[and branches, district committees of the AUEW, trades…]

Scan page 6

and branches, district committees of the AUEW, trades councils, many Labour Parties and union branches are among the sponsors.

We have also tried with some success to link up the Irish community with the labour movement audience, by contacting county assocjations, clubs, Friends of Ireland groups, etc.

What are we hoping to get from the conference? Firstly, a useful and wide-ranging discussion, not just on plastic bullets. We'll have unique platform, which includes Sinn Fein, various black organisations, ex-soldiers, even some Greens from West Germany.

In lact, hall the conference is dealing with the social and political context of the plastic bullets issue. TO JUDGE by the response of the British media, the Kahan Commission's report on the Sabra and Chatila massacres is living proof of the vitality of Israel's demoADIA Liberals have fallen over themselves to praise Kahan, comparing it favourably to our own Franks report. They ignore the fact that Thatcher won a complete military victory in the Malvinas, with minimal opposition at home, whereas Begin's invasion, although a military victory in the strictest sense, has been a political nightmare.

Israel's official casualties are 460 dead and over 2,000 wounded. For a country of Israel's size this is the equivalent of 9,000 dead and 40,000 wounded for Britain.

Begin's war has also produced unprecedented dissent within the Zionist movement torpedoes. hours. itself. Divisions within Israel's ruling class were and are big, with perhaps a majority convinced that Sharon and Begin have, in laying siege to and entering Beirut, damaged Israel's interests, particularly its relations with the US.

Israel's attack on Lebanon, and its encirclement of an Arab capital, tended to, and in some ways was meant to, disrupt the US's relations with the Saudi and other regimes. It ran counter to Reagan's attempt to bring the Israeli state and these regimes closer together.

Nevertheless, the Arab regimes are not that unhappy about the results of Israel's action in Lebanon:

Kahan must be seen in the context of the contradictions of Israel's relations with the US - without which it could not survive economically or militarily.

Kahan is a creature of the Israeli Labour opposition, aided by the liberal faction in the Likud coalition. 'Peace Now' ', with its demonstration of 400,000 after the massacres; crystallised that opposition, just as it did when it seemed that the Camp David accords might be jettisoned by Begin and cover-up, it is a reasonable demand. the Herut right - and Israel's special relationship with the US along with it.

Kahan is in context as much of an establishment cover-up as Franks was. -It offers up a few sacrificial victims as the price of continued US support. But on the crucial question of Israel's intentions and motivations leading up to Sabra and Chatila, the report finds that "no intention existed on the part of anyone who acted on behalf of Israel to harm the non-combattant population"

Kahan 'forgets' the mass bombing of Beirut, Tyre and Sidon, with napalm, fragmentation, vacuum and phosphorus bombs. And it does not comment on Israel's relation with the Phalangists, nor its policy of using • the Phalange and Major Haddad's forces to rid the south of any Palestinian presence.

Even now, the defenceless Palestinian population in the south - who are mainly wómen and children, as the adult males have been interned in Israel's new concentation camps - are daily falling victim to Phalangist murder squads, as the Israelis stand by.

Kahan portrays Sabra and Chatila as the one blemish in an otherwise 'clean' war. And it picks out three people to take the rap - two military officers, one of them the Beirut divisional commander Brigadier Yaron, and defence minister Sharon - even though Begin and foreign minister Shamir clearly had early knowledge of the massacres.

• In naming Sharon, whom the Americans wished to see go anyway, Kahan has in effect legitimised the whole war, and the Zionist state that waged that war.

The irony is that Sharon still retains his position in the Cabinet, and as an adviser noted, his sights are in any case set higher than the defence ministry. He is after Begin's job next, and that is perhaps a fitting epitaph to the Kahan report.

Scan page 7

Socialist Organiser no.120 February 17 1983 Page they retrain (whatever for, have to face enforced econwith the economy in its omic independence, might present state?) eventually irresponsibly choose. to women will be 'encour- keep on working during aged' , ie forced, to support their marriages and refuse themselves without any to be full time housewives; help from their ex- but in general the verdict husbands. has been that if we believe This particular change has in equality, we cannot met with widespread app- expect men to provide liferoval. A few dissenting long mealtickets. voices have pointed out that And of course, feminists women, knowing they may do believe in women's obstacle race involving proposals, the Equa industrial tribunals and Opportunities Commissio bewildering criteria, ACAS and the TUC have focusser and the Central Arbitra- on the fact that it sees thr tion Committee, hundreds principle of "equal pay fo of pounds in legal expenses work of equal value" not a: and little likelihood of a starting point but as a las THE LAW Commission, whose function is to see that legislation is kept up to date, recently recommended that the divorce law should he reformed, and a bill will be presented in this Parliamentary session.

Although the proposals contained in the bill seriously undermine the financial position of women, the Labour Party does not intend to oppose it.

Under the present law, you have to be married for three years before seeking divorce by mutual consent. In the settlement, the judge tries to leave both parties in the same position financially as if the marriage had not been terminated: what this means in practice is that men ahve some obligation to support their exwives, as well as to maintain their children.

The new proposals will allow divorce petitions after one year, something which most people will welcome. However, their main effect is to deprive women of their right to maintenance.

Although they may get transitional payments while NORMAN Tebbit's anti-union legislation and Green Paper have attracted a great deal of publicity and rhetoric from union leaders.

But fewer workers will be aware that Tebbit's laugh-. ably mis-named "Department of Employment' is The government's proposals.

1) Equal pay claims to be made to industrial tribunals (as at present).

2) Advisory Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) to attempt conciliation (as at present).

3) If conciliation fails, case to go to tribunal. It based on like work and fails because of differences of practical importance, tribunal to consider whether equal value claim should be pursued.

4) If job evaluation scheme has been carried out, present procedure would continue unless the tribunal was not satisfied with the validity of the scheme.

5) Case to go to a prehearing assessment to check that claim is reasonEquality... but who pushes the pram? also pressing through proposals for amending the Equal Pay Act.

This follows a ruling in the European Court that existing provisions for equal value claims -requiring them to be based upon job evaluation exercises — are too restrictive able and that there is no obvious genuine material difference between the two cases. If the case is found to be unlikely to succeed the tribunal can warn the applicant that she could face costs if she persists with the case.

6) Case goes back to the tribunal which will recommend the parties to seek assistance of ACAS to establish the value of the two jobs through a job evaluation study of the two jobs concerned plus as many others as the parties consider necessary. Time limit (possibly six months extendable to nine), within which parties must report to the tribunal 'whether they have made progress in assessing the value of the job"

7) If ACAS finds jobs of Lab to meet section 119 of EEC Treaty of Rome.

Tebbit however is proposing not new legislation but a consultative draft order which will be simply put to Parliament for approval or rejection -thus avoiding full debate and the possibility of equal value, it is hoped that the employer will implement the results voluntarily.

8) If parties not able to agree about the value of the jobs, case goes back to tribunal to decide whether jobs are of equal value.

9) If parties don't agree on the introduction of a job evaluation study, or the study is prevented from being carried out, the parties can refer the case back to the tribunal.

10) The tribunal can refer the case to an Independent Assessor chosen from a panel of names prepared in conjunction with ACAS and/or the Central Arbitration Committee. The tribunal will make a decision based on the assessor's report: to equality and independence from men. The trouble is, it hasn't yet arrived.

The ex-wife will be discriminated against in the labour market (even without four million unemployed, her lack of skills and experience make her unattractive to employers), restricted by the lack of child care facilities and ghettoised, supposing she can get a job at all, in one of the low-pay areas where women workers are concentrated.

In other words, the Tories expect women to start supporting themselves in an economy where femaleness equals an instant disadvantage. They want to get us out of the home not by providing increased opportunities but by pulling the rug from under us.

We will have to accept any shitty job we can get, and our standard of living will inevitably fall, in some cases to the level of abject poverty. amendment.

The result would be a baffling and timewasting And perhaps there is more to it than that. 'Behind the rhetoric of sex equality, if you look closely, there is an ideological as well as an economic attack on women. Men's rights, and the claims of the family, are actually being strengthen in these proposals.

The Law commission admits that one major reason for the reform is to make remarriage easier for men. At present they are deterred from it by crippling alimony payments (so we are told; in fact the average alimony payment is rather low, and many men default).

Women, too, will find remarriage tempting, since achieving equal pay.

In criticising Tebbit': their financial position after divorce will be precarious. So although in this imperfect world the family sometimes breaks down, by making men less responsible and women less privileged, you can quietly shore it up, and present this coercion as increased freedom of choice.

It is also clear that husbands will now be able to intimidate their wives with the threat of divorce and poverty. Women's refuges know already that many women are trapped in violent relationships by economic dependence: now many more women are many more marriages will be tainted with this blackmail. The net result: more power to men, more power resort.

They point out that the whole set-up is in the first instance voluntary, leaving employers the chance of endless delays. The only deadlines that apply act against the claimant rather than the employer.

They call for the Central Arbitration Committee and not industrial tribunals to conduct "equal value" cases.

Past experience of such bodies suggest that women workers can expect little improvement whichever committee or tribunal takes the final decision.

With employers seeking every possible avenue to squeeze added exploitation from the workforce, it will only be through organisation and action among women on the shop floor that real gains can be made in equal pay, and the generally low rates of women's pay - only 74% of male hourly earnings -can be raised.

Union leaders however are attempting to divert attention and discussion in precisely the opposite direction - bringing fresh income and jobs for the legal profession and those who sit on stooge tribunals, but no real benefit to somen workers. to the family.

Finally, seasoned campaigners cannot overlook the presence in this crusade for reform of Leo Abse, the sinister advocate of father's rights who will champion the bill in the Commons. Mr Abse, a notable anti-feminist, must be hoping that women will be driven by lack of money and resources to hand over custody of their children without a fight.

Confusion

After all, with remarnage made easier, men will have little trouble getting a new wife and mother to do the work of looking after their children.

Perhaps the most appalling thing revealed by these proposals is the confusion of the Left. Joan Lestor, who was to have been a sponsor along with Mr Abse, withdrew her support on the grounds that the law would affect the weifare of children. (The implication is that Ms Lestor fears an upsurge in the number of mothers deserting their children for waged work: if that isn't what she means, she had better spell it out!!

Nevertheless the Labou Party welcomes in principle the idea that women should lose their right to naintenance. Only a hardened cynic would drear of asking why; in that case, Labour is not demanding an end to all the other laws which enforce female dependence, such as the tax laws, the Social Security Cohabitation rule and the Nationality Act.

Ordinary women, for whom sex equality has come under successive governments to look more and more like a sick joke. will wonder what world Joan Lestor and the Labour establishment are living in. Ultimately, of course feminists and socialists must work towards women's independence from men and their full participation it the economy (suitably restructured so botn sexes can share domestic work and childcare!)

In the short term. borever, we must defend whas rights we have, and sor accept piecemeal changes that worsen our posicace.

Debox CamertE

Scan page 8

TOMORROW my 3-day doctor's note runs out, so I'll have to sit in my office again and count the hours until it's time to go home. Today I simply must take some paper to a friendly printer's, pick up some illegally bought printing blocks and make arrangements with a man who agreed to have a "postbox" for our bulletin at his home, then in the afternoon get in touch with the editors of Fighting Solidarnosc because there is quite a lot of information for them again.

At 7.40 I catch a tram to collect my Fiat 125 from the mechanic's; it started to play up yesterday and I need it for today. A mere 5,000 Ziotys (two-thirds of month's salary for changing a cog in the gear box, and then on to the petrol station. Ten litres of "yellow" (dearer) petrol, topped up with "blue" (Cheaper).

I drive along Powstancow Slaskich Street, glancing in the mirror now and then, but there's no-one following me.

A new housing estate, a large block of flats. I park further down the toad, take two travelling bags and dive into the cellars. I know my way by heart: three lots of stairs to the left, turn right, and it's the second lock-up celloar.

Padlock

The padlock has stuck, it's still dark, but I don't want to turn on the light. The stock of paper is getting low. Only a week ago there were 35 reams. I fill the bags with 14 packets of paper, choosing the ones that aren't torn. Now we're down to grade 4 typing paper. Wer could do with the duplicating kind. I'll have to ask Wojtek. Maybe he has some stock left. Wojtek was nominally in charge of printing supplies, but in practice did everything: organised "postboxes", distributed leaflets, delivered letters, and even did the printing when necessary. He ought to have some paper.

The padlock is on, the bags are full, but now there's someone shufiling down the stairs. I tell myself that I should have put the light on. I pretend that I live in this block and that bags onto the back seat and the Fiat sinks with a groan.

After a moment I get my breath back and drive off at top speed. In 15 minutes I'm almost at the "postbox" designated by the printers. I park round the corner. A detached house - this is it. I ring the bell in the agreed way, and an elderly woman opens the door. 'Is Mr Piotrowski in? I've come to sand down the floors". I give the password. 'I don't know any. thing about that; my son-inlaw will be back tomorrow evening" - and the frightened woman shuts the door in my face. I curse through clenched teeth; Piotrowski has forgotten to tell his family the password. I'II have to tear him off a strip. ness you brought them here, because Piotrowski brings us paper only when he feels like it," complain the printers.

'Last week Lofty brought us three reams from work himself and saved our bacon, so now we don't have to worry for another three weeks." I want to leave, but the printers keep giving me more information for the editors. I tell them to write down everything they knowI can't memorise who got RUsed internetails by SB (secret police), the suggestions and requests for future issues.

I draw their attention to the fingerprints on some of the copies of Fighting

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

Tony Greenstein looks at the Kahan report

maintenance payments Debbie Cameron for resistance