BY ROBERT GRIFFITHS

On August 29, when Labour and theHouse of Commons voted againstwar in Syria, they broke animportant political taboo.

They defied the diktats of US foreignpolicy and upheld the sovereignty ofthe people of Britain.

The interests of the peoples ofBritain and Syria prevailed over thoseof the US military-industrial complex.

Now we need to break anotherpolitical taboo, urgently.

The case for public ownership ofessential industries and services needsto be put, boldly and publicly.

The corporate monopolies and theirso-called 'free market' are failing toprovide decent jobs, wages, services,living standards or security for manymillions of people.

While a tiny minority of the superrich continue to get richer by the week,the majority of people struggle to paythe bills.

Big business are by-words for greed,corruption, tax dodging, waste andincompetence.

Six huge corporations now dominatethe vital gas and electricity market inBritain. They buy and sell betweenthemselves and the oil giants tomanipulate wholesale and retail prices,then pass the higher costs toconsumers and the inflated profits totheir top shareholders.

As the six threaten yet more pricerises this autumn, tame regulatorOfgem pretends to disapprove andcalls for more market competition.

The myth is that higher bills arenecessary to fund investment in newtechnology and capacity.

Yet current prices include elementsto cover depreciation. Profits after

paying interest to the banks are highenough already, but around 40 per centof them are distributed in sharedividends.

Meanwhile, chronic under-investment in new production andstorage facilities continues, withwarnings from Ofgem that Britain facesblackouts from 2016.

‘two-thirds to three-quarters of people believethat postal services, therailways and water shouldbelong in the publicsector’

It's a similar story in the waterindustry. Regional monopolies milk avital industry for extra 'shareholdervalue', while companies such as SevernTrent, United Utilities and ThamesWater lose a quarter of their suppliesthrough leakages.

Still no national water grid has beenbuilt, which means another round ofbans and restrictions next year.

Significantly, while most companieswage a price war against their owndomestic and industrial customers, thelowest increases come from one of thefew not-for-profit enterprises, WelshWater.

Behind local sounding names,Britain's water resources are mostlyowned by a complex web of financialand industrial companies, from Europeand the Middle East to Japan andAustralia.

As intended, Ofwat is toothless inthe face of rampaging waste andprofiteering.

On Britain's privatised railways,government subsidies account for one

third of the revenues on what is one ofEurope's most expensive networks.Without public money, most of thetrain operating companies wouldcollapse within weeks.

Network Rail, a 'not for shareholderdividend' company effectively in thepublic sector, ensures that substantialinvestment goes into the industry'sinfrastructure.

But the privatisation of bus, air, portand road freight services has meantthat all attempts to create an integratedpublic transport system, with thetransfer of freight from road to rail,have come to nought.

The lack of coordinated planningacross our energy and transportsectors is stacking up huge supply andenvironmental problems for futuregenerations. And it is now clear thatwithout strategic elements of publicownership, strategic planning willcontinue to be ineffectual.

The same principles apply in theeconomy as a whole. Today in Britainmass unemployment (especially amongyoung people), low wages, jobinsecurity, tax avoidance and under-investment are the norm.

The British capitalist class owns hugecapital assets around the world, but hasno commitment to build a modern.diverse and productive economy athome.

The City of London and its financialinstitutions control credit, investment,markets and government policy makingacross the British economy.

Yet without the £1.3 trillion bail-outof Britain's financial sector and hugeinjections of public money through'quantitative easing', the City wouldhave gone bankrupt.

We nationalised the losses andliabilities during the post-2007 crash.

However, now that RBS, NorthernRock and Lloyds are returning toprofitability, kept afloat by publicmoney, those profits will be privatised!

Yet, as China shows, large scale publicownership within the financial sectorcan ensure economic growth,investment, job creation and risingwages across the whole economy.

For example, a nationalised bankingsystem working with local governmentcould succeed where the privatemarket has failed by building affordablehomes for Britain's five million peopleon council and housing associationwaiting lists.

Across Europe and Latin America,water and waste services are beingtaken back into municipal ownership.Even in Germany, public utilities arebuying up local electricity generationand supply facilities.

The Welsh government isnationalising Cardiff-Wales Airportafter decades of private under-investment.

Meanwhile, in England the East Coastmainline rail franchise is being handedback from a successful publicenterprise to the same private sectorthat failed it previously.

After keeping pension fund assetsand liabilities in public sector, the RoyalMail is being fattened up for gifting tomultinational corporations.

Yet opinion polls indicate consistentlythat two-thirds to three-quarters ofpeople believe that postal services, therailways and water should belong in thepublic sector

The time has come for the LabourParty leadership to break anothertaboo and embrace public ownership.

ROBERT GRIFFITHS IS GENERAL SECRETARYOF THE COMMUNIST PARTY

EUROPE OFBANKERSAND BIGBUSINESSBY JOHN FOSTER

Root and branch, the EuropeanUnion is an apparatus of monopolycapitalism. It is organised in such away that it cannot be substantially‘reformed’ in the interests ofworkers or the people generally.Ruling classes across Europe are

using the EU in every way possibleto enhance their interests andmaximise the exploitation andoppression of working people .We already have the judgements

at the EU Court of Justice,undermining national collectiveagreements negotiated by tradeunions, allowing employers toimport cheap, super-exploitedlabour from across the EU .In July2009, the European UnionCommission’s economic andfinancial committee (ECOFIN)instructed EU member stategovernments to plan for spendingcuts from 2010. It also stipulatedthat such cuts should be linked to‘labour market reforms…tofacilitate appropriate wage settingand labour mobility across sectorsand regions (of the EU)' .The following year ECOFIN

declared Britain’s budget cuts ‘notsufficiently ambitious’ … and sothe story continues. Such messagesare welcomed by the Britishcapitalist class and its government.They are determined that weshould accept them meekly.The founding Treaty of Rome

(1957) provided for the creation ofa ‘free market’ for goods, services,capital and labour across Europe.That means the freedom of bigbusiness to maximise profit, freefrom any controls by democraticallyelected national governments.Article 98 of the 2007 EU LisbonConstitutional Treaty confirms that‘Member States and the Communityshall act in accordance with theprinciple of an open marketeconomy with free competition’ .Since then EU leaders have used

the Eurozone crisis to impose muchtighter central control of nationalbudgets and reinforce neo-liberalmarket rules. Across the 18 statesnow in the Excess DeficitProgramme there have been radicalassaults on public sectoremployment and a drive to achieveflexible labour markets. The 2012 Stability, Coordination

and Governance Treaty takes this astage further. It requires theelimination of all budget deficitsand further demands that nationaldebts in excess of 60 per cent ofGDP be reduced at the rate of 5per cent a year (Britain’s currentlystands at over 90 per cent).  British banks and corporations

are fully in support. They wantausterity continued. And they needto be inside the EU in order tocontrol European financial servicesand have the power to minimiseany interference. continued overleaf

New Series Number 2September 2013Published by the Communist PartyUnity@TUC

BREAK THE TABOO!

Earlier his year the Manifesto Pressbook Building an economy for thepeople was widely welcomed in thelabour and progressive movement forits challenge to the consensus thathas confined political economy to theoptions that the banks and bigbusiness will accept. Based on the policy agenda that

Britain’s trade union and labourmovement it analyses what is wrongwith the British economy, arguingthat the country’s productive base istoo small, that the economy hasbecome too financialised and thatpower has become concentrated on anarrow economic fraction based inthe City. Edited by Jonathan White with

contributors from Mark Baimbridge,Brian Burkitt, Mary Davis, John FosterMarjorie Mayo, Jonathan Michie,Seumas Milne, Andrew Murray, RogerSeifert, Prem Sikka, Jonathan Whiteand Philip Whyman.

Manifesto Press is making thisvital book available free inpdf and web based formats.For your copy visitwww.manifestopress.org.uk

BY CAROLYN JONES

September 2013 began withreports that Britain is increasinglydivided. As ever we have the richand the poor, the in work and theunemployed, the secure and theinsecure. But now research shows that our

labour market is increasingly divided,with a “second division” workforce ofmainly women and the under 30’s,stuck in low paid, part time, temporaryjobs. Many are on zero hour contracts,many more falsely classified as selfemployed. Too many are surviving onlythrough in-work benefit top ups, with40% of those approaching CABs forassistance actually in employment. And yet the posh boys in power still

peddle the same arrogant message.Using the stale and discreditednarratives that say regulations hurtbusiness and rights cost jobs, thisGovernment continues to hit out atthose least able to hit back. The latest rights-reduction scheme

came into force on 1st September.Workers who already invest their time,energy, skills and commitment intotheir company are now being asked tosell their rights to unfair dismissal andredundancy for a “share” in thecompany that they are helping to builddaily. A cursory glance through the 2013

TUC Agenda highlights the extent ofthe ever-growing employment rightsproblems facing workers in all sectorsof our economy. Whether it’s on healthand safety, unfair dismissal,redundancy, maternity or equalityissues, this government has ignored allthe evidence and sidesteppedopposition to force through changesthat not only turn back the clock butare now destabilising the very bases ofour industrial relations settlement. And there’s more to come. In the

drip-drip fashion reminiscent ofThatcher’s rolling programme of antitrade union laws, Cameron has morehorrors in line for individuals betweennow and April 2014.

First, a law allowing employers tohold “protected conversations” withworkers will prevent Tribunalsassessing the true facts behind adismissal – a modern day bulliescharter. Second, the 114 year old lawthat holds employers liable forbreaches of health and safetyprocedures will be reversed. In future,the burden of proof will be on theinjured worker to prove that theemployer was to blame for theaccident. And in the run up to those changes

being imposed, access to justice hasbeen systematically shut down toworking people. Workers who areabused at work, discriminated againstby their boss or simply sacked forsaying the wrong thing, will now haveto fork out at least £1,200 and out up to£2,800 to pursue their claim for justicethrough the tribunal and court system. Now that they’ve dismantled the

legal system that protects workersagainst abuse and holds bossesaccountable for bad practices, what’s toprevent the downward spiral into yetmore abuse and even higher forms ofexploitation? Bad practice tricklesdown far faster than wealth! Witness the growth in free interns,

“work experience” schemes and zero-hour contracts. And what is blacklistingif not a cabal of modern dayindustrialists punishing those who dareto speak up in defence of workers. The answer, of course, rests in a

stronger voice for workers and theirunions both at the workplace and atthe national negotiating table. That’swhy at this year’s TUC one of the mainpolicy proposal pushes is for aneconomic strategy that has at its heart,a dynamic role for trade unions and

collective bargaining. A new report by Keith Ewing and

John Hendy H shows in detail howputting collective bargaining at theheart of our economic reconstructionwould be good for economic efficiency,good for social justice and a good steptowards meeting our internationallabour law obligations. Of course the arrogant posh boys in

power together with their friends in themedia will portray this as backwardlooking and revolutionary, claiming it’ssimply trade unions looking after theirown self interest. But even the IMF haspublished research suggesting thatcollective bargaining contributes toeconomic stability. And negotiating terms and

conditions at sectoral level setsstandards not just on pay and not justfor union members. Standards oftraining, health and safety, numbers ofapprentices, percentages of part timeworkers, minimum hour guaranteesand levels of pay would all be agreedand applied across whole sectors of theeconomy. Companies would no longer be able

to compete by cutting labour costs. Thedownward spiral would be broken,replaced with a road map towards highstandards based on economicefficiency, justice and democracy.It’s time for UK politicians –

particularly those looking for workingclass votes - to put the “enemy within”ideology aside and join the growingproportion of the population who seeunions and collective bargaining as aforce for good.

CAROLYN JONES IS THE DIRECTOR OF THEINSTITUTE OF EMPLOYMENT RIGHTS.

H RECONSTRUCTION AFTER THE CRISIS – AMANIFESTO FOR COLLECTIVE BARGAINING IS

AVAILABLE FROM IER FOR £10 AT 4THFLOOR, JACK JONES HOUSE, 1 ISLINGTON,LIVERPOOL L3 8EG.

continued from page oneBut this ‘new’ EU stands in the

way of every progressive demand ofthe TUC for alternative economicpolicies that can redevelop Britain’sproductive economy. The same EUpolicies are openly condemned bythe UN’s 2012 Trade andDevelopment Report as a threat tothe world economy and particularlyto world’s poorest. The reportpoints out that those countriesthat have most successfullysurvived the world recession werethose that were free to developpublic sector intervention.This is the freedom that we are

denied by the EU. Not everyone willsupport the call for withdrawal.But we should not be denied thedemocratic right to decide forourselves. Do we want to continuedown a road that is leading to totalbig business dominance? 

JOHN FOSTER IS THE COMMUNIST PARTY’SINTERNATIONAL SECRETARY

The rise of UKIP and theresurgence of anti-EU posturinginside the Tory Party makes it allthe more important that thealternative, left and progressive,case against the EU is projected.The Communist Party’s position

is clear, reiterated after fulldiscussion and debate throughoutthe party. The CP is for Britain'swithdrawal from the EuropeanUnion.The party thinks that the best

basis on which this should takeplace is that of popular support fora programme left and progressivepolicies to rebuild productiveindustry; take key sectors of theeconomy into public ownership;expand and invest in the publicsector; redistribute wealth; securefuture non-nuclear renewableenergy supplies, and restoredemocratic accountabilitty. Butthese kind of policies would bechallenged and undermined by EUtreaties and institutions at everyturn.

New from theCommunist Party

A STRONGER VOICE FORWORKERS AND UNIONS 

FREE TO YOUAT THE TUC

BY GRAHAM STEVENSON

A BUILDING workers leader chargedthat ‘Wars were not due to the badtemper of statesmen’, even if peacetreaties made provisions not to ‘resortto the use of poison gas’ but ‘even merenovices’ knew that it was being‘manufactured’. Mass unemploymentwas ‘driving capitalism to war’ andmass action was required to preventthis. An ASLEF leader sought to prevent

the debate sliding off into a vaguesupport for international diplomacyand mass inactivity. He was actually onthe rostrum and about to but the chairprevented him in favour of a ‘cry for thevote to be taken’ and the block vote ofthe powerful unions closed discussionfor the second time that congress.Gloomily, the Dai headlined: ‘TUCGeneral Council Lines Up With TheWarmongers’.The General Council refused to admit

that year's Hunger Marchers to

Congress on the strange grounds that, ifadmitted, the marchers would advocatethe United Front, the call to unite allworking class political forces on the leftagainst fascism. Even so, many delegates found

themselves forced to praise themarchers, ordinary folk every one ofthem. A Glass Blowers' delegate saidhe'd seen a lot of young people in themarch: ‘I am not patting theCommunists on the back, but there area lot of young people drifting away from

us.’ He had once been part of the oldLeft in the Social DemocraticFederation, but was now a firm right-winger.The Worker's correspondent on the

spot, J R Campbell reported the GeneralCouncil's ‘policy of attempting toescape from the present crisis by meansof price-raising’ with growing anger andincredulity. Delegates from theDraughtsmen and the Shop Assistantshad opposed this, at least without alsoraising wages. A great deal of what wasbeing said by the General Council, theycomplained, seemed almost tuned toback the then coalition government'sline. The TUC leader, Citrine, rose to hisfeet to blind with pseudo-science. Hedeclared that those who differed withhim were also opposing all the world'seconomists. Moreover, it was less thathe had agreed with Chamblerlain thenthe Chancellor of the Exchequer, morethat Chamberlain was agreeing withhim. Thus blinded, Congress becamecommitted to a policy of raising priceswithout any rise in wages.

Picture shows women workersmarching marching to the 1933 TUC.

GRAHAM STEVENSON WRITES A REGULARCOLUMN FOR THE MORNING STAR ,DIPPINGINTO THE PAPER’S ONLINE ARCHIVE .FOR JUST£72 A YEAR, OR £5.99 FOR 10 DAYS, YOUCAN READ DIGITISED PAGES FROM THE DAILYWORKER (1930-45) AND THE MORNINGSTAR (2000 - PRESENT) ATHTTP://TINYURL.COM/DWMS ARCHIVE.

Visit the Morning Star stall forlots more about the paper’sexcitng development plans.

TUC week 80 years ago

www.communist-party.org.uk