The IMG is "morally responsible' for Kevin Gately's death —that is the verdict of Lord Justice Scarman, making his report on the battle of Red Lion Square to Roy Jenkins last week. But Scarman did not prop ose u single significant change to the law. The ruling class has failed completely to use Red Lion Square as a pretext for a new legal assault on workers rights.
In fact, faced with a mass of journalists' evidence about police behaviour, Scarmun was forced to recommend that an independent clement be added to the procedure for investigating complaints agninst the police. Confronted with the ugly facts abour the National Front, he even recommended that a radical amendment" of the Race Relations Act is needed to make it an 'effective sanction'. No wonder Scarman, and especially the press, make such a meal out of the IMG's 'moral responsibility for Gately's death!
MORAL RESPONSIBILITY Despite a mass of evidence showing the use of police truncheons Scarman concludes that nobody can be legally blamed. So on what does this moral responsibility hang!
On the fact that the IMG 'started the trouble'? Perhaps we should point out that the police provocatively changed the route? Or point to the unprovoked assault on us by mounted police in Theobalds Road, and by SPG men in Boswell Street? But these are not the main In Scarman's own words, "failure to rospect the rights of others" was the "reason for the violence in Red Lion Square". So, we would ask The following questions: Were the police authorities respecting the rights of others when they failed to question the effect of the National Froat march on the families of coloured immigrants in this country! Was the Government, a Government whose own social democratic colleagues were being tortured and murdered by fascists in Cite, respecting the rights of others, or more to the point, acuing in the Interests of the workers movement, when they allowed the fascists of the National Front to drum theinway through the streets?
If you are going to seriously discuss morality", then moral blame must rest with the Government, who flagrantly disrespected the rights of the working class majority in this country and of the racial minorities exploited here Perhaps our moral responsibility stems from the fact that in Red Lion Square we intended to mount an 'illegal" picker? If you want to. discuss the law, Lord Scarman, then we would reiterate the point we put to you in the Enquiry: Were the police and the Government applying even the existing laws against the fascists?
NO LIGHT It is no use saying, as Scarmian does, that 'there is a case for codifying our law as to public order so as to ensure that the fundamental human rights set out in the United Nations Declaration of 1948 and the European Convention of 1950 are protected by statute: and there may well be a case for re-shaping our race relations lepislation. but these disorders and the way they were handled by the police, throw: no light on such broad questions' This is to bury one's bead in the sand and pretend that such broad questions' as the re-emergence of a fascist movement in Britain, Violence against black people and trade unionists, and the role of the authorities in giving prolection to fascists, aren't relevant.
But such questions won't go away. It's no use talking about whether the police were defending 'public order" on 15 June, Many have died fighting fascism and many more will do so. What the police did on that day was to encourage and assist real threats to the democratic liberties of the majority of the population: to allow the fasciats to go unimpeded to attack and cry to demoralise those forces committed to fighting fascism, and to get in some training of their own for smashing up the democratic liberties of workers and students in future.
The strugie to stop the growth of fascism in this country over the last 18 months shows one thing conctusively: we can expect nothing from the police and the courts except obstruction, repression and moral hypocrisy. The history of Germany, Italy and Chile all show the same point.
BRUSH ASIDE The Inbour-movement should brush aside Scurman's advice, as the: ruling class job it is. They should demand that the Labour Governen! dismantle the Special Patrol Groups and add its voice to the growing movement to stop fascists by the only available means: mass action of the Inbour movement on the streets coupled with a campaign of self-defence against the police. Any attempt to farther attack the antifascist movement by victimising the IMG shoukd he met with the solidarity of the whole movement. These are the real "lessons' the Labour movement should draw. We should remember. there were no Kevin.
Gately's at Hyde Park Corner on 7 September, when anti-fascists gathered in their thousands, properiy prepared to defend themselves against provocative, violent attacks.
Britain. However the Morning Star has remained silent on this point. encouraging the workers belief in the superiority of being exploited by Brilish capital as opposed to With good reason Woddis goes out of his wou in his artialue an tha 'slander" that Communists 'are not patriots". It is this "patriotism' of Her Majesty's Communist Party which encourages the road to defeat taken by the workers at
AS THE PREMIERE of their International Women's Year 'spectacular the TUC is organising a conference on "Women's Rights as Workers and Citizens: Under the stage management of the South East Regional Council of the TUC, this event is shaping up to be little more than a chat show on the problems of wom en.
predecessor, the London Trades Council, organised a dress rehearsal for the present show in the form of the inaugural meeting of the Working Women's Charler.
CAMPAIGN An IMG resolution was distributed at the beginning of the meeting with proposals on how the Charter could ented a step backwurds for the first time trade unioniits and women from the women's liberation movement were meeting rogether to discuss how to go forward, wanting to set up an organising committee themdelver instead of leaving the Charter to be simply rubber stamped by the official bodies of the trade unions. The IMG therefore proposed that an Ad hoc Committee should be elcoted Trom the meeting to begin a LondonLast March the Regional Council's the Charter which could draw in wide campaign on the demands of rank-and-file working women, as well as tenants associations, antiracist committees, and women's groups.
The resolution from Davis was heavily defeated and there was clearly a great deal of support for the IMG resolution. However our dear comrades of the London Trades Council and the Communist Party of unions involved in the cumpaign attest to this fact, What really lies behind this charpe is not a concern that unions haven't been involved, for the Charter demands, mean it is not strictly limited to trade union structures. When they from trade union branch meetines.
contraception. but a concern about won-trade union groups which harr taken up the fight male average rate.
When the Morning Star says the campaign is 'outside the unions they say it is unrepresentative they mean it includes poople who are not elected But they forget that women's probParty Nymuch al Shirley Summer skill (who is opening the latter dis: cussion) can deal with the social isues. As we have pointed out above, the problems women face as a result of their role in the family, have a direct impact on their positson in the workforce. It is simply "unreal to divide women's lives into these neat compartments.
The most important discussion at the conference should be the way forward in the fight against women's oppression, Three central issues to campaign around in the present situation are equal pay/low pay, nurseries, amd abortion and Most women covered by the qual Pay Act (which is only one third of working women now enjoy equal pay as the Act defines it, but it has meant litt they still remain the low est paid, with women's take-horne pay still being roughly half of that of the Re rest ficht, in the teeth uf the crisis, harder than ever for a decent standard ol living for the whole of the working class - and that include: women. We must fight for a minimum wage for all workers, with an automatic rising scale lied to the cost of living. And any state benefits must also be increased in light of building support for the campaiens launched by the Charter Campaign for increased facilities and backing struggles like those of the nursery workers in Bronley for unionisation We must demand state-provided nurseries to suit our needs, open to al in need, nor just these employed py a particular company Last week, the House of Comons appointed a Selec! Committee to consider the question of abortion. Il is Lle biggest sick joke of 1975 chat wbile the Labour Government and the TUC shout long and loud about the importance of International Wo men's Year, they allow a group of Labour MPs, headed by one James White, to propose further restrictions in the already inadequate Abortion Act. What is international about suggesting that abortion should not be sugaled to loreigh women unable to oblain them in their own reprossive countrics? What is there to shout about in putting the onus on doctors la prove that abortions performed are legal (guilty until proved inne ent!). White has managed to persuade many Mis to support moves which will drive many women back into the arms of the illegal hack-street butchers or force them to suffer unwanted pregnancies
----- pull-quotes -----
not what it says, but what it represents'