Despite the attempts by the press to present 1714 the three way voting as a 'moral victory! for Woodcock and the right-wing majority of the General Council of the TUC, the result of the voting was a slap in the face for the advocates of wage restraints Woe have only to quote Woodcock's own wordsr "I want to ask Congress flatly: Have thoy no trust at all in the General Council? If they have no trust, then pass Motion 58," ind Congress went on to pass Motion 58, the Doilermakers proposal against all wage restraint, Though the majority was small it was achieved against tremendous opposition, All kinds of nachinations, the whole apparatus of the pross,; radio and talevision wore used to try to stop the passing of Motion 58, Under these circumstances even a majority of only 380,000 was a big victory for the left.
The changes made by the General Council to the controversial 'waze restraint' para, whilst they saved it from a massive 'report—back! vote, have in essence emasculated it. It now speaks of the ‘desirability! instead of "necessity" of creating a situation where money incomes did not rise more rapidly than output (the original phrase was "as rapidly as in the past", ) Much has been made of the so-called 'verbal assurance’ by Ted Hill that he wouldn't oppose wage restraint under a Labour Government. His actuel words were: "Mir. Harold “ilson is an old friond of mine and I have complote faith in him, If we have a Labour Government which wants to achieve a planned economy, I will be the first into the rostrum pledging my support." Woodcocl: didn't interprote this remark as the capitaliBee s tried to do, he roterted that tho Boilermakers had passed anti=-wago restraint resolutions during the term of the last Labour Government, "I should not say, Tod, you are wise to bluff Harold “ilson," he said. He warned the dolegates that the issue of wage Toestraint would arise even more acutely when a Labour Government was in power.
Again, it has been demonstrated that it is very difficult for anyone to push the British labour movement on to an outeand—out class collaboration path. The differentiation in the trade union leadership is a reflection of their social base. Frank Cousins and Ted Hill are just as mech 'breaucrats! as Woodcock nnd Douglass, tut they reflect the working class base of the trade union movement, whereas the latter refloct the pressure of the capital ist class on the unions, Escause the unions depend upon the participation and activity ot thousands of ordinary workers, because the unions arc financed out of the pockets of working people, because the trade union must,to win and keep members, show some results, there are strict limits to the extont to which even the most right wing of trade union leaders can go. Moreover, at each turning point, an attempt to push the unions along more and more class collaboration policies gives rise to tendencies within the top trade union leadership. This in turn has tremendous significance for the development of mass left tendencies as the consciousness of the clags, or important sections of the class doss not develop all at once tut in stages, Moreover, all this is but a dress rehearsal for coming struggles under a Labour Goverm ment - in that respect, at least, Woodcock was right.