Workers Socialist League

Socialist Press, Trotskyism Today and the Trotskyist International Liaison Committee, 1975–1984

[As careerist SDLP politicians debate with Tory Butcher…]

Socialist Press no. 188, 27 February 1980 · scan pp. 5–7 · about 1,541 words

Read it in the scan (PDF), scan page 5 →

Read from the scan by machine and not corrected: expect misread words, and now and then a caption or a line from a neighbouring story. For anything you quote, read the scan.

Scan page 5

As careerist SDLP politicians debate with Tory Butcher Atkins the most likely way of securing themselves a well-paid niche in a "devolved". Paisley-led government, the barbaric repression of republican prisoners has been stepped up. • January saw a spate of incidents in which several of the 360 'blanket' -prisoners demanding a restoration of political status in the notorious Long Kesh concentration camp were subjected to a vicious campaign of beatings, humiliating "searches", , and wanton vandalism to their cells and bedding at the hands of prison screws.

But towards the end of the month this British offensive appears to have been carried over to a campaign si violence and ill treatmen: oi Women republicans in Armagh jail.

. Thirty three women are currently 'on protest' in Armagh iail. refusing to accept the **criminal status" reimposed upon them by the Labour government which withdrew the špecial category status from republican prisoners of war in 1976.

Women prisoners already confined to their cells for 21 hours each day have been beaten, refused use of the toilet, and subjected to increasingly foul and unhygenic conditions in a renewed attempt by male and female prison officers to break their fighting spirit.

According to Republican News, February 7 saw a squad of 40 male screws attack prisoners on B1 wing, and wreck cells.

This ram page yas followed up by individual maltreatment of prisoners, all of whom are refusing to do prison work as part of their protest.

Late: ben male comrades, 00 " 52 prisoners are (like all women in British ils) allowed to wear their vn, rather than prison clothing.

But their defiance of the repressive measures meted out by their jailers has brought still further harassment and intimidation, and the women are now reported to be confined in filthy and urine-soaked cells.

Despite their specialised illtreatment, the Tory government and their reactionary Labour henchmen still insist that such prisoners are not political prisoners, but common criminals.

No such illusions are peddled Justice in the occupied six counties. He has called upon judges in the no-jury Diplock frame-up courts to step up the length of sentences handed out to republicans declaring that:

"İt almost certainly is a fact that the general run of sentences will have to become more severe, because there is no doubt the object of sentencing is a deterrent and punishment for something that is a danger to society"

Indeed the Irish liberation struggle is a "danger to society" -not only to the reactionary Orange six-county statelet, but also to the stability of imperialist exploitation and capitalist rule in the whole of Ireland, and to the security of capitalist rule in Britain itself.

The successful defeat of British imperialist repression in Ireland would be a major step forward against the vicious Tory exploiters at home.

In solidarity with the republican prisoners; in joint struggle with Irish workers north and south; and in the interests of the struggle for socialism in Britain, trade unionists and socialists in Britain must step up the struggle to force the immediate withdrawal of British troops from Ireland; the restoration of political status for Irish PoWs preparatory to an amnesty; and for the right of the Irish people to determine their own political future. ment.

They know of course that such a struggle would force the 'lefts' themselves either to put their demagogic words into action, or to stand exposed as nothing more than empty windbags in front of a militant mass movement of workers.

Orme

Scan page 6

Fate :

Since 1970 over 23,000 jobs have been lost in the machine tool industry and the present crisis promises to further this decline: A possible 900 more redundancies were announced recently for Herberts in Coventry. In this climate any attempt to uncover the reasons for the run down will be of interest, and the report discussed here is one such attempt.

It commands particular attention by way of its origin, method of construction and the well researched nature of the material presented.

Delegates The Coventry Machine Tool Workers Committee (CMTWC) is made up of delegates from the JSSCs, both manual and white collar, at all the main machine tool factories in Coventry.

Research was carried out by the Coventry Workshop, an independent organisation which researches for shop stewards,, trade union bodies, tenants, etc.

The Workshop has also produced a number of other reports including"Chrysler's Crisis: The Workers Answer"; "Disappearing Jobs in Telecommunications"; •British Leyland in Britain and South Africa"; and "A Workers Enquiry into the Motor Industry"

The Machine Tool investigation was constructed in sections, with each part being discussed with the MTWC through a series of teach-ins.

Undermine

Findings which undermine the reactionary demand for import controls will be of particular use to socialists when arguing within the trade union movement.

Section I is headed Are imports ' the cause of the crisis?"

The graph (see fig. 1)

shows that the rapid acceleration of imports did not begin until two years after the steep fall in jobs; the root of decline cannot be located in imports.

Jobs began to tall in 1970 and the report defines the reason for this drop as a conscious drive for short term profits and maximum dividend payments by the employers in the sixties.

During the mid-sixties large conglomerates moved in to buy up smaller family concerns.

Compensation

Tube Investments spent £19 million between 196670. (much of which was compensation money IOmI from ear nationalisation of its steel interests).

TI moved from no investments in machine tools in 1966 to becoming the second largest group in the industry by 1970.

Stavely Industries increased their control between 1964-66 from 4 to 18 firms.

the industry's output. Firms began to rationalise as a means of achieving higher munfits in the chartest snare pIUHL II ll Savero SPuN of time possible.

Between 1965.70 Datrıraan Herberts gained £8.7 million in profit but distributed £9.2 million in dividends to shareholders during the same period.

Investment

A NEDO comparison of investment per employee in mechanical engineering showed that investment was 50% higher in West Germany than in the UK.

Figures for research and development show a similar * .04..r trend with little increase merintin is between 1968-75. Th report makes it clear tha this was no lack of fort sight, but a deliberat Manufacturing firm looking for a way to restal ilise their declining rate c of profit in the early 7( began to demand labou saving machinery.

It is suggested that th may have been responsib for a surge of orders frol about 1972.

Sophisticated Numeric Control Machine Toc (NCMTs) formed an important part of this demand. There had been an increase in the installation of NCMTs since 1960 of about 9% per annum as against an average drop of 5% per annum in overail new installation of new machine tools.

It is precisely these high productivity machines that have been imported in increasing numbers since 1971 -(see fig. 9).

Lack of research and development couplea win the policy of short-term Em 10.2 16.3 23.6 14.4 achin until Destination Advanced capitalist Developing countries.

ITTA

Advanced Developing MTTA down the last of the four Churchill factories .in Halifax which it had taken| over in the mix-sixties.

On top of the policy of high dividend payments the report identifies a deliberate retreat by the employers from the advanced competitive markets of the leading capitalist countries.

As mentioned above the largest absolute rise in imports of any specific machine tool has been Numerical Control marhines (Nrs) risino from at Nu.

Co 1971 1972 1973 1974 11.5 1975 14.7 1976 17.5 1977 11.2 Sourc Trade Note: inform countries Total NC as of all MT dun iblishe capitalist Communist countrie countrie Total Source:

profit maximisation in thi Sixties nas led to losses ir domestic markets.

A fall in orders in thi early '70s led to a policy of "slimming for profit" whicl resulted in further sacking and plant closures.

By 1977 output was onl just over half the 1976 figures. Product ranges weri reduced and research and development cut from £4.1 million in 1968 to £1. million in 1972.

down The large firms w ere responsible for the ma jor job losses, e.g. Tube Investments ran down capital employed from €19.2 million in 1969 to £11.4 million in 1 972 and closed QUETE O DATI CANTIADIT 1-61 UỊ SHOW HE :O _Ó'S

Scan page 7

SOCHLKTERESS Page "

fought by a policy of work sharing on full pay under in the Machine Tool Industry and the the control of elected union Machine Tool Imports, 1959-1977 committees ana not,as suggested, by calling for a 100% lay-off pay or relying on Government employment subsidies.

Nowhere is there any mention of a tactic to fight closure, despite the fact that the pamphlet is full of BARRY TURNER reviews the booklet Crisis examples of shut-downs in Engineering: Machine Tool Workers Fight for over the last twenty years. Jobs, published by the Coventry Workshop/ Occupation Institute for Workers Control.

A policy of occupation and supporting strike action must be fought for. All trace of the reactionary, nationalistic demand for import controls must be removed.

The suggestion that "public firms should be Figure 1

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

Bye: 1970, seven firms were responsible for 50% of

← Contents of Socialist Press no. 188, 27 February 1980