Britain shocked

at devaluation

By JOHN WILLIAMSON
LL BRITAIN is shocked at

last week’s announcement -

of the devaluation of the
pound sterling, with its conse-
quent increased prices, growth
of unemployment, and lowering
of living standards. The Sunday
Telegraph recognizes “the con-
sequences for the country are
going to be unpleasant in the
extreme.”

The Observer hails the action
of the right wing Labor govern-
ment: as “a brave act” and
warns against allowing “wages
to shoot ahead” even though
recognizing prices will increase.

While the labor movement
awaits the further news of what
strings will be attached to the
new 1.4 billion dollar loan to
help “stabilize the pound” now
being neogtiated, the struggle
against the consequences of the
_Labor government’s already
existing policies mounts in in-
tensity.

The three latest examples of
this are the reaction of M.P.s
to the by-election results and
subsequent Government support
of a growing pool of unemploy-
ed; the upheavel among coal
miners against the deliberate
run-down of the industry; and
the election of left-wing Hugh
Scanlon to the presidency of the
second largest union—the Amal-
gamated Engineers Union.

Following the disaster of La-
bor candidates in the recent
by-elections, 46 Labor M.Ps. put
down an amendment pressing
for realistic alternatives to pre-
sent economic policies. The
main sponsor, Mr. James Dick-
ens, said the by-election results
show “the electorate is tired
and exasperated” with “the pre-
dominantly Tory policy” of the

greatest reluctance, but “we feel
strongly that the Government’s
economic policies are gravely
damaging to the country and
the Party.” They went on to

make suggestions for an alter-.

native policy, including cuts in
arms spending and export of ca-
pital, control of imports, sale of
foreign investment holdings to
pay off debts to foreign bankers,
and expansion of industry at
home.

No sooner was this over than
Chancellor Callaghan created a
new upheaval by blatently ad-
mitting that the Governor of the
Bank of England, Sir Leslie
O’Brien, had stated Government
policy correctly that Britain
needed to have “a somewhat
larger margin” of unused man-
power and resources. Callaghan
was supported by Wilson in a
speech of unprecedented double-
talk.

Seventy MPs. immediately
tabled a motion that “deplores
and repudiates the approval”
given by the Chancellor to the
Bank of England’s advocacy of
a larger permanent pool of un-
employed. Clearly the Chancel-
lors admission showed that
Wilson’s speech at the Labor
Party conference pledging full
employment, was false.

Answering the charge that the
left is too “emotional” about
unemployment, Morning Star

editor George Matthews, wrote
DECEMBER 8):1 967-+PACIFIC_ TRIBUNE2+Pogell@ 223.

that he is “proud to plead guil-
ty” to this charge and that “any-
one who doesn’t feel emotions
of anger” when men and women
are thrown out of jobs and this
policy is defended “ought not
to be in the labor movement at
all.” Referring to a famous say-
ing of the late Aneurin Bevan
describing Hugh Gaitskell as a
“desiccated calculating mach-
ine” Matthews writes that “be-
side Jim Callaghan and Harold
Wilson, Gaitskell is now begin-
ning to look like a warmhearted
and recklessly generous friend
of the downtrodden.”
e

Already greatly concerned at
the situation in the coal fields
and having fears about a new
Government policy to be an-
nounced, the national leadership
of the National Union of Mine-
workers organized a march and
protest meeting in London.
From all the coalfields of Brit-
ain delegations totalling 4,000
marched through -London’s
streets, with all their national
leaders in front—right, left and
centre — with 1,000 placards
reading “More Coal—No More
Dole.”

After lobbying Parliament
3,000 crowded into Central Hall,
opposite the Houses of Parlia-
ment. Present were 80 M.Ps.
from mining constituencies.
Both right wing president Sir
Sidney Ford and Communist

_Secretary Bill Paynter condemn-
ed Government policy. Paynter

declared we cannot let a vital
industry be strangled. The policy
we believe will be proposed
“means social death to many
mining communities” and then
he warned Mr. Wilson, “There
is a breaking point in the toler-
ance and loyalty of everyone,”
inferring this was also true of
the miners.

Within 48 hours, Lord Robens,
chairman of the Coal Board,
speaking before the introduction
of the Government’s White Pa-
per on Fuel, forecast that what
would be proposed meant that
by 1980, the number of miners
would be reduced from the pre-
sent 387,000 to 65,000. This
meant jobs for only 1 in 6 of
Britain’s présent miners. .

All hell broke loose. The Min-
ister for Fuel and Power claimed
that Lord Robens was engaging
in speculation and condemned
him for creating alarm. But the
White Paper, when issued, sub-
stantiated this outlook. It went
only as far as 1975, but called
for a slashing of coal production
and an “exodus of 35,000 men
a year” from the industry up
to 1971.

NUM president), Sir Sidney
Ford, criticized it, but Secretary
Paynter said he regarded it “as
a funeral dirge, written by a
Labor Minister, for the coal
mining industry” and called for
its defeat.

The Lancashire miners area
secretary, Joe Gormley, and
member of the Labor Party Na-
tional Executive, talked about
the trade unions organizing a
new trade union party.

Burnley (Lancs.) miners call-
ed for a national strike. Many
talked about and a few branches
actually decided to stop pay-
ment of the political levy to the
Labor Party. :

Scottish miners’ leaders called
for a special national confer-
ence, but took issue with the

idea of a new trade union party
or of withdrawal of the political
levy.

Everywhere there was red
hot indignation and most min-
ers’ M.Ps. are alarmed and must
make a choice—fight together
with their miner constituents
against the Wilson policies or
face the consequences.

The election of Hugh Scanlon
as president of the one and a
quarter million-member Amalga-
mated Engineers Union, is the
most significant trade union
election in recent years.

Scanlon, a consistent left-
winger polled 68,022 votes
against John Boyd, well known
right-winger who got 62,008.
This was the highest number of
votes ever cast in an AEU pre-
sidential election.

This ends the 11-year rule of
Lord Carron, bitter right wing
class collaborationist, knighted
by both the Queen and the Pope
in recent years. He is also a
member of the Board of Govern-
ors of the Bank of England.

Scanlon, a former Communist
who declares himself a left so-
cialist, waged his campaign on
fighting policies — against the
Government prices and incomes
policy, for full democracy in the
AEU and in his election address
said, “We must have loyalty at
all times to the principles of
trade unionism and socialism.”

Asked what were the most
important issues facing the uni-
on, he emphasized (1) giving
effect to the fight to reverse the
present restraints on trade union
rights, (2) to safeguard the
internal democracy of the AEU
and (3) to restore confidence
and working relations between
shop stewards and the union’s
national leadership.

His election can bring about
a new balance of forces within
the trade union movement, since
the Transport and General
Workers Union led by Frank
Cousins—and the largest single
union — is already committed
against the main lines of policy
of the Wilson Government.

Editorially the Times says
“Scanlon’s election . . . can rea-
sonably cause the government
as much concern as the swing
of votes at by-elections” while
the Daily Telegraph says it is
“an embarrassment to the TUC”
and even more “‘to the govern-
ment and the Labor Party.”

Last December, speaking at
a Morning Star rally in his home
town of Manchester, Scanlon
dealt with the need to build a
united left, in order to help
bring about socialist policies for
Britain. He also emphasized the
role of the Morning Star.

Among other recent signifi-
cant activities was the 3,000-
strong lobby of Parliament by
representatives of local tenants
organizations in opposition to
rent increases. North of the
border, the Scottish Nationalist
Party candidate, Mrs. Ewing,
won the Hamilton (near Glas-
gow) by-election in an unpre-
cedented swing of votes. They
now announce their intention to
contest every Scottish seat at
the next general election, with
their key demand of “complete
independence” for Scotland.

Bert Whyte 7

| MOSCOW

Struggle in

China

more acute

By BERT WHYTE
MOSCOW

VERY day Soviet newspa-
pers carry accounts of the
“power struggle” in China

and give detailed information on
the tragic events in that unhap-
py country.

The Mao Tse-tung group has
tried to intimidate foreign cor-
respondents in Peking into sil-
ence by methods of expulsion
and terror. Some newsmen have
been beaten up and had their
cars smashed by hungweipings.
Three Soviet and three Japanese

“correspondents were expelled.

The Reuter correspondent has
been under house arrest for
months. Peking authorities re-
fused to extend the visa of Bo-
gunonvich, top reporter for the
Tanjug Agency.

Although reduced to a bare
handful, foreign corresopndents
in Peking continue to report
the true developments, enabling
Sinologists to draw accurate
conclusions on the real state of
affairs in China.

Writing in Izvestia, two Soviet
legal experts in international
law cite various incidents over
the past few months in which
China violated the principle of
immunity of diplomats and of
the inviolability of premises of
diplomatic representatives.

In addition to actions against
the Soviet embassy and its staff,
the articles note, “in 1967 gross
violations of diplomatic privile-
ges and immunity were perpe-
trated against the staff and em-
bassies of Bulgaria, Hungary
Yugoslavia, Mongolia, India, In-
donesia, Burma, France and Bri-
tain.”

Details of these outrages have
been reported in the world press:
the beating up of Indian, Soviet,
British and Indonesian diplomats
by Red Guards; the setting on
fire of the British embassy and
the raid on the Mongolian em-
bassy.

The Izvestia article notes that
the position taken by the Mao
group — that diplomatic immu-
nity is a survival of bourgeois
institutions—is an outright vio-
lation of generally recognized
standards of international law,
“manifestation of great power
chauvinism, an attempt at exert-
ing pressure on talking with
foreign states from positions of
strength, which has nothing in
common with international law.”

An aarticle in Literaturnaya
Gazeta says that “the Maoists
have been led to the adventurist
path by their eagerness to enter
the world arena as a world power
dictating its will to other na-
tions. The adventurism of the
Maoists has plunged China into
grave and lasting economic and
political crisis.”

The -article, titled The Big
Leap Backwards, outlines Chi-
nese economic successes in the
early years, backed by the giant
power of the USSR. “For many
years a complete army of Soviet

specialists—more than ten
sand of them—worked 1?
helping to build factorie,
mobile, tractor and ene je
plants, power station ie
stations, Bes | it

mines, brid
mous Yangtse Bridge) "ug
In 1958 Mao made Ii ij
lution” under the sl0B2” gal
three red banners — 4, ae)
line, great leap forward a 8
try and the people’s
Tracing the disastrous | gl
ments which followed: 1
says: “the big leap, pit
China astray from th
planned development
anarchy. : fag 4
The sharp decline ° ill
ture automatically 418° id
with it light industry, 4
its. turn, boomerange” ol
agriculture. This led t tel i
to give up iron an "gil
bad job and proclaim ag a |
the basis of the on
lions of people wet
the. cities into villagerigh|
ments were shifted,
jects dropped.” (v
: Mikhail. Yakovleys ve pi
Tass correspondent | yf
for 12 years, Wt

t
a

ites i

bezhom about th diss {|
Gver Mao's course Wad]
in the party and st@ Le
failure of the «Great os
the people’s commu aes ’
“In the spring of d is

Yakovlev, “Mao 8 tty:
porters decided it i sg
badly for them an yd
action was necess? iat |

Hungweiping move oot ‘a
launched for this Pig dg
however, life introgys Oy
tions to the calcula oct
and his group. 0"
of the ‘Cultural Reval 7
come and the viet i ;
and his ideas, PPOC* a 7“
times, is not visible j fo igh

gle between the fe 00

satisfaction is grown id |
terror against A intel ‘
ers, peasant 4 /
The ‘tbody ramPaF § i
Hungweipings 2" val vf
of military units unt ]
are increasingly ©"
sistance.” F

Trud, says the 1 8
wider and wide ne is ly
workers to Mao’ "ne Pi gi

months has bee? ] rue! ji
to “terminate t ee soil”, #
“unite on a D oa
today, says Ta ne)
more people have pat |
who is actually * Cine
the miseries th 4, a
are going throus ote !
The Soviet t wa YI
adventurist P0° oe )
group threatens sot ey
foundations é of if (|
China. The interne wO"d y
nese people, fe) ; ae
munist movemen pre
the CPC resoluty |
this fatal policy: aa

Par f
—% ;

sd