Councils can't live with thi Tories!

Scan page 6

PAULA WATSON of Westminster South CLP continues the discussion on Labour councils, the unions and the government.

TROOPS OUT NOW!

THE appalling chaos and confusion on the Left, particularly in London, suggests that the strategy adopted over the last few years has been misguided.

Much of the energy of left activists since 1980 has been directed towards securing the return in local elections of approved left candidates, to gain control of borough and metropolitan councils.

Some success was achieved, particularly in the GLC elections, but so far the results of all this effort have been singularly disappointing. The Labour members of the GLC reneged on most of their manifesto commitments on fares, housing and school meals. Time after time they preferred compromise to confrontation with the Tory government.

Now, we have the unedifying spectacle of ILEA locked in combat with the NUT over compulsory redeployment of teachers and finally, to add a grotesque touch of farce, the absurd invitation to the Queen to open the Thames barrier. So much for all the high republican sentiments expressed at the time of the royal wedding.

Elsewhere in London the scene is similar. Both Lambeth and Southwark councils have recently been in dispute with NALGO residential workers. Brent council is involved in two disputes with its own employees.

Everywhere, when faced by the Tory demands for retrenchment, Labour councils have cut services and put up the rates, in some cases quite substantially. Islington's rates have risen by 30%, Brent's by 20%.

Discreet cuts have been made to balance the budget and some Labour councils have even connived at a measure of privatisation. Next year the government is demanding even more draconian cuts and is backing this up with rate capping, which will come into force in eight months time.

Record The past record suggests that most Labour councils, after a show of breast-beating and brow-clutching, will eventually acquiesce and we shall be treated yet again to the spectacle of Labour representatives administering Tory policy.

This unhappy picture shows that the strategy of trying to capture local councils for the left was not thought out with sufficient care.

The best generals are those rambaian for Gay Rights In I Eat :

JI MOTORE I in Fin I5 1170] who can put themselves into the enemy's position and foresee what action he will take. Surely it did not need a political Einstein to anticipate that the Tory government would attempt to discredit Labour-controlled councils by forcing them into a position where, in order to stay in office, they would either have to make cuts or raise rates?

Consequently, the left should have realised that to retain credibility, its councillors would only be able to stay in office for a comparatively short time. As soon as the government, by manipulation of the rate support grant, made the maintenance of services impossible without rate increases, the left counciliors should have taken a firm stand on the policy of no cuts, no rate rises and no rent increases.

Where the left was in control, this would have meant either majority opposition or consistently voting against any cuts, leading to an eventual confrontation with the government.

Where the left was in a minority on a Labour controlled councils, the result would have been a split, with the right joining with the Tories.

If such a policy had been followed a number of useful gains would have been nade. The Labour right would have been flushed out and shown up for what it is, a cats-paw for capitalism.

Democratically

The electorate would have learned, first, that socialists, though democratically elected, cannot implement their policies in a capitalist environment and under a capitalist national government, and secondly, that capitalism is incompatible with democracy.

In other words the left should have realised that councils could be used as a platform for their policies and views, but that under present circumstances, with a reactionary government in office, they cannot successfully run local authorities for long, unless they are prepared to compromise to such an extent as to destroy their credibility.

To be fair, many Labour councillors would argue that they hung on to office in the hope that Labour would win the next election and that a Labour government would come to their rescue.

Now that possibility has gone, activists must insist that the time for compromise is over. From this moment on all left councillors must take a firm stand on a policy of non cooperation with the Tory government.

Let the Tories do their own dirty work, whether this be through government appointed commissioners, Tory minorities or a coalition of Tories and Labour traitors.

Let us make sure that the Association of London Authorities is not used as a talking shop *hile behind the scenes, the Labour councils quietly surren:: tempere to star in office.

ITE 00 5t #2222:1 BADGE Ise i joe only may lo defers In Toes portramess. a up- sriggie. Nearly all its sometime athes have abandoned the =*..ts to ensure the comDimen: of future Labour goveratients to Party policies. They argue that the should turn its attention solely BM Box 5355, London WCIN 3XX

Scan page 7

160 January 5 1984 Page ational news