HOUNSLOW HOSPITAL: Has lesson been learned?

Scan page 8

Mass vicket in subport of the Hounslow occupation Rally-Caxton House, St John's Way, London N19-youth. akers, film and disco. Tickets 50p (provinces) £1 (London). re details (including transport) from National Secretary, SYL, EGA supporters-WSL initiative led to work-in Dear Ed You carried Hospita a numb 1) The began follower and wa: the rai appear ence b and a 'v had the sion u went to (not cr was tak mittee: wиLиp1 Noveml ment c the M proceec departn before actions.

campai! INHS. I which i cuts as Sucl ¡particul land the been wi your equally nesses a 14 mor 'mere f tently c respons Hounskı within current to solv class lit services for act within and lab i) "Let ones? • roraina.

I ULCIVO' some i we hav fight confine MPs.

ii) Uni never f London W3 litor, r issue of December 6 an article on Hounslow I which is inaccurate in er of respects:

TLA ...... sashinha ine occupaton which on October 6, 1977 d an 8 month 'work-in' $ begun as a response to id of that date. You confused as to the differetween an 'occupation' vork-in' "he 10 NALGO members eir appeals against expulpheld long before you • press.

The initiative to begin antinue) the occupation ‹en by the defence com• which then became the tinn committoo The meeting on 3 ber did produce an agreeon a joint delegation to inister which is being led with. The Xray nent was functioning we left due to our Ne do not run a national gn against cuts in the Ne founded 'Fightback' will continue to oppose it has in the past. h errors are bad enough, larly as the occupation • events preceding it have ell documented. However political criticisms are unfounded, Our weakare categorized as:

More protest politics'. . A nth occupation is hardly protest'! We have consis:ampaigned for a political ie to cutbacks, locating ow's closure firmly the context of the : crisis and the attempts e it by cutting working ving standards and social 3, and stressing the need tive opposition to cuts the whole trade union our movement.

Spawning of illusions in ft Labour MPs. Which The fact is that while we ~ limitar sunnort from •LOU Зирны.

UPs (which we welcomed) e never suggested that the against cuts should be ed to Parliament or led by ion bureaucrats. We have placed ultimate reliance in article in Socialist Press union leaderships or the TUC, and have criticized them for their general lack of will to lead a fight against cuts. We believe in escorting rank and file pressure on leaderships to call action-this was successful when thousands of hospital workers in London struck on October 12, 1977 following the raid on Hounslow.

However, to extend the definition of bureaucrat to the secretaries of GLATC and SERTUC (F. Stiller and J. Dromey) is politically meaningless and quite disgraceful in view of the consistent support which these two organisations and their secretaries in particular gave to the occupation.

3) Refusal to campaign for indefinite strike action.

We have consistently attempted to promote action of all kinds against cuts, and have always stressed the need for stronger and wider trade union action.

A bigger movement against cuts is necessary before such action can be initiated on a realistic basis, and we believe that our occupation and campaign has done something towards that end.

To attribute the failure to re-open Hounsi ow •to our "refusal' to call for indefinite strike action is nonsense, and indicates the nature of the twilight world of ultra-left impotence inhabited by Socialist Press.

Our campaign of course had many weaknesses, and we would have welcomed informed criticism from any quarter. Unfortunately, your innacurate and shallow article has done nothing to pinpoint those weaknesses or promote a greater understanding of how to fight CUtS.

We will shortly be producing our assessment of the campaign which may perhaps elicit a more constructive reply from you.

Meanwhile I trust you will print this letter which will go some way towards setting the record straight.

Yours fraternally, Pete Rowlands Secretary, Hounslow Trades Council on behalf of Hounslow Hospital Occupation Committee.

come WE REPLY:

Brother Rowlands' letter contains a few justified criticisms of our article, combined with some rather more important political mistakes of his own.

Since the Hounslow workin and occupation has played an important role in the development of the struggle against the cuts it is worth looking at the issues raised.

Firstly we apologise that some careless sub editing of our original article obliterated the distinction between the occupation and the original work-in, and abbreviated the account of the defence committee's decision to launch the work-in.

As for the allegation that some of our information was outdated, we can only point out that this information came to Socialist Press from a centrai and influential member of the Hounslow Occupation Commit186 1178 ady lose natos worl press (four days before SP 128 was issued).

However, Brother Rowlands fifth point seems to be based on a misreading of our article which stated clearly that:

"Hounslow Hospital became a national focal point of the fight against hospital closures and cuts in health expenditure.

Assisted by Hounsiow Trades Council, the Occupation Committee was a force in creating the Fightback organisation ...

Socialist Press however confesses itself guilty of two minor errors of terminology, and of receiving outdated information from Occupation Committee leaders. We apologise.

But then Brother Rowlands goes on to take us to task for the political content of our article. And on this score we have no apology to make.

Brother Rowlands asserts that "a 14-month occupation is hardly a 'mere protest'!" Bureaucrat-Dromey He goes on to claim to have "consistently campaigned for a political response to the cutbacks" • and to have stressed "the need for active opposition to cuts...

What was this "political response" and "active opposition"? Does Brother Rowlands mean that the Committee campaigned for London wide strike action in the health unions in support of their fight? He evades the point completely.

In fact that demand, raised by WSL members, was consistently rejected by the Occupation Committee.

Yet without such a turn outwards from the Hounslow hospital, demanding that the rest of the London labour movement land in particular the health service unions) take concrete action against the cuts, the militant and determined occupation was bound to become little more than an SAVI 31-- ..÷ isolated-though militantdrotest action -Brother Rowlands asks us to specify which 'left' Labour MPs were feted by the Committee.

should need no reminding.

Russell Kerr MP in particular was given rapt attention and subjected to no serious demands whatever by the Occupation Committee-white moves by WSL members to expose the hollowness of Kerr's "support" dres Aria panit aroused Hint campayn aruustu nu more than irritation and embarrassment from Brother Rowlands and other Committee leaders.

No demands Far from suggesting that the struggle should be confined to Parliament, the Occupation Committee put forward no demands that left' MPs like Kerr actually conduct any fight in Parliament against the cuts and the policies of the Lib-Lab And Brother Rowlands' enthusiastic defence of 'left' bureaucrat Jack Dromey makes it hard to believe that he is describing the. same person whose demagogy and steadfast refusal to expose the APEX and TGWU officials created the necessary confusion to allow the betrayal of the Grunwick strike; the same person who, despite his speeches, as Secretary of the South East Region TUC has not even consistently mobilised himself in support of the Garners strike; the same person who now as full-time official of ACTSS has proved himself a bureaucrat in every sense of the term.' Not blamed Of course our article did not blame the failure to win the reopening of the Hounslow on the Occupation Committee's un. doubted refusal to call for indefinite supporting strike acion: to make sucn a cnaros would stand the whole issue on its head.

Reactionary

Rather the failure of the Committee to grasp the importance of this policy flowed from their political inability to under stand the stubborn determination of the Labour leadershipBenn and Hart included-to press ahead with their reaction. ary attacks on the working class, It is these attacks which make it necessarv to prepare the workers' movement to respond with equal determination.

The blame for the closure of the Hounslow rests squarely on the shoulders of. the Labour government, those lefts' that assist it to remain in office, and those public sector union officials who have consistently refused to lift a finger to prevent the cuts taking place.

It was the dead weight of those bureaucrats which was decisive in isolating the Mounslow occupation.

Unfortunate

• As for Brother Rowlands' concluding round of. inappro priate insults against Socialist Press, they can only be regarded as unfortunate and ill informed.

WSL members have played an extremely influential role in struggles against the cuts. Two examples should confirm the point.

It was our members that first took up the fight for the occupation of the Elizabeth Garrett Anderson hospital-now still open as a result of that initiative and the obvious willingness of other sections of health workers to take supporting strike action.

We have also been at the forefront of the fight to build the Committee of London Area Shop Stewards in the Health Service (CLASH), which in turn played a key role in fighting for London wide supporting strike action after management ransacked the Hounslow.

Assessment

We would recommend Brother Rowlands consult our booklot How to Fight the Cuts and back numbers of Socialist Press for fuller details of the impact our small movement has been able to have on the struggle against the cuts, and now the fight on low pay in the public sector.

We look forward to seeing the Hounslow Committee's written assossment of thet important experience.

We believe that if the political lessons of that exper ience are learned then future struggies against hospital closure. will start from a more solid foundation.

Scan page 9

ames up A further example of repreșsion in the so called Irish 'Free State' came last December with the end of the marathon Cork-Dublin mail train robbery trial At a cost of over £1 Wedn lay 7t y 1979 sruai

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

pome people di on Sat. 24 February

We recently received Pete Rowlands, Secret Council, criticising our 128.

not being into DISCOS-FILMS SOCIALISM- AND YOUTH! Dartmouth Park Hill, London NW5 1HR. the following letter from iry of Hounslow Trades

PHOTO: Derek Speirs, IFL Communist to AREA HEALTH