Sf
©
What the government is attempting to achieve is quite clear. It is quite obvious that British capitalism cannot go on in the way it has for the last twenty years. At the centre of its many problems is its inability to achieve steady economic growth, without chronic inflation ensuing. Because of its slow economic growth, profit rates have declined. Capital investment, i.e. investment in plant and machinery, etc. has constantly been at a low level, compared to the achievements of competitors, increasing the relative technological backwardness of British industry. The consequent fall in competitiveness has, throughout the post war period, led to periodic balance of payments crises and increasing stresses on the position of Sterling. Unlike the inter war period, British colonies have not been available for use, to quite the same extent, as dumping grounds for British products ja aa cheap and exclusive sources of raw materials. Neither have Shade deficits been covered satisfactorily by income yielded from foriegn and colonial investment, as sometimes oceur1 nes the imperialist ord en ee Se
Similar to past Conservative ‘stop - get measures, th
e July package of the Wilson government was designed, in the short tute to tide British
capitalism ovér a chronic currency and balance of payments crisis. Favourable trade returns in the latter part of 1966, indicate that Wilson may be succeeding in achieving this purely short term aim. Unfortunately, however, the Sterling crisis was combined with another phenomennn. In the °@rly part of 1966, production was already falling, inspite of the fact that employment was remaining at a high level. Selwyn Lloyd and his team never had to face such a combination af disastrous developments. The short term solution te the Sterling crisis acted as a gigantic catalyst on the already present germs of recession. Most bourgeois commentators now feel that the Wilsnn government went too far with ite deflationary measures and are extremely nervous about the year that lies ahead. A comment by William Davies, Financial Editor to 'The Guardian', in an article published on December 28th, sums up the general attitude: ‘eee Thore are signs that industry has got over the first shock adjustment to the July package, but few people doubt that tho measures hurriedly taken to save Sterling went too far. Some still talk of an ‘irreversible recession and others claim that the current situation can easily be controlled. Two things, however, are universally accepted. One, industry faces a tough year. Two, the Government does not have a great deal of room fnr manoeuvre and will need a lot of luck to get us through 1967 without mishap. We cannot afford a major trade war with South Africa or a callapse of the prices and incomes policy. A serious slow down in world trade weuld be a frightful blow and we are in no shape to accept Commnn Market membership on painful terms....' Thus, for the first time since the war, there is a possibility that a full scale slump may occur. # Since the government, on the instigation of the City of London, and foriegn bankers, is sn stubbornly committed tn defending Storling, it will obviously not carry out major reflationary measures, until its position is secure. However, it has already made some attempt to halt the drift towards slump,by increasing ‘investment grants! to industry, perhaps hurried intn such a move by the speed with which industry reacted to the July measures. Aceording to a recent Confederation of British Industry survey, overall investment plans in British industry for 1967 had been reduced by 12%. Other minor inflationary measures include a reminder, by tho Bank of England, to ‘priority borrowers! that the clearing banks have plenty of money available. Also, the payment nf rebates under the Selective Employment Tax, and the retention of high Government military expenditure, will have similar effects. Assuming that none of the fears of William Davies matorialise and that a major slump is averted, there is a big question mark over the Covernment's ability to achievo its long term aims. These can be said to be to get British capitalism permanently out of the 'stop go! cycle by carrying out a widespread rationalisation of the British economy, to facilitate the expansion of its less moribond sectors and to cut out the dead wood. So far, things have gone very badly for the government in this context, the car industry and chemicals hardly being the most ideal pruning sectors. However, for rationalisation ts be successfully earried out, Wilsen needs two things. Firstly, he needs a permanent figure of unemployed cf at least 500,000 to take the impetus out of the bargaining power of the workers, and to act as an ever present resevoir of labour for expanding, or
‘econd. re needs a trade union movemen 3
Secondly, hi eo Re moots te Sa
new firms to draw one
ds to do away with
which is submissively tied to a eobasneery
'free collective bargaining! permanently; ne ne maha ah
ite ; he needs to curb ‘unofficial strikes’s ~
A | this contexts
'restrictive practices’; : atk el akan te
The wage freeze and its extension should be se »+ Sees |
stent the Part 1¥ legislation and trade unionists will ee
look with a discerning eye at the ‘findings’ pf the Royal Comm ee
on the Trade Unions', when they are published. This is not eer ig
class government, ‘mistaken in some of its ideas, * nor is cheno
machinery, on behalf of which it acts, a neutral agency subordinating
class interests to a ‘national interest’. The whole tenor of
government policy is aimed at promoting the interests of —_ |
entrenched business and financial minorities of British society, and
is, therefore, irreconcilably opposed to the interests of the working
Presumably, once the power of the t®ade uniozs. has been
of tne government, 1-@-«
class.
i
prgavided that
tamad, and once the short term difficulties
Sterling, the balance of payments, have been Overeéoine renin
& slump has not been brought about in the process , the way will be
open for the Government to enter the Common Market, which, through
‘market forces', would speed up the rationalisation of the British
economy. We have a stark perspective facing us. If the government succeeds in its aim of disciplining the trade union movement and of helping to solve the problems of British capitalism, at the expence of working class living standards, the labour movement will move into an extremely lean period, similar, in some ways, to the situation in Western Germany for many years. The Labour Party will be a thoroughly neo capitalist party and like the German social democrats, will probably lose a large part of its working class membership. The trade unions, tied in to the state planning mechanisms will become increasingly divorced from the interests of their membership, the latter becoming increasingly apolitical. Obviously, we must strive to prevent this nightmare from occurring. At t glance, the tasks facing us are formidable. The mass of working people are still basically loyal to the Labour government, the harsh realities of the wage freeze and unemployment having, as yet, only been brought home to a minority. | The opposition of the Transport and General Workers Union and the technical unions to the wage freeza, although welcome, hag beenhalf hearted and indecisive. Where workers have, on a local: scale. reacted against the freeze by strike action, e.g. car delivery men at Longbridge and busmen in Hull, the 17.4 G.W.U. national leadership has prevented | SE eee ality GB &: dick Wet ems. aehkePicen tie Whenistinand ai cages a+ opposition leaders, Cousins in Particular has been most ambivalent. er be mre Cetin a oe has been that Britain's problems MMiniwius veuet ivity. He has shown little it must be sakes Mises tue are more Coherent in their opposition, mass action against th aie se mate, &O serious attempt to mobilise of the so called left U.p.tc sot “180, the nature of the opposition and need not be reitoratea here, > TOW WOtorious in wide left circles
tvorated here, é disappointment of Marxists in the performances to datg, of the
oppositional trade union leaders and their parliamentary colleagues should not provoke dismay or sectarian denunciations. Fundamentally, our left wing social democratic comrades do not agree with us in our characterisation of the Wilson government as a force completely alien to the interests of the working class. Cousins, Jenkins and the rest are not conscious traitors of the working class, as some ultra lefts would have us believe. There are no doubt many pressures upon them to keep the trade union opposition under control, to prevent it from completely wrecking the policies of the labour Soveenmeut, which they still have some loyalty to. For them, socialism is a goal of tho distant future, to be achieved through the passing of edicts in Parliament, after C.L.P.'s have replaced the Wiatts and Stewarts, by th e Heffers and Foots of this world. The concept of leading masses of people in a militant struggle for an anti capitalist programme is roreign to them.
r
However, we cannot afford to dismiss the importance of the official T.U. opposition. We should give all the support we can to local strikes against the freeze, redundancies and attempts to erede trade union rights. Workers Solidarity Committees should be formed for this purpose, as has been done in Hull,for example. Such committees can distribute pamphlets to publicise the case of the strikers; they can call mass meetings of support; they can assist in the collection of donations, and work to extend the strike.
Limited or local struggles, however, even if victorious in certain eases, will not bring the government's prices and incomes policy crashing down in ruins. Only determined national struggles, with the resoucres of official union support behind them, will accomplish this. The more local victories there are though, the greater will be the pressure on national union leaders, to help bring such national struggles about.
We can help to build up such pressure in other ways. We should help to convene, with other socialists and with the maximum trade union participation, local and national forums, through such organisations as C.S.E., where precise anti capitalist but non utopian programmes, hostile to government economic policies and all they stand for, can be hammered out. Such programmes must then be fed back to the T.U. branches, the factories and the C.L.P.'s. In order to assist in this process, ‘World Politics' will, in the near future, be putting. forward some detailed drafts, to act as a basis for discussion, where necessary.
In adopting the course it has, the Wilson government has moved onto shaky ground. If it is brought to its knees, as a result of working class action, around anti capitalist policies, the ominous defeat, which is at present staring us in the face, will have been turned into a magnificent victory for the socialist cause. )