Camden Labour Briefing, March 1988

& March 1988

CARING CUTS 1 CAMDEN MORE TORY THAN THE HIGH COURT

On Monday, 29 Febuary, Camden NALGO won a High Court ruling against their employers, Camden Council, preventing them from carrying out their plans to sack the workforce. “Even the judiciary, pillars of the Tory establishment, condemned Camden's heavy-handed tactics as “high confrontation". The judge said the council could have "adopted less draconian measures" and urged them to withdraw their threat to the workforce.

Despite the court ruling, on Wednesday the Director of Housing notified shop stewards of her intention to send out the sacking letters anyway! Letters will go out "congratulating" those people who still have jobs in the new structure, although they will be required to sign the new redeployment contract first.

Those employees who will not have jobs will receive details of 'siotting in’ and ‘ring fencing' proceedures, and be told that in order to be eligible to apply for their own jobs they must sign the redeployment contract. This action is in breach of the undertaking Camden gave to the High Court and WALGO are currently pursuing legal action against the Director under contempt of court.

Victimisation of individual members of staff continues. In one shop alone, staff have been told they cannot take dependents' leave, harassed while at home on sick leave, and told they cannot hold shop meetings to discuss the new proposals.

It seems Camden's blatant disregard for industrial relations and established agreements knows no bounds. They are prepared to defy a High Court order in their efforts to smash trade union organisation in Camden for good. Any commitment to equal .pportunities has been disregarded by Camden's ‘Labour' administration.

“ The council leadership were no doubt 'shocked' by the court's decision. They shouldn't have been. By sending out the letters they'd ignored their own legal advice, and acted against Hampstead and Highgate CLP who voted that the letters should be

withdrawn.

Fran Mason, NALGO Deputy Shop Steward, HPS shap

JHE HSIEH GEAR HEREGTE AE TAA AE

CARING CUTS 2

LIBRARY OCCUPIED AGAINST CLOSURE

50 angry people occupied the St Pancras Reference Library as it was about to finally close on 20th Febuary - victim of Camden's cuts.

Library staff estimate that the Reference Library has 10,000 users per week, and it has always been heavily used by students, particularly from the Third World, as well as by many unemployed people. It also has collections of a regional and national significance. If this facility closes it is clear that NO services are safe.

The occupiers were immediately faced with a bullying management reaction. The Children's and Lending Libraries in the same building were closed to the public under the orders of council leader Dykes. They felt it more important to prevent the reinforcement of our occupation than to allow the public «continued over..

access to their own libraries. Occupiers were locked into the first floor. Management issued threats of personai liability for all expenses incurred.

Despite this, the occupation won strong support and extensive media coverage. With the support of library staff and despite management threats of discipline against any who Spoxe to the occupiers, several new people were smuggied in to join us.

Management finally evicted the occupiers after four days, fearing the spread of the action to the two threatened branch libraries at Belsize Park and High Holborn. Elderiy and less mobile library users at Belsize have let the council know in no uncertain terms that they will take direct action to prevent the loss of the library.

Library staff at the Shaw voted near unanimously to support our occupation, but no complementary industrial action was forthcoming. Wares and Hawkins - respectively Director and Assistant Director of Leisure Services - were able to veil their complete isolation within their own Department by a smokescreen of angry threats.

Kings Cross Labour Party members - slasher Dyke's own ward - played a prominent part in the occupation, and helped to shift the campaign of opposition to library closures to the left. The middie class Public Libraries Users' Group (PLUG) endorsed a much clearer anti-cuts position at its Hampstead mass meeting held whilst the occupation took place.

CARING CUTS 3 REPAIRS SLASHED, RENTS UP

In 1986/7 over £20m was spent on maintenance and decoration of Camden's council housing, and that is excluding the modernisation of a number of council estates. Next year only £1l%m will be spent, a 45% cut. If this £9%m cut in the repairs service was reflected in a lower rent to match the lower service, as it should be, there would be a £5 reduction in rent!

Instead, the Labour Group decided to raise rents by an average of £3.50 a week. And the council papers contained hints of future large increases. This would allow a steady rise to the level the council will be forced to charge as a result of future changes in the way the government wants councils to set their housing budgets. In other words, the council is preparing to comply with legislation the government hasn't even passed yet.

Council tenants will have to develop a strategy against rent rises and deteriorating maintenance. If Camden's tenants organised a campaign to together not pay the increase, neither the council nor the government could do anything about it. It takes around six months to take any tenant to court for rent arrears. The council and the courts have oniy the capacity to run about 50 cases a month, and the majority of these are taken up by squatting cases.

It is always in the financial interests of the council to consider squats first, because the council is losing the entire rent and rates and also has to pay for keeping a family in bed and breakfast. The average weekly cost of not gaining possession of a squat is around £330, compared with the £3.50 a council tenant would be with-holding. The council therefore couldn't take action against one medium-sized estate which refused to pay an increase, let alone all its tenants.

The case for a repeat of the 1960 rent strike is there. If tenants are careful in the tactics they use and stand together even in moderate numbers the council doesn't have the legal resources nor the courts sufficient space to be able to defeat the action. The council would then have to meet with its tenants and negotiate a fair rent by consent.

DIARY 12 March: International Women's Day Demo, 11 am, Embankment 14 March: NHS COHSE strike and Day of Action 17 March: FAB public meeting with international speakers, 7.30 pm, ULU, Malet St, WC1 19 March: FAB national demo, 11.30 am, Embankment 8 April: London day of action against Clause 28

WEXT MEETING OF CAMDEN BRIEFING SUPPORTERS: Monday, 14 March, 8 pm, Camden Town Hall, Euston Rd, NW1

IGHTING THE

NOT CAVING IN !

me peaple in the Labour the position ists

ally believe that nobody lefing has b arqgui cuts ta defend the wark closing their eyes i wi : fen their to appa

that shou

organi the

as Reference library was occupied, marched to the Town Hall to appose cuts in

“ights Back held & meeting with 80 peaple,

attended a meeting against the ILEA cuts,

Oo members are still refusing ta sign the

that Camden is trying to impose,

Ve now restrained the council fram imposing the new cantrac until a High Court hearing,

# P there are letters in the local press oapposing a cub, oF @xpressing support for the "Manifesto"

Wh

* some Tenants Associations are sa incensed by an increase in rents and a cut in the repair service that they are discussing a rent strike

These same peaple al dismiss "Camden Fights Back" far being irrelevant a "Briefing" frant. As a matter of fact, representatives fram the Trades Council, ILTA, Nalgo, Eing’s Cross Women’s Centre, PLUG, the Nurseries Campaign attend the meetings as well as individual members of NUPE, UCATT and the Labour Party. This does represent a cross-section of the sort of people that fclalists should gather tagether ta fight the Tary attack en local gavernment.

What unites those whoa attend the "Fight Back" meetings is not a hatred of the Labour Farty or the Labour Group, but a genuine desire to fight the Tories and defend the gains of the working class in Camden that have been introduced by the Labour Council. However, "Fight Back" does believe that in order to have a chance of winning the fight against the poll tax, clause 28, the opting aut af estates, the abolition of the ILEA, etc... it is necessary ta make a stand mow . Futting off a challenge ta the government over the present round of cuts will only strengthen the Tories

By caving in now to the Tory imposed cuts, the Labour Group is only breeding cyn sm amonsgt those that have supported it in the past : the working class and the appressed . When the Local Gavernment and Housing Bille becomes law, local councils will have lost complete independance and we will see Labour Councils taking poll tax e@evaders toa court, closing down lesbian & gay units and selling off council estates purely to have the glary of remaining in office ! By refusing ta fight, the Labour Group is digging its own grave .

Fred Leplat,

CAMDEN "FIGHTS BACK" MEETS ON THURSDAYS AT 6pm AT THEATRO TECNIS, CROWNDALE ROAD, NWio . ALL LOCAL ORGANISATIONS ARE INVITED TO AFFILIATE AT A COST OF £5 AND SEND DELEGATES OR OBSERVERS. DETAILS c/a CAMDEN NALGO, TOWN HALL.

‘LONDON FIGHTS BACK' CONFERENCE: Saturday, 9 April

CAMDEN FAB meets every Tuesday, 7 pm at Kingsway Princeton College, Sidmouth St, off Grays Inn Rd, WC1. All welcome.

The Labour Group has removed the whip from the il ‘Manifesto’ councillors, preventing them from taking part in Labour Group decision making. They have been expelled because they refused to sign standing orders in isolation from a commitment to implement the manifesto.

Labour candidates for the borough elections in May i986 signed a declaration that they would abide by Group standing orders and rules, AND would agree to implement the manifesto. That manifesto said: "We are asking people to vote for Labour on the basis of our commitment to maintain services and jobs and to fight for locai democracy. A Labour Council elected on this basis will inevitably find itself in direct conflict with

the Tory Government's attempts to control our expenditure. The people of Camden should

know that by no ompiying with centra overnment's attempt

this context we will continue to defend and improve local services and defend jobs." Pretty clear, eh?

Since the general election, the

majority of the councillors have gone qe THIS 1S CAMDEN é %

back on their election promise. They Way A COUNCIL HERE — have refused to confront the government ie oc RaaY 200K, eT Ss BE § in the way that they promised. They ARN Sh prion peer pret

have betrayed the working class people > ii CUE CIVILEED who voted Labour so that jobs and ie services could be safeguarded against further attack from central government.

By excluding from the Group the 11 councillors who stuck for their socialist commitment, the way is now paved for the hard right of the remaining 33 councillors to force a leadership takeover at the Group's elections in May. Dykes, Woods and Fitzgerald may well be replaced by Shaw, Hulme and Smyth.

The 11 have not accepted exclusion from the Group, and have appealed to the National Constitutional Committee. Support for them is crucial as part of a broad fightback campaign. The following model resolution can be used for this purpose:-

) to the Camden New Journal

Tha

This (branch) notes with grave concern the decision of Camden Labour Group to withdraw the whip from 11 Labour councillors. These councillors have been expelled from the Group in order to silence their opposition to cuts in jobs and services.

The 11 represent a strong current of opinion within the Labour Farty and trade union movement which is opposed to Labour-controlled authorities carrying out Tory cuts, and which is committed to building resistance to Tory attacks on working class communities

and on local democracy. We call upon Camden Labour Group to immediately reinstate the 11 councillors,

recognising that they represent a legitimate position which is shared by many others in the Labour movement and should not be witch-hunted for this. Instead the Labour movement should be holding widespread and well-informed debates with its members and local communities on how to build resistance to the unprecedented attacks by central

government,

Send copies to Cir R.Sumray, Labour Group Secretary, Camden Town Hall; Greater London Labour Party Regional Executive, 195 Walworth Road, SEi7; and the Nationai Constitutional Committee, 150 Walworth Road, SEi7

Camden Labour Briefing, 24 Godwin Court, Crowndale Rd, NW1