[page 12]
The agenda for this year's Scottish Trades Union Congress contains many fine resolutions. Resolution 155 from Fast Kilbride takes up the increase in police repression and calls for the banning of racist and fascist organisations as well as demunding trade union rights for the police. Resolution 150 from Glasgow Trades Council rejects the Immigration Act important because the assumptions of this act are at the root of the growth of racism. The resolution also calls for local anti-racist bodies to be set up by constituency parties und trade unions to conduct the campaign. Resolutions 142 and 143 reaffirm opposition to the Chilean regime and call for the Scotland-Chile match to be called off. There are other worthwhile resolutions which deserve support from socialists.
But on the most important issues facing the labour movement incomes policy and economic policy - the agenda is sadly lacking. Last years STUC divided sharply around two contrasting positions. The majority of rank-and-file delepates opposed ware restraint and supported a 10-point action programme in the shape of resolution 17 from Stirling Trades Council (Sec Scottish Socialist number 1). The block vote of the big unions, marshalled by Jack Jones. secured support for government and TUC policy- Incomes policy is again likely to be the major debate at this year's conference, to be held in Rothesay from 18th 22nd April What is lacking this year is a fightine socilist programme. This is all the more unfortunate became the prospect of incomes policy being rejected is much greater.
At first glance, it might seem that there can he little chanee from 1976. Most unions
are committed to policies decided by their 1976 conferences which backed the TUCgovernment C4. 5% limits on wage increases However, most unions imposed stringent conditions. What has happened until now is that union officials have used conference decisions as a blank cheqac to support the government. Such is the way they treat union democracy!
As Aln Thornett, candidate for T & G secretary, points out in his clection address. "The biennial Delegate Conference accepted the Social Contract subject to cight stringent conditions including lower unemployment, massive public spending increases and price controls. None of these conditions were fulfilled."
The ability of the leaders to pull it off this year is more doubtful because of mounting dissatisfaction of the membership.
Indeed only one resolution, from the EETPU, offers outright support for government policy. A few resolutions, such as number 37 from the Bank Employees, call for incomes policy coupled to the restoration of differentials But 11 out of 18 resolutions in the incomes policy section oppose wage restraint outright: their mood is summed up by the NUM resolution number 29: "That this Congress is opposed to any incomes policy having as its aim wage regulation through interference from any sources in free collective bargaining."
The lack of a socialist alternative is most noticcabie in the cconomie policy section. Five resolutions numbers 1, 4, 5. 6 and 7 lay down an alternative economic policy and will be composited. All include in onc form or another the programme put before
the Congress by General Council which calls for: (1). control over capital export (2) expansion of the public sector in industry and finance 13) reversal of the cuts and a programme of public spending (4) selective import controls 15) tax retorm (6) 35-bour week and retirement at 60 The idea behind the resolution is.to pressurise the government into changing its policies — to mask the ugly face of capitalism. But how can this secure advance for the Inbour movement? Results in any field have only been won by workers in action. This has at least been recognised in resolution 97 on Equal Pay Trom TASS, which says: says: *experience proves that industrial action backed by support and solidarity from the orjanised trade union movement can achieve equal pay for women workers."
It calls for a combination of industrial strugele and a fight for new legistation to prevent "the attempts of employers and Industrial Tribanals to block women's rights".
The General Couneil resolution and others ate right to call for changes in Government policy as goalsor the trade union movement. But delegates will take nothing from the conference unless they can link any such demand to working class action in the same way that the TASS resolution does.
Unfortunately the demands themseives are often an obstacle to this kind of action because the General Council is looking for a "better way to run capitalism" based on reflation and import controls. Import controls should not be supported by any socialist. They will not enhance but obstruct trade union solidarity by favouring British workers over others. Instead of restoring Tagging British manufacturers by giving them spocial privileges, the labour movement should openly call for the nationalisation of firms creating redundancy, and for Industrial action aimed at opening their books and at workers' control.
And none of the motions in this section puts forward any proposals for defence of living standards except reliance on government action. Stirling Trades Council's call for automatie cost of livine clauses, for cxample, has not been put forward anywhere cise as part of a rounded action programme as it was last year. It will be up to rankand-file trade unionists to forge a fighting programme in the months after Congress, starting hopefully from a clear rejection of the Social Contract and wage restraint at Rothesay.
ROWLAND SHERET (Stirling Trades Council STUC delegate, in a personal capacity?