Vol. 6. No.14
Pace 1 Editorial notes Page 7 ‘The 1970 Housing Plan
2 ditto 8 Wilson's Shalke-out
3 ©Cpen letter to an MP. 9 Te@GYWU Action at Fry's
4 East Yorks Sus Strike 10 Free Speech in Danger
Defend Trade Unions 11 Dritain trains Ky's
6 American Notes troops
12 Aniuouncements
Yio one will envy the dilemma of the left NPs in Parliament on ednesday next week when the Order in Council operating Fart IV of the Frices and Incomes Act is d_ bated. Unless they can cet their own motion down - which has proved in the past extremely difficult - they will have the choice of either voting with the Yories acainst the Government or merely abstaining. To be forced to vote with the Conservative MPs - traditional enemies of the working class movement - against a labour Government may seem a cruel fate. Yowever, it is infinitely less terrible then going down in history as having done nothing of consequence when a savage attack has been mounted against trade unionists’ rights. Any inhibitions which left MPs might have at voting with the Tories should be placed in a proper perspective. They will be voting against the measures for socialist reasons. Will this inhibit the Tories from joining them? It is their own conscience and their own loyalty to the working class movement which is at stake — no one else's. but to pose the problem gives a clue to the answer: to abstain or yote against is secondary. what is decisive and primary is to take action which will mobilise working class op»osition to the measures. iiveryone knows that in the last analysis it is indecisive what hapnens in Parliament next week. If the Goveri ment should be defeated, does anyone believe that antitrade union lerislation will not be passed? In the extrene case of a Tory Government replacing the present Labour one, the Tories might change the emphasis, at least for a time, but only in the interests of obtaining more and more out of the working class. whe unions may cet their "freedom", but it will be a freedom to be worked harcer. It will be the old ques-~ tion of the workers having to run very fast in order merely to stay in the same nlace, anc to maintain ¢. :theirexisting meagre share of the national income. And, as Alec Douglas llome has made clear, the Tories wil? devise a new legal framework in which the unions can operate "freely". The choice between the two measures is a bieak one, and the only socialist option is to oppose anti-working class measures, from whatever quarter they emanate.
lost readers wili have seen the reports in the press about the Amnesty International report on the torture of prisoners in fiden and Southern Arabia. This is a sheer disgrace. What is being done there mirrors the worst aspects of the treatment of prisoners in Vietnan. Yet it is being done by a Labour Government. Anyone who does not sneak out against these te terrible haprenings has no right to be called liberal, let alone socialist. We must, however, think cooly about this question. When our anger has subsided we must ask and answer the question how this terrible state of affairs came to pass. The answer is very simple: if Ilr. Wilson and his Government want to operate the imperialist policy of "East of Suez", they are forced — regardless of their intentions - to use time honoured imperialist methods to subdue the local populations. He who wants to stop the torture of prisoners must oppose this basic policy. It is no use being shocked by these abominations unless one is prepared to oppose, tooth and nail, "Labour" imperialism under the "East of Suez" guise.