Fightback against any political demands

Scan page 4

The Fightback for Women's Rights Campaign initiated by the Socialist Campaign for a Labour Victory fell into the now usual swamp of disorganised 'unity' at its 2nd conference in Digbeth on Saturday 21 June.

The initial attendance of 500 at its inaugural conference in March had plunged to 200 at the recall conference suppasedly convened to adopt a But following the tradition of the Working Womens Charter Campaign (which foundered when the TUC realised it could adopt a stronger charter for women's rights without being forced to actively do anything) and the International Marxist Group's ill-fated "Women Inaction"- sorry, Women in Action-newspaper stunt, the Fightback for Women's Rights opted once again for the usual vague promises of aims and objectives:

"To build a mass campaign of action against the major attacks against women by this Fine-but how and on what policies?

"The Campaign must be part of the labour movement response to the Tory attacks".

Good-but how do women confront the present bureaucratic leadership of the labour movement-which is such a powerful and insidious block to building that labour movement response to Thatcher and Co?

"We will encourage and aid the organisation and consciousness of women in the labour movement and fight to change sexism . . . and ally with all those fighting for democracy in the Labour Party"

Even this mild, implicit cricism of the Callaghan-Healey axis is mingled with complete faith in all those 'lefts" who line up with the accountability moves in the Labour Party democracy struggle. 'Left' MP Joan Richardson: uncritically supported "We are for direct action against capitalism" • Again, a worthy sentiment but what course of action are the campaigners proposing? The conscious political elements that organised and ran the conference must accept responsibility for the bankruptcy of policy and perspective.

In the leadership of the campaign, and bearing main responsibility for the nebulous "aims and objectives" passed as well as the shambolic, not to say bureaucratic chairing of the day's sessions were supporters of Workers Action.

To the right of these comrades and arguing strongly even for the deletion of the final point (because it commits women to fighting capitalism) were members of the Inter-. national Marxist Group, arguing for a 'softly softly' approach to women.

The IMG strategy, as ever, is apparently to unite women now on any old basis and maybe raise a few points of programme and policy in a couple of years time when they have built up some confidence and consciousness about themselves.

Alone in fighting for the method and policies of Trotsky's Transitional Programme were members of Workers Power, WSL comrades and Socialist Press supporters. Workers Power proposals included no to all cuts and a call for public works, for a woman's right to work, smash the Employment Bill, В ПО restrictions on abortion rights, opposition to Immigration Acts and called for the defence of wages, benefits and social services from inflation.

WSL members and Socialist Press supporters pressed for a development of this programme by urging Labour councils to fight the cuts by mobilising campaigns around no rent and jate increases and instead refusing to pay bank interest charges, and opening up council books to working class investigation.

They raised through concrete examples the question of the right wing leadership in the Labour Party and trade unions, and emphasised that as soon as women begin to struggle to defend their jobs, wages and social services they must be armed with an understanding of how and why their struggles will be knifed by these bureaucrats.

The conference however voted not to discuss these proposals and proceeded: to endorse the initial aims and objectives" package. That decision seems likely to complete the unusually rapid demise of the Women's Fightback grouping as any form of serious pole of attraction for women in struggle.

Scan page 5

As Labour Party officials made last minute adjustments to their creaking and rusty machinery in preparation for the Party's first anti-war demonstration. in 24 years, Callaghan's shadow spokesman on Defence, William, Rodgers did his level best to throw a spanner in the works.

The Party's Special Conference on May 31 had adopted an evasively worded resolution "Peace, Jobs and Freedom", which deliberately avoided any statement of position on Britain's membership of the want nothing less than a full-blown reaffirmation of the Party's traditional commitment to British imperialism and the expansion of its barbaric military machine.

They actually want Party leaders to clamber onto the "Peace" platform on Sunday and thump the tub for NATO!

Rodgers spelled this out last Thursday in a virulent Cold War speech to the right wing rump of the Parliamentary Labour Bitterly complaining that the 'Peace' march would find Labourites aligned with socialists, and forces genuinely opposed to British Rodgers declared:

"It should be plainly said that the Labour Party supports Britain's membership of NATO and rejects withdrawal .•. and we are in favour of multilateral disarmament, in both the nuclear and conventional fields, and reject unilateral nuclear disarmament"

Labour's objection to Tory "defence" policies was based not on principle but on their vast expense, he insisted It is speeches like this which spell out the crisis of leadership that confronts Labour's right wing as Callaghan moves inexorably towards retirement.

For while these or similar views are shared by the whole of the crypto-Tory right, the more shrewd: operators have sensed that the prevailing climate in the Party and the labour movement as a whole is far from conducive to such brazen statements.

Instead, like Callaghan himself, they' have become cioset imperialists, lurking behind devious speeches and evasive resolutions, and hoping against hope that the Tory press helps them cover their own murky past.

Rodgers is therefore waging a war without an army. It was no accident that he was excluded from the recent Labour Party political broadcast on defence.

It is high time Labour Party members gave him and his ilk their marching orders, and dispatched them to the as yet empty barracks of Roy Jenkins' would-be "Centre" Party.

At the same time the fight must be stepped up to commit CLPs and the Party nationally to the policies Rodgers so abhors: the unilateral nuclear disarmament of British imperialism; withdrawal from the reactionary NATO alliance and Callaghan other imperialist blocs; and unconditional defence of the USSR and the deformed workers states of East Europe, Asia and Cuba against imperialist attack.