Following investigations carried out by a representative of our organisation, the Campaign Against Racial Discrimination (C.A.R.D.) feels impelled to make the following statements
In the section that is on strike, 95% of the workers are Indian, West Indian or Pakistani. But the strike is not a racial one. It is a purely industrial dispute, The strikers do not claim that they have been treated differently because they are Indian, Pakistani or West Indian. We have found the following to be the reasons for the strikes
The new machines will mean a 300% increase in productivity. The new agreement will mean a 50% increase in the workload for each man. In return, each worker is promised a rise of 10/- a week. The strikers say that the new agreement is intolerable. Moreover, they claim that the terms were first tentatively put to them at a meeting on the 26th of April and were unanimously rejected by theme However, the union and management negotiated the agreement on the above terms. On May 24th the men for the first time were informed of the agreement by management, and were told to carry it out. They went on strike.
Immediately the strike started, the union official involved issued a statement to the press saying that the action was racially motivated and had nothing to do with an industrial dispute.
This attempt to hide the issue behind accusations of racialism is a dangerous precedent. It seems intended to inhibit coloured workers from taking part in any industrial action, Whatever the motive, the publicity which has been given these unfounded accusations can only be harmful.
The question of race has never been raised by the men on strike: they have found it necessary to engage in unofficial action which is not in any way unique. In these circumstances, the management's decision to dismiss over 360 men is a callous and deplorable act.
C.N.D. CONFERENCE 196 from Alan Rooney
Over 150 delegates attended this year's three-day conference over the Whitsun holiday. There was no major alteration of policy this year: C.N.D. re-affirmed its stand for unilateralism, showing no shift at all to present Labour Party policies. Conference passed the following resolutions on Vietnam and Dominica unanimously: Vietnam: "Conference deplores the British Government's unlimited support for
U.S. policy in Vietnam, which threatens escalation into a world
war. It calls upon the Government to use its influence to stop the
bombing of North Vietnam as a first step to peace. It calls for
the bringing together of the participants of the Geneva Conference
of 1954, together with representatives of the National Liberation
Front (Vietcong). It asks ; .that the International Control Commis~
sion set up by that conference should return to South Vietnam to
supervise a ceasefire, the withdrawal of all outside armed forces,
and the holding of free elections, without prejudice to the eventual
reunification of the country as envisaged in the Geneva Agreements.
"Conference expresses its full support for the British Council for
Peace in Vietnam, for its lobby of Parliament on June 30th, and
for any similar demonstrations called by this Council.” Dominica: "Conference condemns the American interference in the internal
affairs of the Dominican Republic and calls for the immediate
withdrawal of American troops,"
In a discussion on the United Nations, conference did not suggest the setting up of agpermanent peace-keeping force, but in sharp contrast, many delegates point to the need for the Republic ‘of China to be admitted to the United Nations.
Before conference ended it seemed clear that C.N.D. would be giving more attention to the development of support in the Labour.and trade union movement; C.N,D. aims to give more emphasis to its campaign for a reduction in the Arms Bill, against the bases, etc. Early plans are being drawn up for a massive demonstration to take place on the Sunday preceding Labour Party Conference in Blackpool at the end of September.