THE TORIES assault on local government and the cities is moving into top. gear. JOHN ROSS answers five key questions on why the Metropolitan and the GLC have to be defended.
Why are the Metropolitan Couneils and the GLCE Tories abolishing Because the Tories are increasingly unable to win elections in the cities. In 1963 for example the Conservative government old Labour controlled London County Council. The aim was to break Labour's control by bringing in the controlled OULCI boroughs.
But even the suburbs have been increasingly turning against the Tory By London every Council.
Tory electoral support in the big cities has been progressively collapsing for thirty years now. It you take. general elections then Tor election the fory os feliby 29 post-war peak of 1955 and the per cent in Glasgow, 24 per cent in Liverpool, 20 per cent in Manchester, 20 per cent in Edinburgh, 14 per cent in Sheffield, and 5 per cent in London.
The Tories are increasingly unable to win any popular support for their policies in the big cities. risk that the Metropolitan Councils and the GLC would become permanent bastions of opposition to the Conservative Party and Conservative governments.
Unable to win democratic support for her policies in the cities I hatcher therefore decided to step in and smash the Metropolitan authorities.
But if the Conservative decline in the big cities had been did Thatcher decide to act die wiiy when she did?
Because of the policies the Tories aim to implement if they win their struggle to destroy local democracy.
Since the mid-1970s both Tory and Labour governments have been putting a tremendous squeeze on local government spending. shame it was the Labour government under Dennis Healey, Callaghan and Harold Wilson which started the attack on the cities. cher followed where the last Labour government led Between 1975 and 1983 local authority spending fell from 15.9 to 12.8 per cent of Gross Domestic Product. Local government employment has been cut by 100,000 since 1979. 1he amount of local government expenditure financed by central government has fallen from 60 to 50 per cent in the same time.
But even these cuts are only the Not what the government waltes. Thatcher Lawson demanding local ding cuts of between 3 per cent and 12 per cent. Up to 300,000 jobs will be - 100,000 going in education alone.
Popular cheap fare policies such aorkshire will be totally eliminated th those in London will be horaries. meals wheels and other services.
But isn't the government in reality just eliminating which have been putting the rates up to ridiculously high levels?
There is no doubt that some Labour ment attacks by putting up the rates. This is a short sighted and extremely divisive policy which should resisted.
But the argument that it is Labour councils which are responsible rate increases is a straightforward lie which should be exposed.
The reason for the huge increase in rates is the cutbacks made by the Councils big abolished the London controlled Metropolitan between. the They face the prolonged МЕНАН 10118 B 93 13 11 8 ВІВЦЯ 18 BAS NA I N not What happens in the big cities is going to affect just the trade unions or even just the labour movement — although the effect is going to be concentrated there Old people are going to have their cut to pieces The entire hit by the cutbacks in services such as transport. Education will deteriorate. Women are going to tace a greate risk of sexual attacks because of the cerenoranoe un services transport, street lighting etc. Black people are going to be attacked even more by the police patrols that will be stepped up Small traders will be sharply affected by the overall decline in the cities.
has the opportunity around the issue of the cities to build one of the broadest and most needed alliance of forces it has ever created To defeat Thatcher's proposals needs first industrial action and mass demonstrations and protests. It also needs a policy of complete non co operation with the proposals and a solid aliance between the local coun.
and the public sector unions. opportunity is giving tremendous defeat in the May local government elections.
But if Labour does lead the campaign to defend the cities it will clearly show the labour movement it is the vanguard force fighting for the rights of the working class and all the op pressed in society. And also that it is the labour movement, and not Thatcher, that is the fighter for democracy and civil liberties in Britain.
If that campaign is carried out by Labour then not only can services and democrac be defended but Thatcher can suffer a crushing elec toral defeat in the cities. If the Con.
city base is thoroughly destroyed it will be extremely hard for them ever to recover from that blow. It could begin to tip the relation of political forces in society.
The stakes really are that high.