Escalate the action!
County Hall on Tuesday March 26, made the point that for Ken Livingstone the allure of a parliamentary seat in Brent East seemed to push any notion of support for the boroughs to the side. That seemed to say it all. Indeed, Livingstone's appearance on the London Programme, rubbishing the whole no rate tactic, seemed to many to go beyond personal political skin-saving and into the realm of incitement to break party policy and shoulder Kinnock's famous "dented shield".
At the end of these articles one feels obliged to raise a few snappy slogans to chart the advance of the movement. In this case the lessons we have learnt are largely negative. We have learnt that accountability in our resolutions but an uncompromising fight for a socialist leadership on the
Those who broke party and their apologists must be as political lepers and we should demand a full accounting of the GLC debacle in the movement to dispel the confusion in our ranks.
The rightwing is now rampant in mosphere of skinsaving and they even have a majority on the new Policy and Resources "supercommittee". The GLC has shifted from a centre-left to a centre right alignment.
Full support must therefore be given not only to those councils and RATECAPPING THE miners were on strike for a year ! munities. The ratecapping confrontation has been with us for barely two months, yet already the action is
The main stumbling block in the way of councillors standing firm has been the issue of "illegality".
concillors have that they won't subject themselves to the threat of surcharge, removal and disqualification from public office. They don't seem to have learned the lessons of history: that the best way of changing the law is to break it, shown by trade unionists from the Tolpuddle Martyrs to the defeat of the Industrial Relations Act in the early 70s; from the suffregettes to the Greenham
Thousands of miners, women and labour movement activists broke laws on secondary picketting, and guidelines on picket numbers (enforced as the law) routinely
One ad not getting full page GLC press treatment. unions still in the fight but the movement must demand and ensure that those in County Hall who held theline are not subejcted to a witch-hunt. The Notts Area of Ratecapping
it is appropriate to end on the prophetic words of John McDonnell in a letter to Ken Livingstone dated October 1, 1984.
effect of a defeated, acquiescent GLC on the morale of the Left in the long term is also an im. Though obviously the sight of a lef GLC victorious over a Tory govern-
By JENNY FISHER during the miners strike, so that the struggle could be carried out effectively. They were not all arrested. The Tories are selective about when they use the law; they don't want to create martyrs which the labour movement would be inspired to defend. As the numbers of Councils defying the law dwindle, it will be easier for them to be picked oil. It would have been an impossible situation tor the government il aundreds of councillors had defied the lav together: that was the reasoning behind a joint fight this year. Those who are protecting themselves by ending the defiance of their own Councils are sabotaging chances of other Councils in the fight.
Councillors have known for a long time that confrontation over ratecapping was coming up; and that Labour Party policy was not to set a rate. Those who were reallly against cuts had plenty of time to resign
some measure of dignity Socialist Viewpoint, No. 5, April 1985. Page 21
74% of the GLC labour group are scabs understand pathetic support it were stand and are beaten. However, we will undermine the confidence
Tus by hundreds of housands of socialists throughout the country if we are seen to be capitulating to a Thatcherite government or even breaking ranks with other socialist councils and
lucking the ight with the govern
nent by cooking our books. It is the difference between our GLC being remembered as George Lansbur Ind Poplar or Marshall Petain an‹ the Vichy Government." weren't prepared to break the law -which some did. The implication of staying in office and refusing to fight must be working class in the face of Tory cuts.
What could, of course, have forced the issue would have been strong suport from the trade unions and the Labour Party. Many Councils voted for a "no rate" posiCouncil chamber and surrounding the Town Hall. The votes would probably have gone that way anyway; but many councillors have since spoken about the vital part the lobbies played in supporting them in voting for "no rate" and giving them a confidence in the fight which endured after the meeting.
But large lobbies by activists are no enough. Councillors need the backing ol local trade unions: that they will strike in defence of jobs and services if councillors are surcharged or removed. But we also
Othe public sector unions nationally behind pledges for local
Local strike action will not be enough to
(RATECAPPING) means cats
Labour councillors with Jenkins head on a platter shift the Tories: those who say that Thatcher won't care if Camden residents don't have their bins emptied, or if the streets aren't swept in Islington, are right. But the public sector unions have got the power to shift the government; especially after the massive blow to the economy inflicted by the miners strike.
The trade union silence on how they're going to fight ratecapping stated their position that "it's a bad thing' — is shameful. The rank and file cannot let union leaders get away fight massive attacks on jobs, or on the services workers need.
Rank and file groups - such as shop stewards committees of particular unions, and wider groupings, such as the London Shop Stewards Committee Bridge" - must turn the pressure on the leaders of the public sector unions to back workers in this fight. It's clear that the leadeship of Scargill, in uneqivocally arguing the miners' case, ference to the miners strike; as opposed to the feeble attitude of Tuffin in the Post Of. ficer, where workers were just as prepared as the miners to fight attacks on jobs. The leaders of national unions could make a huge difference to the strength of this battle: without pressure from the rank and file for action, they will be content to leave local workers isolated.
The role of the Labour Party leadership is important in any anti-cuts struggle; but it's crucial in a local government fight conducted in accordance with Party With the leadership not prepared to come out and defend the necessary "illegal" it's not surprising individual counciliors are hesitant.
The left won the day at the Labour Party local government conference; when the policy of "no rate" was won consequences against "dented shield approach" of "if the Tories make cuts , it's nasty and you can mention it in the House of Commons; if the Tories get Labour Councils to make cuts on the Tories' behalf, it's more humane."
ship has ignored party policy; and by do- ing that, it has subverted not only an anti- government struggle, but a policy which the Party had decided on as a whole. This is, of course, nothing new; but the lessons need to be drawn by all Labour Party ac- tivists. Many campaigns are working to change — or keep gains made in — Party policy. But unless we can call our leaders having and representatives to account, policy with refusing to ting party policy by refusing to speak out; they have also succeeded in pressurising the Local Government Information Unit (the former Local Government Campaign and the Association "London Authorities to water down their policies, and to hold back from escalating the strug- right wing of the Party have been able, as a minority, to exercise a veto over the best made a dif- ray of implementing Party policy and ALA must be countered by pressure and ALA support, police precepts, loan repayments. the capitualtion of ILEA and the GLC, the financial impact on the government and the City will be less than it could hve been; but it will be a positive step for Councils to Labour Labour Party take to step up the confrontation. measures, ones proach. the fight, councillors are working on the GLC model of the Council officers are helping them; or in with all its some cases Kinnock's empting them, by working out their own fallback budgets and leaking details to the press. There are fallback budgets. First, not every Council can make use of reserves and/or creative
which Promises excuses. waged ing, harmless, money, The problem is that the Kinnock leader- Labour But the leadership are not only subver. back to capital, etc. underway. In this way, the he pressure they have put on the LGI Groups and local authority Councils, with LGIU National Insurance. With The Kinnock leadership are not the only b. Prehey look for ecuses to avoid is they look tor excuses to avoic "fallback budget". such as Hackney pre- organisations three main problems about Socialist Viewpoint, No. 5, April 1985. Page 22
accounting to lessen the cuts. Councils
resort to fallback budgets are therefore isolating other Councils; leaving them to fight alone.
that "we'll keep going this year, and fight next year" are just feeble
The response next year to a call for a fight against cuts will be: "you said there would be cuts last year, then you found a way to manage: now you're crying wolf again." And Councils may not have the luxury of waiting till next year, depending on the speed with which the Tories institute privatisation. If a joint fight can't be
Snow to defend a direct works department from the effects of ratecapp-
what will it be like defending that department in six months time from the effects of compulsory privatisation? Secondly falstik, fallback budgets are not
budgets, which won't lead to cuts. Most Councils are producing tallback budgets to give less cuts than government limits would mean; but cuts are still there. No fallback budget provides for filling vacancies, etc., and restoring past cuts. Fallback budgets are also linked to rent and rate increases: so the working class is now expected to pay for the privilege of having less cuts!
Thirdly, ratecapping is not just about
Abut also about local democracy. Fallback budgets accept the principle that central government can veto the decisions of the "local ballot box" and dictate how much Councils spend, and what they spend it on. Councils seem to have forgotten that the Bill includes that power — dressed up as an "appeals procedure".
Some of the fallback budgets are being referred to as "deficit budgets". When the
Party originally considered "deficit budgets" as a tactic, the strategy was for a massive deficit, which would provoke a crisis very quickly, and lead to the same confrontation situation to defend jobs and services that we have now. The right cannot get away with dressing up their cuts as "deficit budgets", as if they were sticking to a lost Labour Party strategy, and were still fighting. They cannot be allowed to imply that the strategy the Labour Party chose was at fault. Their version of "deficit budgets" is to find a way to get by for the majority of the year - by selling Council property and leasing it
create artificial injections of - and have a minor crisis some time in the future. That would not be strong enough to lead an individual fight against cuts in 10 months time or so. It is not the strategy which the Labour Party chose that's at fault: but how it's been carried out, with the right wing veto on effective implementation.
Councillors, Labour Parties and trade unions must stick out for a "no rate" position. None of them should be associated with implementing cuts. If workers and the community are prepared to fight the cuts implied by Tory spending limits, they will fight Labour-imposed cuts too; especially if a lead is given. Labour Councillors can keep the momentum for a fight going by voting against all cuts budgets, and exposing a fallback budget for what it is. Even if a vote for a "no rate" position lets a Tory budget through, councillors should not associate themselves with the "dented shield" approach of the right wing and the officers; but should explain how the effects will be the same.
MIs. Thatcher has explained on her Asian tour that she has "taught the British trade unions the facts of life": a polite way of reassuring Asian businessmen that the
Cof the working class are smashed, and the ruling class triumphant. Kinnock has indicated he's insulted by that; now it's up to all of us to show the error of Thatcher's assessment.
compromises that paved the road to