We regret that our editorial last week got mixed between the stages of writing and duplicating. Since its message was important, we are reprinting what it should have said. “... and arising from our determination to maintain our members' standard of living, we feel we are left with no alternative but to instruct our members to withdraw their labour as from 00.01 hours on Monday, Pebruary 14th, 1966." With these words the National Union of Railwaymen began a new phase in the history of the Labour movement : a phase in which the trades unions, which founded the Labour Party, are finding themselves compelled to move inexorably towards a showdown with the Labour Government. On the same day, news reaches us, another sorely mistreated group of workers will be in action against totally unjust governmental policies. The Scottish Miners have called for a lobby of Parliament, and invited other areas of the N.U.M. to join in. It is wuch to be hoped that many will do so. The Scots are overcoming the transport problem by chartering aeroplanes : perhaps other, nearer, areas wight be able to travel by agree~ ment with the N.U.R., so that the only trains on the lines will be full of protesting coal-miners. This would be a powerful reminder to the Government of what is possible once its often neglected, and now shamefully misused, Supporters are aroused. Certainly the miners and the railwaymen must link together in the fight against the attempt to control wages to stabilise capitalism. This is the fight of all workers. All workers, too, must take heed of the Callaghan- Jay axis and its apparent determination to induce enough unemployment to impose wage restraint by simple market pressures. Por the miners, these two general dangers are augmented by a third especial one : that of the complete subordination of coal to oil, and the dismemberment of the mining industry which is being remorselessly pushed through by Fred Lee. All Labour's major pledges to the miners, about introducing an integrated fuel policy, have been brazenly shelved. Until, belatedly, Mr. Fraser was sacked, the same thing was happening to the railwaymen. Since Barbara Castle was given the chance, it now becomes possible that some of the worst damage to the prospect of an integrated transport system could be undone, were she backed up by a fierce campaign to give her the powers to attack the vested interests which stand in the way. But the matter has been left dangerously late, and could well prove beyond rescue. Urgently, then, the miners must secure the same reversal of policy which is implied in transport. Fred Lee, who, we understand, is profoundly miserable at the role he has been manoeuvred into playing, is obviously incapable of withstanding Treasury and departmental pressures. He must join ir. Fraser, and a new man must be found to represent the promises which Labour made to Britain's mineworkers, Let every miners’ branch and lodge join the lobby on the 14th February, and let all voices be raised with the slogan “Fred Lee must Go !" This is no longer a personal issue : we are sorry for Mr. Lee, who has been a pawn in an evil game. But no change will be made until new, strong hands seize the tiller at the lliinistry of Power. The course of abject subordination to private industry must be sternly stopped. Everyone must help the miners to reverse it, and to assert the socialist priorities without which this Government will founder and irretrievably lose.
Writing in "THe Foundryworker", "Week" sponsor Dave La@bert has stern words about the threatening anti-union laws; "On 23rd December, 1965, the T,.U.C. General Council discussed (legislation to enforce an Incomes Policy). They decided by 23 votes to 12 just to 'note' the Government's decision, to go ahead with legislation. They did so despite the advice of their General Secretary, George Woodcock, who urged them to oppose legislation and tell the Govern®®%&- 'A voluntary. incomes policy is much more likely to prove effective and to achieve greater justice and equality than is a system based on the use of legislation.' "George Woodcock is dead right. A rational and acceptable Incomes Policy has to be achieved by consent, not by force. The sooner we get back to that principle the bettere Meanwhile we have to pull the hotheads avay from the morass of legislation we are rushing into, This is a very dangerous way to &o. "We must appreciate that our Government is not a free agent in this matter. The international bankers are clearly demanding, as a condition of their continuing support, that their ideas on a policy for prices and incomes are operated, This is what all the mad rush is aboute When our Chancellor Jim Callaghan, mects them again they want to see their pound of flesh dripping on the scalese And pressure to enforce the legislation now in preparation will steadily increase. This we all know, Our first need is to get ourselves out of the moneylenders! clutches. We have to pay our national waye In this, our job as the main foundry union is to prod and expose backward foundry employers who are content to muddle . on with poor production methods and low wages so long as they can show a profit, ‘Let's Go With Labour! was our election slogan. So let us go now on production. This is the way out of our present danger. "We have to insist here on a lot more advance information about company plans and how they relate to the general needs of the National Plan. The sooner we start to develop effective forms of joint consultation and of workers! control the sooner we are likely to find out how we can best contribute to running British industries, In this the Government must give us a clear lead. Foundries are clearly run for private profit. We accept that fact. Employers must equally accept our right to believé in and work for public owmership and control, Extending the operation of existing. public industries to new work is one way we can do this The Fairfield Shipyard Experiment may lead to another, So long as our ultimate aim is clears to make industry serve us. To make life better and our families secureée ; "National wage claims, vetted now by the 7.U.C., can be kept broadly in line with national production increases. This will only work if we achieve what is intended in the National Plan. If prices sare effectively controlled, by legislation if need bee and this is a very different thing from legislation on earningse employers will have to face one simple facts Higher wages will have to come out of their profits or from better working methods, Our shop stewards must be free to provide this spur to action. where they can, Legislation to stop them will only shield dichard employers, inflate profits, and frustrate the positive contribution unions can make to industrial efficiency and the National Plan,"