What

from John London Mr. Woodcock, general secretary of the Trades Union Congress, was cryptic after his discussion at 10 Downing Street on Monday, December 18th. He did say, however, that the unions could hardly be expected to support a new wages freeze. AccOrding to Stephen Fay, Labour correspondent of the Sun Times Business News, in an article in the 17th December issue of that paper (that is, the day before Woodcokk saw Wilson): "The Government will tomorrow ask the trade union movement to freeze all general wage increases until the middle of 1969. Economic Ministers are to tell the Trades Union Congress that normal wage bargaining should not even begin until the end of 1968, when they expect the balance of payments to move into surplus. The policy, which reflects Mr. Roy Jenkins' tough Treasury line, is harsher than the TUC expected. And unless the Government can bring even more persuasive arguments to bear than it has done so far, it will be rejected by the trade union leaders. The TUC is willing to co-operate, as long as its conditions are met, but not for as long as 12 months. If the Government sticks stubbornly to its new policy, it could precipitate a serious and damaging split with the trade unions. "When the Economic Committee of the TUC meets the triumvirate of economic ministers —- Mr. Wilson, Mr. Jenkins and Mr. Shore — tomorrow it will inform them bluntly thet a norm of 34 to 4 per cent. for general wage increases should be adopted from the middle of 1968. It has not altered its economic strategy, just latered its timing by 6 months. Even then, the TUC will only co-operate if the Government can ensure that price increases attributable to devlaution rise gradually in the next six months. If the Confederation of British Industry's belief that consolidated price increases should be allowed early next year is accepted, the TUC will be disinclined to hold the pass until next July. The Government's difficulties are further exaggerated by two factors: (1) Private estimates made in Congress House of devaluation's effect on prices at home cast doubt on the Government's contention that they will rise by only 3 per cent.; it is thought that increases of 4$ to 5 per cente are more realistic. (2) The TUC cannot ignore the Conference of Trade Union Executives which meets late in February to debate economic policy. If the general council's policy is to be adopted it must recognise the groundswell of discontent in the movement over continuing wage restraint. "Indeed, the focus of attention is likely to shift away from the TUC to individual wage claims. These are dominated by the Confederation of Shipbuiling and Engineering Unions' claim for "a substantial wage increase." The president of the Amalgamated Engineering Union, Hugh Scanlon, does not inten¢ to be diverted either by the Government's policy, the TUC's voluntary incomes policy, or the forthcoming report of the Prices and Incomes Board on engineering wages. And there are significant signs now that the predominantly right-wing executive of the AEU is lining up behind left-wing Scanlon in the fight for a general wage rise." It would appear that there is a substantial amount of truth in this report. Rank and file trade unionists must keep up the pressure to ensure that the TUC does not go in with the Government in its plans to impose a really big cut in the living standards of the British people. The unions were created by the workers to protect their interests not cut their wages.