[Birmingham's new Tory council lips and sharpening its…]

Scan page 8

Birmingham's new Tory council lips and sharpening its knife to • able slice out of public services.

On their 'hit list' for hiving off are refuse collection, housing management, school meals, swimming baths, leisure services, and

This wholesale plan for looting the public services and handing profits to Tory businessmen is part of a generalised attack by the Thatcher government on nationalised indusIn Wandsworth and in Peterborough struggles are currently under way against such "hiving off". - with its implications of wholesale loss of jobs and attacks on the working conditions of public sector employees.

In this feature, JOHN McILROY surveys the present drive towards privatisation - and its implications for the working class.

BL's Prestcold sold off assets worth nearly £20 million for *No to privatisation! The problems of mass unemployment and crumbling social services can only be resolved through a planned socialist economy: the fight must be for workers' control and to prepare for workers' management within the nationalised indus *Open the books of the public sector - particular. ly those faced with Tory privatisation plans. Expose the links between the public services and the network of private suppliers, contractors and bankers who reap profits from them. Prove the case to the workers' movement for mass action to force the nationalisation of the banks and other major industries without compensation, as part of a socialist plan for full employment and improved public *Defend all jobs and working conditions! For strike action, occupations and full supporting blacking action to halt the hiving off of public services and nationalised industries. Force the union leaders to call all out action! Kick out the Tory government! *Labour Party policy, adopted in 1980, is to "rez tore to public ownership, without compensation, the - Ed laundries are prime loreets for the privale profiteers assets of our public sector industries sold off by the "I hope workers from all over the country will learn from our mistakes. The only way to fight is through all-out strike action from the moment a council discusses the possibility of privatisation."

The speaker is Arthur Smith, former TGWU convenor of the dustmen in Southend-on-Sea, Essex. Arthur was addressing a recent meeting in Liverpool about the privatisation of municipal cleaning which came into effect on 1 April 1981. He is going round the country talking about his experiences as he feels that it is very much a question of Southend yesterday, other dustmen tomorrow.

You have probably seen the quarter of a million pound advertising campaign that Exclusive Cleaning (the company which won the Southend contract has mounted in the papers, urging other councils to follow suit.

Exclusive's Chairman, David Evans, a councillor and Chairman of St. Albans Highways Committee (he describes himself as "a born capitalist and a fierce right winger") was the hit of last year's Tory conference. Evans's declared salary for 1980/81 was £36,000 and he owns two Rolls Royces. He claims that his company has been approached by 40 councils and expects at least a dozen to go private in 1982.

Cut The immediate reason for privatisation is the Tories' pressure on local councils to cut spending. Companies like Exclusive Cleaning (part of the Brengreen Group with a £30 million turnover employing 17,000 part-timers out of a labour force of 20.000) are looking for new Janessa the face of facTsar• 27 TITE is licking its cut a profitNorman Tebbit wants to sell off the Job Centres.

As recently as 1963 a (Tory) government committee, looking 1 at over 100 years experience of the incompatibility of capitalists like Evans and public health, stated "Local Authorities should not employ contractors to collect household refuse"

Today, however, the Department of Environment pressures councils to contract out not only refuse collection but, school catering, housing and road maintenance, while the press propagates the image of municipal workers as workshy and overpaid.

As the Southend Standard said of Arthur Smith's comrades "Over the years, the workmen had built up a nice little number which meant many could get a fair week's pay for less than a fair week's work. Then they screwed overtime out of the council (well, that means we ratepayers) in ludicrous fashion" (3.3.81).

Heard that somewhere before? Train drivers? Car workers?

A big factor in Southend was that union organisation had developed apace during the seventies, protect105: SE This s ac=- Ex: 157 they are better off"

The Saatchi and Saatchi syrup slithers over what really happened on 1 April 1981. Out of a sacked workforce of 232 only about 70 were given jobs. No shop steward or union activist was re-employed. Most are still part of the miserable 4 "You don't need a union when you've got a boss like that" says the advert. When it took over the contract Exclusive Cleaning hired a gang of thugs armed with pickaxes, handles, cricket bats, etc. to stop the excouncil workers picketing.

Smith had to request police protection to clear out his desk, and the heavies accompanied dustmen on their rounds for nearly three months after the new contract was awarded.

Wages

Having claimed that the men were overpaid, Exclusive. Cleaning now claim the new workforce are earning more! Arthur Smith counters that the hours are longer and claims that earnings have in reality been cut under Exclusive.

One man who regularly took home £85 to £90 now gets only £67.60 and has had to apply for à rent rebate.

Sickness pay, holidays (cut from six to three weeks) and pensions have all deteriorated. The council itself admitted that privatisation means "a loss of some benefits such as good pension rights and sickness allowances."

Central to the campaign has been the argument that private companies provide better service and save the ratepayers' -money. Arthur Smith argues that the service is in no way superior. He also questions the half a million saving for ratepayers that Evans claims.

Sacked Redundancy payments to the sacked workers alone were £472,000. Exclusive has doubled charges for collecting trade refuse. Its contract with the council enables it to charge the full economic cost, and it expects to collect £230,000 in the coming year, compared to £115,000 collected by the council in 1980/81.

Moreover, Exclusive have got a new deal from the council workshops which means vehicle maintenance will cost £100,000 a year compared with the previous £250,000.

Refuse vehicles and other council assets -were transferred to Exclusive Cleaning £9 million. at knock-down prices.

Finally, Southend at a greater cost. Council's Resources and Planning: Manager, Richard Cresswell, has tound himselt showpiece. As copies of their a new job. You've guessed successful Southend tender it ... the reptile who was change hands at £100 per involved in handing the copy they have signed a concontract over to David Evans now works for Exclusive as Council and are talking to a project engineer. the Tories in Wirral.

prey have been quick to Showpiece scent easy pickings. In Wandsworth, Exclusive were Far from being as the undercut by Pritchard Indusadvert states "a great exam- trial Services in a fight for a ple of private enterprise five year 4½ million pound achieving so much more than contract. Peter Pritchard public enterprise" Southend runs a worldwide cleaning, is a carefully managed show- private medicine and piece. Under the gilt lies the security guard service. Last grime: sackings, speed up, no year his 14,000 British They are being backed b Job Ownership Ltd., finar ced by the Rowntree Trus Two of their organiser Robert Oakeshott and 1 Grimond have promise maximum support.

Put up to it or genuine these people are acting as / dangerous diversion. To ge the contract they wouk have to act as a collectiv David Evans, driving dow conditions to undercu private capital.

Confusion may be causer by the fact that it Labour council that involved in contracting out Labour Weekly on 19 Febru ary carried a report tha Tower Hamlets Council il London was considerin privatising some of its ser vices.

Another danger is tha councils who are only toyin with privatisation will use as a sorat to catch mackerel. Barnet, who rejed ted it, used its threat as potent bargaining weapon NUPE official Jerem trade unions, worse service employees were paid an aver- Corbyn said when th age of £1,536.

workers accepted the loss o Exclusive, however, are Pritchard, like Exclusive, 66 jobs: "They felt that they busy cashing in on their will operate with fewer had a shotgun at their head workers and fewer vehicles. and had to accept". Wages will be the same, but the workforce will suffer in terms of pensions, sickness Action tract with Eastbourne pay and job security.

And a third company, In the short term th Grand Metropolitan, is tak- answer is to fight for indus Other. exotic birds of ing over part of Chelsea's trial action right at the start refuse collection. with a determined campaig Privatisation should be to black every other opera resisted by all workers. tion of the companie There are traps. A redun- putting in tenders. Barne dancy payment with the lure gave as one reason for stay of immediate re engagement ing public the fact that ther may weaken opposition . would be a delay before thi but look what happened at contractors could take ove Southend. In Liverpool a and in the meantime a strik group of workers have could have a devastating im suggested a cooperative. pact. tries. services!

Scan page 9

Tories (below) sell off the profitable bits like North Sea oil, for the benefit of Stock Exchange sharks, while (right) essential public services are starved of funds Tories". . Yet when Tony Benn referred to this policy in Parliament last November he was publicly upbraided by Foot and the Party's right wing.

The fight against privatisation requires that the renationalisation policy be upheld, and implemented - and that those leaders who reject it be removed.

*The establishment of a socialist society offering jobs and decent living conditions for all requires not just the defeat of the Tories but the fight for a new Previous Labour governments have administered capitalism in collusion with the bosses and bankers, basing themselves on the established state machine ignoring or defying Labour's rank and file.

What we need is a workers' government - a government based on the labour movement and accountable to it, taking decisive measures against the bosses' state machine and capitalist privilege.

The Left must therefore organise and fight to transform the labour movement: to democratise ite to win accountability; and to arm it with the will, the mass involvement, and the clear policies necessary to eeable it to push through working class solutions to mashla it to nuch thananh analine alam AGC MAD The TUC have produced a pamphlet condemning privatisation of cleaning services the Financial Secretary to and to provide public sector the Treasury, Nicholas trade unionists with ammunRidley, who said last Decemition against it. However, ber, "The vast majority of workers faced with this people in this country have threat will have to rely on already come to the same themselves. One initially use- conclusion as us: that we fui step would be the con- should try and return everyvening of a cross union thing to the private sector conference of stewards that is nationalised ... that involved in Municipal Cleans- is what we are doing" ing.

This would provide an is simple: the parts of opportunity to discuss the publicly owned industry lessons of the privatisation which are potentially profitexperience, break down isol- able will be gobbled up by ation, establish links and thrusting capitalists. The coordinate strategy. It is screws will be turned upon something all members of the reduced workforce, and the TGWU and GMWU more surplus value sweated should think about.

We need however, to link out. the fight against privatisation owned industry which are of cleansing services with the unprofitable will be destroyentire privatisation strategy ed, but their destruction will of the Tory government.

raise average productivity This was summed up by across the economy.

Thatcher is restrained by the resilience of the workers' movement, the cautious response of capital and the fact that private capital simply cannot operate some services which nonetheless are vital to capitalism.

The thinking behind this The Tories have moved, however, slowly but surely. The first step was British Aerospace in 1980. BA workers are now facing 3,000 redundancies.

This was followed by "Britain's biggest ever employee buy-out", • the National Frieght Company. The management of the NFC The parts of publicly proposed last June that they, the 26,000 employees, and 18,000 pensioners should buy the company from the government as an alternative to a sell-off to the private sector.

This was advertised as an answer to the crisis, but it is difficult to see the condtions of workers being improved under this hybrid coop or its prospects being bright in a tough market. NFC has declared 10,000 redundancies over the last 2½ years and profits have been eroded.

Yet workers' financial participation will in reality be very limited. The 2,000 middle managers have subscribed about £1,600 each to provide the bulk of the minimum needed for the scheme to go ahead, with the top 20 managers subscribing up to €25,000 each.

Another success for the Tories was their £224 million dispasal of a near50% stake in the Cable and Wiredess Terrorurca tians far not me: group, and by the deadline last October the issue was almost four times over-subscribed.

The Tories are also looking to the future in a determined way. They insisted that small shareholders should be favoured, both to meet the needs of their "small business" ideology and to increase the problem of renationalisation by Labour government.

The looting of British Leyland has also continued. The Forklift subsidiary at Coventry has been sold off to Climax Holdings, and Marshall and Son are buying up the machinery distribution rights and order books of the tractor plant at Bathgate.

Typical of the way the Tories want privatisation to work was the sell-off of the Prestcold part of BL's special products division. Abell, a self-made millionaire was in charge of this division from 1975 to 1978. When he left to take charge of Leyland Vehicles the Financial Times stated "that he must take responsibility for their (Prestcold's) financial near collapse"

But it was all in a good cause. When Abell left Leyland Vehicles in January 1981 to became toad = was announced that Suter Electrical was to purchase Prestcold from BL, payıng £9 million for a company with assets worth nearly £20 A year ago British Steel reached an agreement on the creation of Phoenix I, a joint project for the rationalisation of wire rod and bar production. This 50-50 owned operation is now trading as a new company, Allied Steel and Wire, outside BSC control.

However, the attempt to inject a further private sector element into the steel industry through involving BSC and Glen with three other companies in the production. and marketing of engineering steels - Phoenix 2 - has come to grief, despite Thatcher's high prioritisation of the privatisation of parts of the steel industry.

Similarly, the scandal surrounding the sale of Amersham international - a public sector company dealing with radioactive material used in health care - when it was found that merchant bankers N.M. Rothschild had underpriced the share issue by £25.5 million, has led to greater scrutiny of the Tories' policies. Even Tor backbencher Edward Cann called for ar na. money that headed for the Government's latest privatis ation offering Amersham International has been unedi fying. It has once agair labelled the City as the nation's chief repository of greed. And Amersham is no1 an isolated case. British Aerospace a year ago anc Cable and Wireless lasi Autumn were similar tales if on a lesser scale."

At the moment Thatcher intends to drive ahead with four main projects:

*The selling off of British Telecom.

*The floating of the British National Oil Corpor ation's production anc exploration interests.

*The privatisation 01 British Gas's oil assets.

*The hiving off of Airways.

All of these schemes are presenting probiems. It has been revealed that Rothschild have already been paid £½ million for its work on the carve up of BNOC even before legislation has been passed enabling the sale.

As the Oil and Gas Enterprise Bill which will give the Tories sell-off power goes through Parliament, Gavin Laird (AUEW) and Clive Jenkins, ASTHS membe i° the BNOC Scare "TOM sac cad:

Well ..AET 3833 prices knocking several hundred million pounds off the sale value of BNOC assets.

The majority of the BNOC Board want privatisation but they disagree on method and timing.

But in British Gas, Sir Ernest Woodroofe, a member of the Board and self-confessed "staunch Conservative" , has opposed the selling off of assets. A detailed 500 page investigation into British Airways' troubled finances drawn up by top accountants Price Waterhouse, has questioned the viability of a carve-up when BA is £11 million in debt.

As the Guardian commented, "the private sector is remarkably reluctant to buy something that is losing £200 million a year"

Yet capitalists are salivating to get their gobs into the rich gravy of British Telecom. The Chancellor announced in the Budget a BT bond which would allow the corporation to raise up to £150 million from private investment.

This is not now likely to go ahead. Instead half the shares will be simply sold off to "the public" with a Bill being rushed through in October.

Last year's Telecommunications Act allowed BT to take stakes in commercial partnerships. Its first major venture was to link with British Aerospace and Marconi to form United Satellites to provide direct satellite broadcasting. Now the private sector will share with BT the new cable revolution which will offer multichannel TV plus electronic mail home banking, shopping, security and information services.

Just at the right time the Prime Minister's advisory panel on information technology published its report on cable TV: "1 believe that there is a consensus that this is a good development and should be cashed in on " said Charles Read, its chairperson.

Consensus? Certainly, on the panel. They consisted of the Managing Directors of Mullard Ltd (electronics manufacturers), Rediffusion Ltd (heavily involved ET. cable TV) and Infor-ator Technology Lid •Cas TOTE т: Io Dna = TO INT

Scan page 10

abnormality lies in the direc-- •women present that day tion of being a highly exag- decided to take the camgerated form of what arel 'paign for women's right to considered to be the normal work further and not let the duties of men and women. fight end on June 5. national Women's Festival and Rally organised by the Labour Party. There'll be women's bands, stalls, theatre, open-air; discussion forums, a rally with national and international speakers, plus food, kids' entertainment & creche, and lots more.

The march is called by the ACTION COMMITTEE FOR A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO WORK, and co-sponsored by the SOUTH EAST in THAT men who rape 8 year old girls should be encouraged to continue their association with their victims, that efforts should be made not to disrupt their "loving relationship" is a pretty horrifying proposition. Yet that is precisely the view that prevails when the man happens to be the child's father.

Sarah Nelson in a carefully argued but shocking book "Incest - Fact and Myth" exposes the attitudes of "caring agencies" and the "experts" in the field and contrasts them with the reality.

Incest is defined officially as sexual intercourse between closely related individuals. This inadequate definition leaves out other forms of sexual abuse which do not include penile penetration but may be equally traumatic for the victim. And it does not include sexual acts committed" by men who may be in similar positions of power and authority over the child but are not related by blood -such as mothers' lovers or boyfriends.

Even using the narrow definition, the facts are startling.

The overwhelming majority of incest cases are between fathers and daughters, and most of the rest are step-fathers and step-daughters, or grandfathers and grand daughters.

The average age of the victim when the incestuous assaults begin is somewhere between 8 and 10 years old, though cases have been reported of incest starting when the child is a toddler and continuing till she reaches adulthood. Once begun it very often continues regularly for several years.

These facts rather demolish the myth that incest is a once-in-a-lifetime fall from grace on the part of the father.

The physical effects on the victim are stomachturning. Victims suffer vaginal tears and infections, ulceration and several venereal diseases. They often develop psychosomatic symptoms such as migraines, stomach pains and skin disorders.

Violence

In addition, in many cases, physical violence is used to compel the girl's cooperation including battering, burning and locking or tying them up.

Since incest persists over many years, another underreported effect is pregnancy. Sarah Nelson suggests that many instances do not come to light because of miscarriages and abortions, and paternity being attributed to another man eg. a boyfriend.

But even so the figures suggest that pregnancy results in between 10 and 20% of cases.

An unwanted (sometimes abnormal) child, born to a mother maybe as young as 11 or 12, seems like just one more vicious twist to an already appalling situation.

On top of the physical effects, certain psychological damage appears with appalling frequency - depression, neurosis, and suicidal tendencies. Very often it takes the form of behavioural disturbances.

One therapist who treated 500 drug addicts found 70% had been child victims of sexual abuse. A worker involved with runaway adolescents noted that half were victims of sexual abuse (who could blame them for running away?). Various reports have suggested a link between incest and girls subsequently taking up prostitution. ON 24 April, Hackney Women's Right to Work held a one day conference attended by 40 women. The aim of the conference was twoIn one study 25% of prostitutes interviewed had been incest victims. In another, 51 out of 103 prostitutes claimed their first sexual experience had been with their father.

Also many girls react by being completely turned off sex throughout their adult life. This can extend to other areas of their lives, so that they feel socially isolated, unable to communicate and unable to form close relationships with other people.

The most common reaction is self-disgust, feelings of degradation and worthlessness (which may go a long way towards explaining the other behavioural consequences).

The facts Sarah Nelson produces present a shattering toll of human misery, wrecked lives, damaged bodies and minds. But perhaps the most sickening aspect is how this contrasts with the received view of those who are supposed to help and the alleged "experts" in the field.

Myths

She examines the most prevalent myths among the professions and exposes the reactionary assumptions behind them.

One of the commonest responses, as in rape, is to blame the victim. So, for example, the child is presented as sexually precocious or provocative, or it is claimed that she unconsciously desires sex with her father.

In contrast to the hysteria when a child is molested by a stranger the "experts" inveigh against notions of childhood innocence and Freud's theory of infantile sexuality is paraded.

There are several inconsistencies in this argument. It totally ignores the evidence that very often force is used to subdue the girl's opposition and that identifiable physical damage results: in this view, the child must not only be provocative, but fold.

Firstly to advertise and build support for a national demonstration and festival on June 5. Secondly to scious how can a child be held responsible for them? It reveals a staggering hypocrisy that girls are encouraged to be pretty, flirtatious "little women" and then accused of "provoking" rape.

The second response is to suggest that incest is an acceptable part of certain "subcultures" (read working class or poor deprived families). Apart from the nauseating class bias of this, it again ignores the facts.

Firstly, it is clear that neither the victim nor the perpetrator actually do see it as "acceptable": it is a "family secret" , the victim feels degraded and abused, the father threatens further viol ence if she reveals their "secret"

Secondly, although much of the documentation comes from deprived, "low-class" families, this has more to do with how the act comes to light than any real evidence that it is more prevalent in these families.

Evidence from adult women who go for psychiatric treatment and reveal in the course of it a history of child abuse, indicates that it is just as common among "nice" middle class and MARCH WITH US TO WOMEN'S FESTIVAL AND RALLY launch a campaign in the local area which would take up the whole issue of women's working conditions in Hackney. professional families, but that they are less likely to come to the attention of social workers or the police.

Another gambit is to blame the mother. She, through illness, overwork or attempts at 1 independence, refuses to provide for her husband's sexual needs and therefore, it's only to be expected that he should turn elsewhere. The eldest daughter, especially, is a ready-made stand-in.

. The mother then turns a blind eye as the pressure is off her.

In fact the mother herself may also be the victim of violence and marital rape. She herself lives in fear and dare not or is unable to protect her daughter.

She • may be ill, constantly pregnant OF forced to work very long hours to provide for her family in a situation where the father does not work or spends all "his" money on himself.

But can the mother's actions honestly be seen as blameworthy? Is this another case of contributory negligence?

Underlying all the myths and scapegoating (and Sarah Nelson details many others) is a profoundly oppressive view of the family and the roles that should be acted out within it. It assumes a THE •Come and join us on June 5th. We'll be assembling at County Hall, Waterloo, from 10.30 and the march will start to move off at 11 and an ta Rattareas Park far tha "', aru yu tu masterata i ain iui Hackney's high percentage of sweat shops of non-unionised small clothing factories made the taks of organising the conference Some horrifying facts about incest are analysed in a new book. Gerry Byrne reports.

view of male sexuality, that its demands are imperative and must be satisfied, that somehow men are helpless to control its overwhelming force and therefore not responsible for their sexual actions.

Really the only "must" is a social one: men can and will get away with it, women must satisfy them and repress their own desires and aspirations.

Far from the social workers' myth of the "disorganised family" , with "disordered role allocation" the reality seems to be the opposite.

Incest takes place in families where the traditional roles are extremely rigid.

The men do not expect to do any work round the house and demand to have their every whim, sexual and otherwise, pandered to. The women are in a literal sense slaves, unable to escape the situation and powerless to fight back. The girls are trained from a very early age to follow in their mothers' joyless footsteps.

While incest is not "normal" and we should refuse to accord it even that implied toleration, it does seem to be the case that its difficult.

Yet there is a dire need for such a campaign in Hackney. For example, between 1975 and 1979 there was a loss of 10.3% of women's full-time jobs, compared with 1% for men.

Many Hackney women - are homeworkers and there * are 4,000 who are employed as contract cleaners, working less than 16 hours a week and so unprotected by employment laws.

Factory

They can be hired and fired at will and since 1971 pay and conditions have rapidly deteriorated. Nearly half the cleaners earn less than £1.05 an hour. Another large employer of women in Hackney is a toy factory called Lesneys. Women at Lesneys have no job security because they are emoployed on 3-monthly contracts.

The conference, which was attended by trade unionists and Labour Party members among others, began with an introduction to the situation of women workers in Hackney.

This was followed by workshops on a variety of areas from public employees and unemployed women to nursery facilities.

The afternoon took the form of action workshops where how to organise and fight against redundancies was discussed; the stand up and be counted campaign; positive action; YOPs schemes; and how to build for the national demonstration and festival.

It was felt that we needed to take our recom. mendations back into the local unions and Labour Council in order to make our demands realisable.

In fact, looking • back over the last few months, prior to the conference the most positive and encourgoino thino is that the LIAL LIL

----- pull-quotes -----

park maintenance. tries and the public sector.

leadership in the labour movement. he crisis of capitalism.

STRIKE BAC WITH THE TOR