Ii GAUCHE SANS "OPEN UP THE BOOKS!" from Bob Gregory
The following iranslation is from an article an the Belgian left-wing weekly, La Gauche, which is edited by Ernest Mandel, The artigle, with Bopeared in the September 26 issue, is noteworthy for two reasons, First it shows the identity of the employers! tactics in developed Western European countries} onds secondly, it indicates how a positive resistance to an ‘incomes policy' may be developed by the trade unions in these countries around the demand for the opening of the books,
"The meeting of the National Committees for Eeonomic Expansion has hed no definite outcome,..lt has been suggested that there was discussion around the issue of s ‘wages policy', the acceptance of such a policy would only come through ‘moderation! which would have for-either side, an attitude close to that of the employers. Mesenwhile, Citizen Spinoy" (the socialist Minister for Economic Affairs) “has developed his views... he adopted the term ‘noderation! emd talked of the necessity of maintaining wage incveases within the confines of a rise in productivity...we have demonstrated that this thesis is not in accordance with the theoretical data and the facts of experience. It is possible to increase Wages more rapifily than productivity, without provoking a rise in prices; it involves, quite simply, a redistribittion of revenue in favour of Labour and at the expense of capital. ‘This is moreover, the only means of briming about this
“Theat mast be remembered above all else is that the "share of the cake’ distributed to Inbour has greatly diminished compared with the pre-war period, It must be strongly emphasised that : .the 'share of the ceke! falling to labour in Helgium is the smallest of sll in the cowmtries of the Common linrket and that wages contimue to lag behind those of all Belgium's neighboursesss
"The whole discussion is tied up with an earlier issue that must be raised time end time again, How can one compare the imcomes of labour and cepitel when the former is knomalmost down te the last penny and the exsct income of the employers can never be properly ascertained? I3 it necessary to recall here the might of writings concerning tax evasion and fraud in the private sector, which were inpressively quoted whon the issue of fiscal reform was being discussed, ~ but which cre not mentioned at all when ettempts are being made to impose 2 so-called ‘incomes policy!? Is it necessary to recall the accountants of the large capitelist concerns who sre paid to know a thousand vays of understating current income, from the accelerated devalustion of plant and stock, to the disguise of acquisitions of new plant wider the general heeding of ‘expenses! Without mentioning the phenemenon of the ‘expense account civilisation'?
“The capitalists ster against all the evidence that their profits are low and thet their capital is not ‘sufficiently rewarded', That's grest! They should therefore have no objection to allowing us to seek evidence to prove them wrong by consulting their books, as Victor Larock has suggested, Uefore the General Council of the PSB, Ernest Glinne has teken up this argument and hes enlled for the opening up of the books, This cry must preface any discussion on a so-called ‘incomes policy'. Stharniue we will be engaging in advance in a fcots bargain, If we #o into negotiations with our eyes closed, because the income of labour is exactly mown, weshll find that where capital is comcerned..we shall only know what the employers want us to know of their -income (in order that they pay as little in taxation as possible). Isn't this the reply that the trade union move- Gent must give to the voice of the siren vamping the merits of en ‘incomes policy! or of a "social programme'? Before engaging in debate on this subject, let them open up the beoks of capital end let us discuss with open books, that is to say, on an egual footing!"
= —, I ——____eeeee—— rr ::'_/_0€0(0€008 OST