[Johnny Byrne reviews Whose Law and Order? at…]

Scan page 9

Johnny Byrne reviews Whose Law and Order? at the first eviction in which the new Criminal Law Act was.used Since its formation in 1974 the Campaign Against a Criminal Trespass Law (CACTL) has attempted to raise within the labour movement and within squatters' organisations the issue of occupation against closures.

Over the last period Greeting for police the first eviction CACTL's correct orientation to class has built up an important comes at a particularly signiflist of affiliations including 150 icant time when the rights to trade union regions, districts occupy, strike and picket are and branches including all 4 coming under increasing fire AUEW sections and North West from the state (police violence Region TUC), 70 trades and reactionary judges), from councils, 30 Labour Parties, the the Tories (with their promises NUS and 60 students unions, to smash the most fundamental and a large number of political, of union rights) and from the legal, housing and community leadership of both the Labour Party and the trade unions (with organisations.

ON The production of this pam- the 'Concordat' and all manner of restrictive 'codes of conduct').

In this sharpening situation CACTL has extended its brief beyond occupations to take in attacks on the right to strike, to picket, to black goods and to demonstrate.

In doing so the campaign provides an invaluable guide to the development of the attacks by the state and from the right wing.

But the pamphlet entirely fails to take up the role of the trade union bureaucrats in masterminding the deals with capitalism which undermine trade union rights just as surely as any Act of Parliament.

Whose Law and Order? gives a comprehensive analysis of the state's build-up towards a confrontation with the unions.

It shows clearly that in order to win that clash the state is already whittling away at the right to picket, strike, occupy and demonstrate.

Survey

The pamphlet includes a chronological survey of developments over the last nine yearsthough again the role of the bureaucracy is not brought out.

For example, under 1978: "Gamers strike beginspolice limit pickets to six"

There is no mention here of the collaboration of TGWU Region 1 officials who proposed, engineered and still defend the whole deal!

In stressing the point that CACTL fails to take account of the role of the present working class leadership I am not simpy making some minor carping criticism.

It is the most important political lesson to be drawn from the whole fight to defend basic rights.

MacDonald "Rough Justice'.

Unlike some organisations waging campaigns within the labour movement, CACTL has a clear position on the militancy of the working class.

The willingness of workers to fight comes over strongly in much of the pamphlet.

All the more reason then to raise the crucial question of the kind of leadership the working class has.

CACTL itself has recently come under attack from the TUC leadership at the highest level (see SP 134) for trying to organise regional conferences on the attack on basic union rights.

Whose Law and Order? was written at the time that Callaghan and the TUC were formulating the 'Concordat' , the so-called "Better Way" which sought to re estabish the labour bureaucracy's control over the rank-and-file after the lorry drivers' and public sector workers' strikes.

The actual terms of the government/TUC 'codes of conduct mirrored accurately proposals put by the police.

As such, in the General Election the working class was presented with a "choice" between an attack by Labour's grovelling reformist leadership, arm in arm with TUC bureaucrats, or by the Tories themselves.

Despite this, Whose Law and Order? is noticeably vague on the implications:

"The advantages of such a code are obvious--it would be the unions rather than the state which would have to enforce it.

"The importance of the precedent which would thus be established is a matter which has not only been taken up by many within the movement but also by the Judge hearing the United Biscuits case against the lorry driver picket. leadership provides the buliets, while the state finally pulls the trigger. But CACTL does not attempt to draw any such conclusions.

Instead it pulls back from facing the vital question of Nowhere in the pamphlet, for example, is there a call for strike committees to retain absolute control over picketing.

Fighting for workers control means challenging all those in the leadership of the labour movement who refuse to go all-out to defend basic union rights.

We have no political control over the Tories, the police or the judiciary, but we do have the duty to take up a fight within the Labour Party and the unions to direct towards a revolutionary perspective which will actually show a way forward to defend the rights to strike, picket, demonstrate, black goods and occupy.

Occupation

Such a programme mușt be based on tactics of occupation linked to strike action, with work sharing on full pay to combat . redundancies and sackings, with workers' defence squads set up to defend the picket line, and with an end to all court interference in union affairs.

We urge readers of Socialist Press to get copies of Whose Law and Order?, to support affiliations to CACTL and to fight against Len Murray's attempts to sabotage the organisation of regional TUC conferences on occupations and strikes.

The booklet is an important compendium of developments over the last period; but it is in the failure to tackle the question, of the role of the present union leadership that it betrays its lack of perspective for the sharp struggles that lie immediately ahead.

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

DEC PHOTO: Andrew Wiard, Report

phlet, Whose Law and Order? the organisations of the working