, demanding to know why the whole system can't be junked, releasing millions for public investment.

I NATCHER.

← GEC strikers dig in for jobs A beacon of resistance · Election smears: a growth industry Expect more from the dirty tricks department →

Something wrong on this page?