General Strike Unless Union

Scan page 9

Main thrust of SLL policy - general strike action.

But the SLL and shows that differently.

In January now degenerated Workers Revolutionary Party-played major role in the mobilisation of national action against the 66-70 Labour government's infamous anti-trade union Bill "In Place of Strife' in 1969.

With important industrial power in sections of the docks and the car industry, the SLL was able not in the strikes and orotests in the a principled way, to propose unity in action with the Stalinists-a proposal which forced them to fall in behind the SLL initiative for a one-day token strike on May 1 of that year.

In order to boister up their conviction that unprincipled blocs and adaptation to all and sundry are the way to fight the Social Contract, the International Marxist Group now turns its attention towards falsifying that history.

RED WEEKLY

This is done in an article in Red Weekly of 17 March, in which Anna Larkin writes:

"The AlVA and the SLo, tar from leading the massive opposition to 'In Place of Strife' , attempted to sabotage it. The CP called a strike and demonstration for 27 February 1969. Over 100,000 workers came out-despite the SLLs opposition to it" • (Page 4).

She goes on to argue:

"It was this action, not the call for a strike on 1 May in Workers Press [in fact the SLL had not yet launched Workers Press: their paper was the Newsletter!] the following day that was the springboard for the May action"

RECORD historical record of the the Communist things happener very 1969 To Sul demands on left' MPs to remove for a demonstration to demand that the trade union leaders act against the proposals of the Labour government. The SLL chose February 23, four days before the TUC met in Croydon to discuss the Labour government's proposals.

To counter this, John Gollan, General Secretary of the Communist Party, announced that his executive was In favour of a 24-hour national strike to "compel the government to keep its hands off the unions"-on the day the TUC LHE MAT DSV MoMentuttalioo BU IrE ROISA chould tease ao chahs in anyanée asine thul ihe wekiug ohir in deden. mid to wmanh the ent-trade uniun Laros, 1222223 •ED'BE' BEST YET 1nh nd TEES meet, February 27.

MORE NEEDED The Newsletter replied:

"We agree with this decision so far as it goes, but it does not go far enough. Much more than a one-day strike will be needed to halt this (Newsletter, 15 January 1969).

And on January 21 they stated:

"This demonstration, together with the lobby of trade union executives proposed by the Communist Party are musts"

On January 25 the Newsletter reported the calls for action from London union branches for this day. The texts of the branch motions leave no doubt that it was the SLL which was moving them. SLL members successfully moved for a stoppage in the Cowley car plants-a decision which was later sabotaged by the withdrawal of the AUEW from the action.

And . on February 12 the Political Committee of the SLL made a statement addressed to "every organisation, national and local, of the Communist Party, and to every individual member"

UNITY IN ACTION

It was a clear and principled call for unity in action against the anti-union laws:

"We are supporting the national demonstration against the legislation called by the All Trades Union Alliance for February 23. The Communist Party has announced support for a one-day token strike on February 27.

We have said in the Newsletter that if such a strike is seriously prepared, we will support it. We know that militant workers in particular factories will give isolated support to this call, and our members will fight to support them.

But it is essential that workers coming into struggle after the Labour leaders' betrayals should gain confidence in the fight for a socialist alternative.

That is why we • have stressed thorough preparation for an effective action, in which the

Merseyside

40,000 out Meeting demands general strike in into terme Jr in Oxford Car men close down BritishLayland plant AT More Batend, LS.E. charges dropped working class will learn how to use its industrial strength in the political struggle.

We propose therefore that a date be set-we suggest provisionally April 21-by agreement, some six weeks ahead, to which our joint efforts would be directed for a national stoppage: in engineering and motors, in the docks, in mines and throughout industry. (...)

These workers will gain confidence to fight if we make a definite step towards UNITY IN ACTION on the most vital issue facing the working class".

(emphasis in original)

The 3,000 strong February 23 SLL ATUA demonstration London passed a resolution in the following terms.

"We support every strike action against the White Paper and call for the maximum unity of organised workers for a massive national strike against the White Paper and the Wilson government"

The February 27 demonstrations were a large affair. Nearly 3,000 lobbied in Croydon.

Yet the bigger demonstration was in Liverpool where 35,000 struck and 7,000 demonstrated (according to the Morning Star), following a call by Liverpool Trades Who moved the motion for strike action in Liverpool docks? Larry Cavanagh of the SLL!

The SLL at that time were the major force in the Liverpool docks.

Where then in all this is there shred of evidence for Larkin's slur of sabotage and opposition?

Larkin goes on to effectively argue that the CP were the major force behind the May 1 mobilisation. This too, is untrue.

Immediately after February 27 the SLL changed their proposed date for joint strike action with the CP from the rather arbitrary 21 April (which opened the danger of the CP merely choosing a different arbitrary date) to the more obvious and difficult to avoid date of May And it was this initiative which was later followed by the CP, as we will explain in our next article.

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

only to be the major initiating force in the trikat year, brotests abne, in

LANS TRADES UNIONS ALLIANCE DROPPED

1.1.2128120 111712) WELLS