IT IS AS CERTAIN as anything can be that we will have a Labour government by May. The new government will quickly be forced to confront the issue Blair has ducked in advance of the election - whether to sign up for the single European currency, for European Monetary Union (EMU).
The consequences of this decision are likely to shape the first period of Labour in office. There is little doubt that Blair will opt for EMU and take Britain in either the first or second stages - if stages are created.
The new government will need to make more and deeper cuts in the already battered Welfare State as they seeks to reduce government borrowing to 3% of GDP in line with the convergence criteria of the Maastricht Treaty.
There is no middle way. A Labour government must either attack the welfare state or reject Maastricht and undermine Britain's position inside the EU. ALAN THORNETT looks at the big issues that will confront the labour movement EUROPE is not the only reason for an assault on welfare. The economic and fiscal policies with which Blair is going into the Election are in essence a collapse into rory economic pol• icy: but they also imply further reduction in public spending.
These two factors create a double-barrelled attack on welfare to be carried out by Labour. across Europe against the implicathe debate in the workers' movement lags behind the material process taking place.
This is particularly the case in debate is dominated by the Tory right, with Labour and TUCleader. ships lined up behind European in. tegration. The left, despite important efforts by sections of it to address the issue, remains margi. nalised.
There are apparently as many as S0 opponents of Maastricht in the Parliamentary Labour Party, mostly, but not all, on the left. It is nositive that some on the lett are lending support to the project of the Euromarches, particularly Alar Simpson of the People's Europe However none of these MPs seem likely to oc willing to chanchge Blair in a clear way on this issue in the immediate post-clection period.
Yet European integration is directed primarily against the workwith the aim of more effectively exploiting its labour power and maximising profit.
The left in Britain has a responsibility to challenge this logic develop the working class dimension of the debate, and start to turn the tide. Persuading left MP's or senior trade unionists to speak out clearly could be crucial in gaining a wider audience for these ideas.
The "New Realist' politics of the 1980s brought with it a sea-change in the TUC on the question of European integration. 10 years previously they had opposed the BEC Today the overwhelming majority of union leaders support the BU.
While they are not prepared to do anything temscives to chanenge the Tory government, the bosses or the market system, they argue that ritic and social rights. They look towards a 'social Europe and the Social Chapter. They hanker after the institutionalisation of the unions in Europe which has been exChica Thatcherism, and is not about to be embraced by Blair.
Politically they have pinned their hopes on the illusion that the new bosses' Europe can be reformed.
This year's TUC conference strengthened the stance still further, voting for more integration and specifically for EMU. In this they are more radical, at least in their public stance, than the Labour leadership.
Only a minority of unions have even discussed this issuc, and al though UNISON's conference has adopica a policy of oppositon it Maastricht, no union has been prepared to stand out against the TUC line.
But the so-called Social Europe is not about the generosity of Europe's bosses. It is designed as a palliative to persuade the working class and the labour bureaucracy to accept European integration.
The Social Chapter is in any case a classic example of a paper tiger. It The so-called Social Europe is not about the generosity of Europe's bosses. It is designed as a palliative to persuade the working class and the labour bureaucracy to accept European integration. includes the right to strike, but this is subject to 'national obligations', and in Britain is over-ruled by thc Tory anti-union laws. Its provisions, even if implemented, are marginal to the problems facing the working class.
In any case the so-called "social Europe' also includes the notorious 1985 Schengen apreement. Whilst citizens have rights to move their place or resocace with te com munity, the Schengen deal erects a wall against immigrants and asylum seckers from outside. Anyone barred from one BU country is barred from them all. In Britain this racist structure has been complemented by the Immigration and Asylum Act and similarly draconian lemslation has been implemented in most other EC countries. Old King Kohl hopes German capital would dominate a European state The tragic consequences of such racist laws were graphically illustrated in the death of 280 clandes. tine immigrants the Mediterranean on Christmas Day.
The Maastricht Treaty provided for a full constitutional review of its workings which is now taking place This process should be concluded at the Amsterdam Inter-Governthis year. The rocent Dublin sum. mit of EU heads of government was a part of this.
The Dublin meeting discussed a new draft treaty - "Maastricht 2" which will become the Treaty of Amsterdam if agreed in June. This will set the scene for a whole new stage of European political integra• tion.
Not all the objectives of Dublin were achieved. John Major and the British Tories vigorously opposed ROSS ROO SOON CORTOIS and move to a common immigration policy. to one side but will come up again in Amsterdam.
The crucial step which was taken by the Dublin summit was tne agreement on the so-called 'Growth and Stability Pact. This is a legal framework for the turo and establishes the rules by which the new currency will function. ity Pact is highly significant and will hand over far-reaching powers to the Council of Ministers to determine the fate of countries who take part in the single currency.
Effectively, under the Pact, the convergence criteria will continue in force after the introduction of the single currency in January 199%, in the form of 'stability criteria". Gorernment spending will remain fixed at a maximum 3% of GDP - and a breach of the criteria will result in a huge fines being levied on the countries involved, forcing them to cut spending to get back into line These fines can amount to many billions of pounds - up to 0.5% of GDP.
From the point of view of the Europcan project, the Stability Criteria are crucial. The single curattempts to regulate the currencies of the HU. The European Exchange Rate Mechanism went into crisis unacr toe impact of recession and the pound was spat out ofit on Black Wednesday, after the Bank of England had spent C18 billion trying to maintain its value.
Bhu will not sust repulate exchange rates, but lock these permanently together. nice that, w. tac Euro is to remain stable against the dollar and the yen, economic fluctuations between the different member states must be reflected directly in rising unemployment and cuts in government spending rather than in changes in the relative value his is why there has to be a genuine economic convergence if there is to be a chance of stability. There can be fudging at the mar"In England they are killing cows: in Germany they are killing the welfare state" gins, but serious fudging would
A new development in the world political situauon, such as a recession in toc USA, could threaten the whole structure. British Capital and EMU Both the Tory and Labour Parties posture over entry into EMU and argue that all the options are open. But it is not so simple. majority of big capital want integration.
Other sectors, whose operations are focused elsewhere, are more diVoce wac a sui uucom" petitive companies are opposed to But the most significant want the EU and if the full benefits of Europe are to be realised, these companies need not only markets but monetary 80008 UH70H This issue has created the beginings of civil war in the present form.
Germany, France and others are prepared for a two-tier Europe if some other countries are unable or unwilling to ioin by the target date of January 1999.
Prime Minister Blair will not be happy if he is unable to join the first easy option. There could be a lot to lose for Brusn capit it tocy arc forced to remain outside the currency for a few more years and things shape up without them. This can happen both in terms of the tionalisation of capital. However, it is not clear that it will be possible for Labour to move quickly enough to avoid this.
Ultimately integration will be on the terms of the most powerful state in the EU - Germany. Britain is developing into a low-pay, underskilled economy, over relant on hnancial services in the City of London. EMU will nocelerate this trend, and exact a heavy price from the working class. Banks will have a free hand to impote monetarist, deflationary, economic restructuring, to force throush massive public spending cuts, creating a more mothe discipline of mass unemploy. 818CH5.
When the treaty is pur together with the racist Schengen agreement the shape of 'Fortress Europe' The European Union is fundamentally an attempt by the most powerful sectors of the European bourgcoisie to shift the balance of power towards itself and away from the working class. They need to re structure European capitalism in the most effective way to increase the rate of exploitation and maximise profit.
Their ultimate aim is some sort of European super state, since a singie state form can most ellectivels (though not exclusively) achieve this objective. What they have in mind is not just a duplication of the existing nation states but on a larger The new structure is however intended to perform all the essential functions that nation states have This is a difficult project, but one in which a considerable amount of political will has been, and is, invested.
The Maastricht Treaty went further than any previous treaty towards the creation of this kind of state form. It set out timetables for a single currency as part of an economic and monetary union which implies a common forcign, security and defence policy. Politically and economically both the Treaty, and the objectives it promotes, challenge the sovereignty of nattonal parlaments and establish institufions which are ourside of any democratic control.
The Tory right make some correct points about this, although their critique is from a reactionary This ona oHas asoCuyc. issue has split the bourgeoisie in Britain and created the beginines of civil war in the Tory party which may well destroy it in its present form.
Under maastricht, cconomic power will be shifted from both the national governments and national banks to an independent and even more unaccountable Europcan Central Bank (ECB), modelled on the Bundesbank which would control the interest rates of countries within EMU.
These powerful members of the European Bank will be appointed Rewerkscher Holz und Kunsistor ina for cight years, and cannot be remored by popular vote. The European Monetary Institution, the forerunner of the ECB, will be escablished in carly 1998 in preparation for the launch of the ECB a year later.
A single Europcan currency and bank are essential not only for cconomic integration but the cstablishment of a monctarist structure across Europe that can break up the main clements of the welfare state and the post war settlement. The Emergence of the EU as a Global Superpower The strategic aim of a reorganised Europcan capitalism is more adequately to meet the economic challenge of the power blocks - of Japan and the "Tiger' cconomies of the Pacific rim, and the North American block around the United States.
This strategic aim has evolved out of the post-war European project. The post-war settlement was forged after the USA's emergence as the main victor of the second world Europe's big companies need mergers and rationalisation it they are to compete with the generally larger American and Japanese giants. This is why the EU-based multinationals nationals are overwhelmingly in favour of the EU and further integration. war and the overwhelmingly domiEuropean project of the Iron and Common Market was a creation of the Cold War and NATO.
Historically British capitalism has been the most globalised. hich proportion of its assers lay outside Britain, hence the special role or tae bity of bondon as a contre ol international finance. With the decune or tac Brosn bmpuc, now ever, British capital made a compromise and became second string to the USA under the 'special relationship'. British overseas markets, assets and financial operations, became more and more dependent on US economic and military powch France reacted against US dominance in Europe, and refused to become a full member of NATO. This, along with the emergence of Germany as the most powerful capitalist state in Europe began to crode US influence, and shape a more in• dependent European project.
The relative cconomic deline of the USA during the 1970s and the shaping up of new power blocks stimulated a new drive towards European integration during the These developments created an increasing contradicuon tot tac British ruling class between its membership of the EC and its special relationship with the USA. The special relationship had remained the main pillar of British strategy under successive governments until Ine post-war boom ran out or stcat France had opposed Britain's late application to the EEC for that reason. Britain's successful application to join the EEC created profound contradictions between the British market for goods and its internaional financial operations, which during the 1980s brought a massive outflow of capital, primarily to the USA.
Europe versus American and Japanese power blocks is now the crux of the European Union. In this global strugglc, the relatively small European imperialist states require bisser and more sccure markets anu a greater freedom for the movement ana radonausation or capital ou & European basis if they are to com. pete.
Europe's big companies need mergers and rationalisation it they are to compete with the generally larger American and Japanese giants. This is why the BU-based multinationals nationals overwhelmingly in favour of the BU and further integration. In fact a group of multi-nationals representing multi-billion pound businesses meet regularly to pressurise For a Socialist Alternative British withdrawal from the EU. his view is based on a concrele Those who take action assessment that such as step, be cause it is against the interests of rational capital, would give a boost to the class struggle here in Britain. At the same time this might well create a crisis within the EU itself which would positively affect the relatonsmp or forces t otacr countries.
Our aim of course is not capitalist Britain outside of the EU. We want a socialist Britain in a socialist Surope. At every stage, socialists have to propose a Europe-wide al(ernative to the bosses project.
We do not defend the national state. We stand for a United Socialist States of Europe, cast and west. We are internationalists. Europe we want is one which prioritises the needs of the working class against profit, promotes equality for women, fights racism and defends the environment. We want a real 'social Europe' — and that can only be a socialist Europe We support the idea of a genuine Constituent Assembly of all the peoples of Europe to determine the future of Europe. We are for workers' solidarity against the capitalist trusts and multinationals. for building direct links and joint struggles berween workers across Europe.
At the same time we cannot simply abstain on Maastricht, Maastricht 2 or EMU on the grounds that if they fall the bosses will impose another form of capitalism. These Treaties represent a direct attack on Te WoT TC BECE ests. In particular they represent a cordinated attempt to smash up Today it casier for working people to see that EMU and the Maastricht treaty will lead to further attacks on their jobs and services, even if they retain illusions that the EC itself is a positive thing. That is why we have participated in many campaigns and debates against That is why we seck to broaden the debate in the labour morement, working so that those who today will take action against the effects of Maastricht will through action come to realise that the whole project of Europcan intergration needs From this point of view the recent announcement that Labour will hold a referendum on the question of European Monetary Union is a welcome one. A referendum will stimulate broader political debate and allow us a broader audience for Obviously we would have pretrod a refereedum on the questio of European Union itself. ut if EMU, a crucial stagc of European integration, is to be put to a referen. dum then we will campaign for a no vote. We will do so whilst rejecting the right-wing nationalist arguOnly the independent mass action of the working class. as has been taking place across Europe, n cnn noe Dowae of international capital and its state forms. A crucial part of this perspective is defeating the current plans of the employers for a reorganised Europe to coincide with their
Socialist Quroo
The Dublin Summit
Tory party which may well destroy it in its
What Kind of Super State?
against the effects of Maastricht will come to realise that the whole project of European integration needs to be challenged.