Now- Break the Coalition!

Scan page 1

Two left wing Labour MPs last week showed how easy it could be to torpedo the reactionary policies being foisted on the working class by the Callaghan-Steel coalition Audrey Wise and Jeffery Rooker voted against Healey's budget proposals to defeat them in committee.

The effect of these defeats is that many workers earning wages below the poverty line will pay less income tax (though they will still pay tax, even while in many cases claiming Family Income Supplement).

But the real importance of this move by the "lefts' is not the minimal reform that was won. It is the fact that, after "left-wingers" have trooped into the lobbies time after time to support public spending . cuts, Healey's handouts to industry, wage control and a host of attacks on workers, for once two left' MPs have taken a stand against Callaghan and Healey.

BREAK NEEDED

Wise and Rooker have said openly they do not want to precipitate an election. But the fact remains that to carry through any real change of government policy, it is necessary to break the coalition deal with the Liberals.

Liberal leader Steel has now made it clear that the coalition hinges on providing jobs for leading Liberals in the European Parliament through elections run on proportional representation, and a Phase Three of incomes policy. Liberals will not support any socialist measures whatever.

Under these conditions a break from the Liberals must take place. It would mean immediate defeat for Labour in Parliament and an election.

WAGE CONTROL

But under the present Parliamentary conditions the government cannot linger on much longer in any event. Failure to obtain a stringent Phase 3 of wage control could bring it down.

The Labour 'lefts' must break ftom their craven subservience to Callaghan and Healey.

They must launch a campaign throughout the movement to throw out these collaborators, break the coalition and for the Labour Party Conference to adopt a platform of socialist policies on which to fight a General Election. only made during external disputes.

On Friday 10 June worker was suspended for refusing to work his job in a new sequence, complaining it was painful. The 77 men on his line in the Body Plant walked out in sympathy.

This led to lay-offs in the Assembly Plant with workers marching around the plant chanting "What do we want? 80%! When do we want it? Now!"

Pickets were put on the gates, leading to the closure of the Body Plant. Then the occupation began.

The fact that a few hundred workers have closed the giant Dagenham complex shows the feeling on lay-off pay.

This feeling arises directly from the plunging value of wages and the difficulty in living on less than 40-hours pay.

This dispute must not be allowed to lead into an attack on the right to strike in exchange for management 'concessions'.

Union leaders have toyed with the demand for 80% lay off pay for too long. That must now be fought for.

At the same time the demands of the shop stewards-for a 15% wage increase and a cost of living clause-must be

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

brought forward in the annual review, due in July.