What should a state-owned car plant produce?
Socialist Outlook has called for nationalisation throughout the Rover crisis, as we do in relation to Fords, steel and the component industry.
But we have always stressed this is not to pursue a competitive struggle against other car manufacturers: the productive capacity of the car plants and their suppliers should be harnessed to help develop a planned transport system. This means that the railways, buses, air and road transport must also be nationalised. Alongside this, other useful products should be developed.
But who is going to control it? Any re-nationalisation must not repeat the disaster of the last time the government stepped in..
When British Leyland was nationalised in 1975, Harold Wilson's Labour government immediately set about preparing it for sale, insisting that it must be competitive.
They brought in Michael Edwardes, fresh from breaking the unions at Union Carbide. As his deputy they appointed Ian MacGregor, who went on to smash the 1984 miners' strike.
The workforce was reduced from 186,090 in 1975 to 46,000 in 1988 when it was privatised. Plant after plant was closed.
There were deliberate moves to weaken the shop-floor unions through drawing stewards and officials onto so-called "participation" committees, where they sat alongside management.
After this softening up exercise, Edwardes and MacGregor then set about the unions with a vengeance. Longbridge convenor Derek Robinson was sacked, and the Combine Committee was smashed. Alan Thornett was then sacked from Cowley, followed by Bob Cullen and others. More stewards were sacked from Longbridge. Unlimited government money was available to carry out this task.
This is not our view of nationalisation. We want workers' control of production through elected committees, not state appointed managers drawn from the most vicious sections of business.