Evening 'constitutional guaranteeing 'civil religious liberties';
ensuring the implementation of the MacBride Principles employment discrimination through the medium of the British government's Fair Emplovment Agency; by Britain calling for the 'cessation of all offensive military activity by all parties and organisaFinally, most revealingly maintaining its troops in by establishing a commision *to draw up proposals for Northern (sic)
Ireland police force'!
The real meaning the LCC's claim to being 'practical' is their continuing gressive role: to provide for the 'operational use of arms only (sic) for detensive purposes or protection of threatened munities.
Have Peter Hain and the LCC learnt nothing trom the vears or brilisi occupation? It was precisely inis argument — le need to protect a threaten- that the Labour government under Harold Wilson used 1969 when it 'temporarily' sent troops counties In be use place 'Violence and dissenHain SION LCC put something to be overcome by Britain. It is the conseBritish Cucuce presence. The protection threatened communities' guaranteed through the use contrary ope contrary, tionalist community needs its own sen-protechoi against such use.
The proposal for "phased withdrawal' during which time Britain that is British imperialism would seek to overcome ' dissension and violence' will not bring about withdrawal at all. 'Troops back to barracks' is recipe not for complete withdrawal but tor continuing British presence.
future government which LCC has in mind will use troops 'protect' 'threatened' communities Wilson government morin- differently from deed government coalition.
A Labour government up an imperialist state British perialism calously defends its domination over Ireland. Past Labour governments have slavishly implemented the edicts of British imperialist of interests on Ireland.
lo place any hope in a government as beting Irish self-determination against British imperialism would be to fly in the face not only of the experience ot pas List ur innocents proclaimed views:
country' of defence 'national security' over Zircon, his defence of the special relationship' with US imperialism, and so on Juture government took Six measures that contradicted this it would be because it was forced the the not gle itself through by labour movement. Centre be > future government more subject pressure of labour move ment mass action than the government, given Kinnock ment's relationship to the unions and Labour Party.
government would be additionally pressure NUM leadership and the Campaign MPs giving support to such mass action and struggle and ensuring that the ment paid a high political price for its pro-imperialist policies. the Moreover, getting rid of the through mobilising a united working class vote for Labour would be a huge boost for the self-confidence of the movement. or would open up greater possibilities of mass action in defence of the interests of the working class anc im- the oppressed, including on Ireland By mobilising mass action now we will be in the best position to deepen it under a Labour government tomorrow. Winning a policy commitment from ment is important only in the framework mobilising mass action today.
Whereas the focus of the Hain/LCC proposals is to concentrate the attention of the Labour moveself- today on what his future Labour government might do tomorrow, outside or unis mass action. perspective, the real fight will the labour move ment today is to campaign for the Labour leadership to break from their bi-partisan defence of British any military presenict chart a course to mobilising the labour movemen in opposition to it.
It would be a huge advance if the labour leaderthe ship were forced to take steps toward promoting mass action on aspects of current Parti policy opposition non-jury Diplock be strip searching Preventhe tion of Terrorism Act, etc.
By failing to address itself to this question of mass action now by failing to raise the issue of British withdrawal the Hain/LCC proposals do not enshrine the princi ple of Irish the determination — the cor nerstone of any genuinely of anti-imperialist policy on the Irish question.
and teachers' interests.
Socialist forces, a strategy to win.
employed, has ting them up for compulsory redundancy.
but them to back our struggle.
of reinforces and facilitates such action. form of contract.
Fficial action' of success campaign.
SWP's anti-bureaucratic oppositionism to the STA.
now political struggle that will suffer. to mobilise support for the fight to defend education Worker's judgement that 'the job of revolutionary socialists is to continue to challenge the rightward drift within the STA' is a pristine pure illustration of where the SWP's line leads. Of course this is not 'the job'. The real job is to put forward practical proposals to defeat the Tories and the employers. But rather than adopt such a class struggle policy, the sectarian abstainers of the SWP retreat into. anti-bureaucratic oppositionism: very hot demands to 'expose union leaders — including STA leaders — but nothing to say when it comes to mapping out, within today's conditions and balance of Nothing shows this more clearly than their position in the fight to defeat the ILEA's compulsory redeployment proposals. The Labour-led ILEA has adopted a budget which passes on Tory cuts to its workforce. It is cutting the total number of teachers 1300 secondary school teachers 'surplus' to requirements, and is attempting to force them from one school to another thereby setILTA decided to promote the broadest mass action by teachers to fight this attack and to build on such mass action to take on an offensive within the Labour Party. ILTA officers met with representatives of the union leadership and won a commitment from Such official backing is a valuable asset in our struggle to win over the labour movement, especially in the manual unions, and parents, and to isolate and • defeat the employers. It does not deflect from the basic task of mobilising teachers. On the contrary, it The 'concession' that in the event of nationally sanctioned action, ILTA leaders would discourage unofficial action was given in order to achieve it. It was a small price to pay to win official executive opposition to compulsory redeployment, and support for defending the jobs of all teachers on whateve But this agreement was the occasion for Socialist Worker's sectarian onslaught on ILTA and the STA. They counterpose an infantile glorification of 'unofthough even the SWP realise that a strategy based on unofficial action stands no chance So at the last meeting of the Inner London STA they came forward with a motion that we should call on the national executive to support an all-out strike in London against the redeployment and then, wher they refused, denounce them and start on a deten . Under the guise of militancy, the actually represents a gross capitulation which they attempt to cover up through their sectarian onslaught against The STA will not be deflected from its class Strianism. We will continue to mobilise teachers in the SWP's ultra-left defence of their interests and those of the workins class and the oppressed. We will continue to win o! ficial union backing for this and we will continue to struggle inside the broader labour movement Despite our differences we appeal to the SWP to remain within the STA. If their sectarian posturin leads them out of the STA, it will be this overal
Socialist Action 24 April 1987
----- pull-quotes -----
pledge that he would. 'die his