NUPE turns sharp right

Scan page 15

of the National Economic Assessment. Is it an incomes policy or is it not an incomes policy? I will tell you what NUPE sees it as. It is an attack on unemployment in this society and an attack on the low pay of our members"

The pay policy debate on Tuesday was a walkover for a well organised platform. The left was weak and disorganised, and most seemed oblivious to the issues involved, although the timing of the NUPE conference clearly made its decision crucial for the immediate adoption of a new social contract should a Labour government be elected on June 9.

Opposition

Composite resolution A, moved by Socialist Workers' Party (SWP) member Alan Walter from Camden, called for "total opposition to any form of wage restraint, incomes policy, or productivity scheme, whether introduced by the Tory, SDP, Liberal or Labour Parties" Unfortunately it went on to make a number of demands about the conduct of a future wages struggle, such as a common review date and a united struggle of the public sector. Although correct and important, these were completely subordinate to the main issue of wage restraint.

Composite A was counterposed to an executive statement on pay policy which took no position either way on wage restraint, and a resolution from the Stafford branch calling for a statutory incomes policy.

The major issues involved did The Communist Party openly supported the executive statement (and this was reflected in the uncritical report in Tuesday's Morning Star). Only one delegate, Anna Lunts from Manchester NHS, a Socialist Organiser supporter, spoke on the National Economic Assessment and called for specific rejection of it along with all forms of wage controls.

Bickerstaffe could not have had an easier ride. In his summing up Alan Walter failed again to mention wage controls or the National Economic Assessment.

The platform successfully called for rejection of both composite A and the Stafford resolution, and acceptance of the executive statement.

This left the conference with no policy on wage controls except Bickerstaffe's unchallenged statement the previous day supporting the National Economic Assessment - which will be used in the event of a Labour government to support a social contract Mark II.

Although the SWP, which had the biggest group of delegates on the left, fell into the trap because they. regard the struggle within the Labour Party as irrelevant and direct themselves ever more to minimal 'rank-and-file'-ism, all this was consistent with the general mood of the conference, which was not to take up the Labour Party or a future Labour government, but simply to have an anti-Tory jamboree.

Conference opened with long militant speeches ridiculing Thatcher and Thatcherism from assistant general secretary Tom Sawyer and from Rodney Bickerstaffe, without a word about why ThatRodney Bickerstaffe cher has been able to impose policies so effectively. Lal Party general secretary Jim M mer was brought in to make a itant speech. The overwhelr mood of the delegates, inclu the Labour Left, was to go a with the unitv bandwagon an more. cas. cooperate with the platforn order to 'win the election'.

This could have been chall ed in the wages policy deba the implications of what was pening had been forcefully pr ed out. The sharpest reflectio the mood for sinking differe was the success of the leader in getting the withdrawal of motion condemning the w hunt in the Labour. Party favour of an anti-Tory staten by the executive.

Section

The key section of the motion was as follows: "We urge this year's delegation to the Labour Party conference to vote in National Executive Committee elections first for those candidates who support NUPE's main policies, including opposition to ex: her bour ortimilning ding long id to in lengte if hapointin of nces •ship the ritch i in nent pulsions from the Labour Party under the register. We also ask that our member of the NEC opposes any expulsions, and supports the reinstatement of any member. Conference defends the traditional right of Party members to belong to pressure groups within the Party, and considers that such groups. should no longer be subject to arbitrary powers of the Party's National Executive Committee"

The Labour left went along with the withdrawal of this motion, as did Militant. Speech after speech justified the withdrawal of the motion. In the words of one delegate, "We have to drop this resolution in order to win the The daily bulletin of the NUPE Broad Left, heavily dominated by the Communist Party, commented that this action "confirms the tactical sense of the comrades in the Labour Party debate in remitting their resolution in order to avoid what would have been an acrimonious debate in the election run-up"

The unity mood even overtook the debate on last year's assing time when one motion in the debate revealed that NUPE has bought shares in Grand Metropolitan, one of the major contractors involved. The resolution said the following: 'This conference is appalled that NUPE's funds are invested in private service companies such as Grand Metropolitan and calls for the immediate and complete withdrawal of union investment in any company or institution that is in any way connected with the attempted privatisation of local authority services"

Although the platform immediately pledged to sell the shares, they actually defended their decision to buy them on the basis that they had been able to make a successful intervention into the share holders' meeting.

In the course of the debate it was noted that 50,000 women have lost their jobs in the devastation of the school meals service, inevitably draws Britain into the centre of any future conflict" was rejected on the advice of the platform.

Manchester delegate Anna Lunts said: 'NATO is not just a military alliance. It is a political alliance developed in the cold war Whils NATO, Britain is tied to an alliance which is prepared to use nuclear weapons" . The right wing opposed with the argument that the Labour Party will be fighting the election on the basis of continued membership of NATO. "We should not get unilateral nuclear disarmament and NATO mixed up". The EC opposed the amendment with the argument that it was "divisive at this time"

There was a useful debate on Ireland, around a successtul motion, supported by the executive, to "continue to exert pressure for the repeal of the Prevention of Terrorism Act and in particular to highlight the deplorable use of the Act on NUPE members and other trade unionists in the course of their union duties"

The brevity of the conference - effectively two days - led to important issues like women's oppression and racism being left off the agenda. The conference ended as it began, with calls for unity around the election and for a Labour victory on June 9. Litt1e, nowever, nau deen saia as to 1~ Laterarina had hane mid an ta what should be done on June 10 or after.

Advertisement

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

to wage controls"