|
| July 2003 |
|
An asset for activists Red & Green - The New Zealand journal of Left alternatives reviewed by Daphne Lawless ----------------- Confiscation of our heritage and rights By Grant Morgan The media would have us think that 'confiscations' belong to the distant past, like colonialism's unjust seizure of Maori land. But that's not right. Confiscations of our heritage and rights are going on today. ----------------- Democracy in Tonga At the start of June, the Tongan government re-imposed a ban on the import of Taimi'o Tonga, an Auckland-based newspaper produced by ex-pat publisher Kalafi Moala. At the same time, it introduced a bill to parliament allowing bans on anything deemed against the "public interest, national security, public order and morality". Moala labelled the bill "a declaration of dictatorship". ------------------ 'The movement has to have a socialist programme' SIONE is a Tongan socialist living in Auckland. He talked with Socialist Worker Monthly Review about the tensions in Tonga and the democracy movement. ------------------ More like Vietnam every day A top US general is already comparing the occupation of Iraq to the "quagmire" the US sank into in Vietnam. ------------------ Profit and power drive GE by David Colyer The first week of July saw a crop of news stories related to Genetic Engineering (GE). The stories highlighted why GE should be kept in the laboratory and out of the food chain and the wider environment. ------------------ Return to the streets The Labour-led government remains committed to GE. It plans to lift the two-year moratorium on the release of genetically modified organisms at the end of October. ------------------ Recolonising the Pacific Foreign minister Phil Goff announced in June that New Zealand would be contributing up to 200 soldiers to an Australian-led force in Solomon Islands. ------------------ 'Renationalise rail without compensation' by Grant Brookes The Labour government was moving to take back partial ownership of the railways as Socialist Worker Monthly Review went to press. ------------------- Reverse the flow for water 30 campaigners against water privatisation in Wellington took their lively protest to the city council offices. ------------------- 'Take back the power' by Grant Brookes July 5 sees the launch of an Alliance petition calling for community control over the electricity industry, an end to market provisions and environmentally sustainable energy alternatives. ------------------- The dirtiest word in parliament For years it's been the dirtiest word in parliament; now the Alliance is using it frequently. Alliance journal Red & Green aims at "encouraging discussion and debate about themes and issues relating to our political orientation socialist." ------------------- Editorial: The highest stage of capitalism ------------------- The union's not for show by John Anderson On June 27, the management of Sante Fe Gold learnt a lesson in workers' rights they're unlikely to forget, after a picket sent a message directly to their wallets. ------------------- |
|
An asset for activists Red & Green - The New Zealand journal of Left alternatives reviewed by Daphne Lawless Red and Green appears at a time when as explored in the "Radical Handbook" supplement in this magazine the New Zealand left is beginning to regroup and new relationships are forming. It advertises itself as "a journal of theory and politics" whose aim is to "help build the intellectual culture essential to the development of the Left in New Zealand". The Introduction to issue 1 explains how this project developed from the Alliance split in January 2002. The editors suggest that "anti-intellectual pragmatism" has historically characterised New Zealand politics, and particularly the left. Former Alliance leader Jim Anderton is mentioned as one of the main "pragmatists" who opposed neo-liberalism without having a coherent theoretical alternative. It's suggested that this might explain his capitulation to the Labour Party. The need for a thought-out alternative to imperialist globalisation is indeed vital. Socialist Worker has put forward the "broad programme" for the peace and justice groups contained in the "Handbook" for the same reason. The bulk of Red & Green is taken up with analysis of the war in Iraq. A good taste comes from the article, "NZ to join Iraq occupation", by Mike Treen. "The people of Iraq have already suffered at least a million deaths under UN Security Council-imposed sanctions", he says. "Supporters of social justice should remain focussed on the principled defence of the right of all oppressed people to self-determination free of imperialist interference and control. "We must continue to demand the immediate withdrawal of all foreign troops from Iraq and no New Zealand military involvement". In an impressive feat of investigative journalism, Nicky Hager's article on "NZ's secret military links" gives an account of the SAS's role in Afghanistan an affair so secret that prime minister Helen Clark wouldn't even admit they were there. This very secrecy is Hager's main target. "New Zealanders pay for these soldiers," he says. "Everything they do and everyone they kill is done in New Zealand's name. The public clearly has a right to be part of those decisions." Hager also dispels the myth that New Zealand has been excluded from the Western alliance since 1985. Instead, he says, "most defence planning, training and equipping continues firmly within a US alliance framework, much the same as if New Zealand was still formally in the ANZUS alliance". Aziz Choudry examines the links between the "war on terror" and institutions of global capitalism like the World Trade Organisation. He argues powerfully that "the military, the police and security agencies act as the muscle of the free market economy". "There has been much talk about bringing the anti-globalisation movement together with the peace movement. "The pressing issues which they confront are tightly connected. We cannot afford the luxury of single-issue politics." Other pieces range from John Minto's fiery riposte to Michael Bassett's cheerleading for the war, to an analysis of the motives of the American invasion by the Research Unit for Political Economy. But as well as describing the motivations and tactics of our enemies, Red & Green also contains articles exploring how we might fight back and oppose them. One of these is Quentin Findlay's "The Road to Wigan Pier Revisited". Findlay argues that the Alliance, and the "democratic Left" in general, should adopt an explicit socialist agenda. He defines "socialism" as "a society in which the dominant spheres of economic influence are socially owned or controlled, the economy is directed toward social goals and private concerns are subservient to those goals". Findlay credits his definition to "the young Marx", but his view is actually closer to that of Nye Bevan, a minister in the British Labour government after world war two. Bevan said that socialism was based on "the conquest of the commanding heights of the economy". Findlay's socialism is also a "market socialism", where "capital would continue to exist", but alongside a public sector and a co-operative sector run by "worker or community participation". He claims, " If private concerns, such as multinational corporations, can create and manipulate markets for their own ends, then socialists can do likewise by using the state and the co-operative sectors." But if the state and capital are not under the direct control of workers, then we have no way to democratically plan the economy as a whole. Co-operatively owned enterprises would still be forced to compete with one another and with big private corporations in selling their goods and services. While the workers may not have a boss over them, market pressure would drive them to cut their own wages and conditions. Booms and slumps would still occur. It's also unlikely that capitalists would sit idly by and watch a co-operative sector take off. Findlay finally argues for the Alliance to become "an organisation that promotes political thought and activity within the wider community". But his models are the Swedish Social Democrats and the old Italian Communist Party both of which became pillars of the establishment in their respective countries. Many Alliance members would be envisaging a more radical future for their party. Taken overall, the first issue of Red and Green is a great asset for New Zealand activists. As a forum for open theoretical debate on the left it can also foster its development and regroupment, especially as a broader range of left activists get involved in reading, discussing and contributing to it. |
|
Confiscation of our heritage and rights by Grant Morgan The media would have us think that 'confiscations' belong to the distant past, like colonialism's unjust seizure of Maori land. But that's not right. Confiscations of our heritage and rights are going on today. It doesn't matter if you're Asian, Maori, Polynesian or Pakeha, or if you're female or male. If you belong to the grassroots, then you're being dispossessed by the market and the government in so many ways. Here are just some of the confiscations happening right now: Confiscation of workers' rights Under New Zealand law, all strikes are illegal unless connected to talks about a new work contract. Due to government propaganda, however, many workers don't know their freedom to strike has been confiscated. With just one exception, Helen Clark's government continued all of National's harsh legal bans on workers' right to strike. Labour's law forbids any worker from going on strike against government policies, mass layoffs, managers picking on staff, speedups on the job, environmental dangers or wars of aggression. Nor can workers strike to support other strikers, no matter what their dispute is about. The aim is to weaken the combined strength of workers, so that employers have more power over the rest of us. Workers standing up for their rights face severe penalties. Some Auckland firefighters are currently facing a court case. They had been on pickets to isolate a small group linked to managers' failed efforts to crush the firefighters' union. If these firefighters are found guilty, yet continue with peaceful actions to defend their union, the law allows them to be jailed for three months and have their homes, cars and other personal property seized. Such legislative violence against the workers' movement is disgraceful from a government calling themselves 'Labour'. Confiscation of workers' jobs The power of capital is so great and the global market is so shaky that job insecurity haunts most NZ workers. Every day, some workers have their jobs confiscated by profit-driven employers. Hundreds of timber workers in the central North Island are facing unemployment. Their bosses blame the market. When the market favoured them, the forestry bosses were happy to cream off big profits generated by the labour of their low-paid staff. Now these same bosses are confiscating workers' jobs to protect their corporate wealth which workers' labour created in the first place. Shouldn't the bosses who profited from the market be told by the government to protect their staff when the market goes sour? Any such suggestion is, of course, howled down by corporate profiteers. If Helen Clark does nothing to save timber workers' jobs, it will be clear they put bosses' profits and the capitalist market first. Confiscation of legal rights The people running society say the law must always be obeyed. But when it suits their interests, the ruling elite confiscate other peoples' legal rights in a flash. Two recent examples involve Maori customary title and migrants' rights. Court of Appeal judges cleared the way for the Maori Land Court to consider an iwi claim for customary title of some coastline. This judgement finally upheld international law on indigenous customary title. Next day, Helen Clark proposed a new law to give the state full ownership of the coast. The prime minister was backed by National, full of crap about 'one standard of citizenship'. But the coast is being commercialised by a coalition of wealthy investors and state bureaucrats. They're squeezing out the rest of us from many parts of the coast. Iwi customary title could improve public access by blocking commercialisation. Helen Clark's confiscation of the legal rights of Maori, the first migrants to Aotearoa, is matched by Labour's 'dawn raid' on the legal rights of recent migrants. A new immigration law which victimises non-whites and the poor was rushed through parliament in just a few hours. An 'invitation only' exclusion zone has been created around New Zealand. Even migrants with enough 'entry points' may miss out. They must also be 'invited in' by immigration bureaucrats, who will service the labour demands of employers. Helen Clark's government has shifted the balance of power even more in favour of bosses and their labour market. Because the rules have suddenly changed, thousands of would-be migrants already in New Zealand risk deportation. Their legal rights have been stolen away. NZ's independence: Another confiscation US president George W. Bush wants to create an American world order. This evil empire of bombs and bucks is against the interests of most people on the planet. Yet Helen Clark is supporting the US 'war on terrorism', which is Washington's excuse for bullying and invading other countries, and is sending NZ troops to Iraq. Labour's sell-out to US imperialism is an extension of National's arse-licking. Labour and National have confiscated New Zealand's independence. Yet they're the first to wave the NZ flag. Our independence will only be reclaimed when grassroots people in New Zealand link up with grassroots people overseas to build a world that serves the needs of humanity. |
|
Democracy in Tonga At the start of June, the Tongan government re-imposed a ban on the import of Taimi'o Tonga, an Auckland-based newspaper produced by ex-pat publisher Kalafi Moala. At the same time, it introduced a bill to parliament allowing bans on anything deemed against the "public interest, national security, public order and morality". Moala labelled the bill "a declaration of dictatorship". The ban came against a backdrop of tensions between New Zealand and Tonga. In the lead-up to Tongan elections last year, foreign minister Phil Goff's threatened to withhold aid unless the government was reformed. He was accused of meddling in Tonga's internal affairs. Relations deteriorated further when an extraordinary report by New Zealand's former high commissioner in Tonga, Brian Smythe, was leaked to the NZ Herald. "From a socialist perspective", wrote Smythe, "the system is anathema. It involves redistribution from the poor to the rich. "Social problems in Tonga are building youth unemployment, drugs, crime, suicide, traffic accidents, prostitution. "The only long-term solution is the creation of a society where people have a say in their own future and can work for their own betterment". Tonga is currently dominated by the king and his nobles. Of the 27 MPs in the Tongan parliament, nine are appointed by the king and nine more by the 33 members of the country's nobility. Only nine are directly elected by the "commoners". The royal family have used their power to amass huge personal fortunes. The king holds millions of dollars in offshore bank accounts. In 1997, Forbes magazine put the wealth of princess Pilolevu at over T$30 million. The average wage in Tonga today is less than T$50 a week. Moala's Taimi'o Tonga newspaper is aligned with the Tongan Human Rights and Democracy Movement (HRDM), which is pushing for a 30-seat parliament with all MPs elected by the people. In last year's general election, the HRDM won seven of the nine available seats. Honolulu-based Pacific Magazine said that "unemployment, poverty, information leakages that disclose corruption and great discrepancies of wealth, privilege, and opportunity enjoyed by members and supporters of the monarchist establishment compared with what most ordinary Tongans have, is swelling support for the democracy movement ideals". Support was strongest on the main island of Tongatapu, where two thirds of Tonga's working class are concentrated. Around a quarter of Tongans are employed as wage earners. Many of the rest work plots of land on estates controlled by the nobles. Most Tongan workers are not organised in trade unions, but nurses and teachers have formed workers' organisations. Criticisms of the monarchy are strong among public sector workers. But while workers increasingly support the HRDM, its leaders are not offering solutions to the problems of unemployment, poverty and job insecurity. Last year, HDRM head Akilisi Pohiva praised a plan put forward by the finance minister for Tonga to cut public spending, privatise state assets and join the World Trade Organisation. In March, he welcomed the backing of the Bush administration in the US. Pohiva is also seeking support from New Zealand's Labour government. But New Zealand intervention in Tongan politics weakens the democracy movement. "When we talk of the need for democratisation", said Smythe's report, "they rally in defence of their monarchy". Labour hopes reforms will open up Tonga to New Zealand capitalists and defuse political instability, but not abolish the monarchy or tackle the roots of inequality. So they continue to back the king militarily. Smythe reported, "Some soldiers see the democracy movement as the 'enemy'. We in New Zealand effectively set up the Tongan Defence Service and remain closely associated with it." Green MP Keith Locke has called on Labour to cut military ties. "We shouldn't be helping train an armed force that may be used against the people", he said. "Withdrawing military aid now would send a strong signal to the Tongan government. It would also give heart to those Tongans pushing for more democracy in their country." |
|
'The movement has to have a socialist programme' SIONE is a Tongan socialist living in Auckland. He talked with Socialist Worker Monthly Review about the tensions in Tonga and the democracy movement. ------------ Peoples' idea of what is wrong with the government is changing. They used to blame the nobles and say the king was doing his best. But people are starting to blame the king for not ruling properly. There are other issues coming out now. Prices have almost doubled in the last year, and wages are pretty much the same. Land ownership papers are in the name of the people, but the nobles administer the land. People pay a tax to use it. There are probably going to be conflicts coming up regarding ownership and what a noble's estate means. Most people can see the nobles are irrelevant, especially the younger generation. Another thing is about land-owners who don't even live in the country. [HRDM leader] Akilisi first got elected in 1987. He got a huge reputation from the stuff he's been doing. The thing they are mainly talking about is corruption. But they're not making economic demands. The Australian and New Zealand governments are going to try and co-opt the top of the democracy movement. Some wealthy business people have already thrown their weight behind it. At the same time, a lot of common people support them, too. It depends what Akilisi does as well. It's still at an early stage. I think the working class movement is going to come out of the left wing of this one. The leadership of the movement has to come from the common people and the workers. It'll have to have a socialist programme, which means abolishing the monarchy, and economic policies that benefit the common people. A lot of this stuff would seem pretty wild to most people at the moment. But the people looking to the democracy movement are looking for solutions. Tonga's economy is being integrated into the world economy by the forces of globalisation. A majority of Tongans live overseas, including 40,000 here in New Zealand. Most are workers, and the money they send back keeps Tonga's economy afloat. Through the overseas workers the movement in Tonga can link up with the labour movement internationally and build powerful support for a programme that really benefits the people. On the other hand, behind the democratic talk of Western governments lurk business interests that want to get their hands on the country's assets. In the long term the different forces that make up the movement Akilisi, his supporters, business, the governments of New Zealand and Australia are going to start pulling in different directions.| |
|
More like Vietnam every day A top US general is already comparing the occupation of Iraq to the "quagmire" the US sank into in Vietnam. The US had "failed to understand the mindset and attitudes of the Iraqi people and the depth of hostility towards the US", says retired general William Nash. To date, 57 US and 8 British soldiers and scores of Iraqi people have been killed in armed clashes since George Bush announced the end of "combat" on May 1. After one clash, the Independent newspaper commented, "The official American reports of the search operation chillingly resemble those issued at the height of the Vietnam War, with all the dead described as enemy combatants." In a further, sick echo of Vietnam, US troops in the western city of Ramadi copied a scene from the film Apocalypse Now. They blasted out Wagner's piece of music "Ride of the Valkyries" before smashing into houses. In the movie the same music plays as a crazed US officer launches a helicopter strike on a Vietnamese village. Democracy canned The US and Britain are abandoning promises to bring democracy to Iraq and turning to increased military repression. "US commanders have ordered a halt to local elections and self rule in provincial cities across Iraq," reports the Washington Post newspaper. The US occupying forces are "choosing instead to install their own handpicked mayors and administrators, many of whom are former Iraqi military leaders". The paper says the order "follows similar decisions by the 3rd Infantry Division in central Iraq and those of British commanders in the south." Iraqi generals and police colonels with close ties to Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath Party are now mayors of a dozen cities, including Samarra, Najaf, Tikrit, Balad and Baqubah. NZ joins the war 60 army engineers will be joining a detachment of mine clearers in Iraq. They will operate with British units. Prime minister Helen Clark says the troops will perform "humanitarian work". But defence chief Bruce Ferguson stressed that the engineers will be armed and were "authorised to defend themselves if they were with a force that came under fire". "All my soldiers", he said, "whether they be infantry, armoured corps, or in this case engineers, they are first and foremost soldiers." 'Shoot the fuckers' London's Evening Standard newspaper carried chilling interviews last month with US troops who admit they kill civilians. Anthony Castillo of the US infantry said, "When they were there, they were in the wrong spot, so they were considered the enemy." Sergeant John Meadows said, "Like, the only way to get through shit like that was to concentrate on getting through it by killing as many people as you can." Corporal Richardson added, "You make the rules as you go along. Like, in Fallujah we get rocks thrown at us by kids. You wanna turn round and shoot one of the little fuckers." Castillo also pointed to the rising anger among US troops at their own commanders. "We're more angry at the generals who are making these decisions and who never hit the ground, and who don't get shot at or have to look at the bloody bodies." |
|
Profit and power drive GE by David Colyer The first week of July saw a crop of news stories related to Genetic Engineering (GE). GE corn has once again been discovered growing in this country, the government agency overseeing GE has been strongly criticised in a report and the European Union (EU) has given into US pressure to remove bans on GE. The stories highlighted why GE should be kept in the laboratory and out of the food chain and the wider environment. GE corn discovered in a Japanese pizza has been traced to Gisbourne. The corn was grown from imported seed that been tested and declared GE free before arriving in this county. If engineered genes can contaminate GE free corn when there is supposed to be a moratorium on GE crops, then we can hardly believe claims that non-GE crops will be protected from contamination after the moratorium is lifted at the end of October. The Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) is the government agency charged with overseeing GE. An independent report out this month found that, among other problems, ERMA was "so strongly oriented to processing applications", at the expense of monitoring what gene engineers were actually doing, "that the recurrence of monitoring mishaps cannot be ruled out". These findings suggest that ERMA is a rubber stamp for GE, compromising health and safety to make life easy for the biotech industry. Meanwhile, the US backed by other countries, including New Zealand has been building a case in the World Trade Organisation (WTO) to force the EU to drop bans on the import of GE products. The Europeans have now buckled to the pressure and dropped their bans. This was a clear case of the US flexing its economic muscle after its "victory" in Iraq. New Zealand's support and the EU back-down was a recognition of US dominance. The WTO case highlights that the same desire for profit and power that drive war and globalisation are also behind GE. |
|
Return to the streets The Labour-led government remains committed to GE. It plans to lift the two-year moratorium on the release of genetically modified organisms at the end of October. But the GE Free movement is starting to reactivate. Wellington environmentalist group Harakeke Eco Collective is organising a march from Te Aro Park to parliament at noon on July 19. A week later a national strategy hui for the GE free movement will be held in Auckland. Labour introduced the moratorium after 20,000 people marched in Auckland in September 2001. Stopping the government from lifting the moratorium would probably require an even more massive mobilisation. It's hard to see that happening in the next three months. However, the reactivation of the movement in the lead-up to October could lay the foundations for on-going mass resistance once the moratorium is lifted. "GE isn't just about food safety, it's about democracy. The government is pursuing the agenda of business and ignoring public opinion. What motivated me to get stuck in [to the GE free campaign] was a newspaper article by Marion Hobbs in which she said New Zealanders were opposed to GE because they were scientifically illiterate. She said opponents of GE had adopted an almost religious opposition and would never be convinced, in effect saying that if opinions are deeply held they can be ignored. Whatever our reasons for opposing GE, we have a right to them. We need to get people on the streets to win. We can win all the scientific arguments, but that doesn't mean the government will change policy. We can win the debate but still lose the real battle. We're planning another big protest before the moratorium ends in October we've got to make the opposition to GE strong and public. If the government ignores deeply held reservations about GE it's going to suffer the consequences." SAM BUCHANAN, Harakeke Eco Collective activist -------- "The GE free movement has become mainstream. A myriad of organisations are now involved. Rural Women and the Sustainability Council want the moratorium extended. The movement is bigger than any one group. Federated Farmers want 1 percent to be the acceptable level of GE contamination in "GE free" food. This denies everyone's right to GE free food and undermines our export image. From a scientific point of view it's outrageous. The "acceptable" contamination could be from human genes. The most outrageous issue, at the moment, is our government's support for the US case at World Trade Organisation to force the Europeans to accept GE food. This is like New Zealand forcing nuclear power on Pacific nations. The challenge is to get the message out. It is not enough for the GE free movement to be groups like Socialist Worker and the Greens. It has to be ordinary New Zealanders across the whole political and ethnic spectrum. We must demand legislation to protect 100 percent GE free production and environment." JON CARAPIET, spokesperson for GE Free NZ |
|
Recolonising the Pacific Foreign minister Phil Goff announced in June that New Zealand would be contributing up to 200 soldiers to an Australian-led force in Solomon Islands. As the NZ Herald commented, the move "will mark a profound shift in policy in the Pacific". It represents a return to a disastrous policy of direct colonial intervention. Goff labelled the Solomons a "failed state" that needed outside intervention by Australia and New Zealand. Since 1998, ethnic conflict between the Isatabu people of the main island, Guadalcanal, and people from the neighbouring island of Malaita has claimed hundreds of lives. Around 20,000 people have been driven from their homes and the economy has collapsed. But it's Western intervention that created the breakdown in the first place. Prior to the 1880s, the Solomons were a collection of separate, self-governing islands. In 1883, they were colonised by Germany and Britain. Former union leader Joses Tuhanuku said the colonialists "took the best land from us in exchange for items like empty bottles, tobacco, soap, fishing line and hooks. "Then they began to convert proud and dignified Solomon Islanders into a workforce of down-trodden and degraded human beings." During the second world war, the US captured the island of Guadalcanal from Japan. The island became a key military base. The US occupiers shifted the capital from the more developed island of Malaita to Honiara on Guadalcanal. They also brought large numbers of Malaitans to run the government and work in key industries. The people of Guadalcanal were driven off their land. This process continued after Solomon Islands independence in 1978. Australian companies took the place of the US military in driving migration and fostering divisions. In 1998, Australian multinational Delta Gold opened a huge mine on Guadalcanal. The mine accounted for a quarter of Solomon Island's economy. It produced $50 million a year for Delta Gold but returned nothing to local people except poisoned rivers and land. The tensions rose to boiling point in 1998 when the Asian economic crisis hit and pushed up unemployment. Local elites on Guadalcanal led the Isatabu Freedom Movement (IFM) in attacks on Malaitans to divert anger away from their own privileges and policies. The Malaitan Eagle Force (MEF) took up arms in response. The MEF is led by Andrew Nori, a former finance minister who implemented the neo-liberal policies demanded by the International Monetary Fund and the Australian government. He resigned in disgrace in 1994 after being caught stealing $70,000 worth of aid money. The real divide in the Solomons, meanwhile, is not between Isatabu and Malaitans. It's revealed by in fact that 1 percent of households receive 52 percent of all income. The military intervention now being planned by Australia and New Zealand is not motivated by the desperate plight of the vast majority of the people. Both governments have been withholding aid to the Solomons to pressure the government into slashing jobs and introducing more neo-liberal reforms. The reasons for intervention were plainly stated in a report titled Our Failing Neighbour, published by Australian Strategic Policy Institute last month. Firstly, "Australia's standing in the wider world including with the United States is at stake". And secondly, "the collapse of Solomon Islands is depriving Australia of business and investment opportunities". In particular, Australia wants the gold mine, closed by the conflict in 2000, back in operation. In a visit to the Solomons last year, Goff said explicitly that stability was needed so that Delta Gold would invest $25 million to re-open the mine. New Zealand businesses like financial services giant Tower also have interests in the Solomons. Goff was awaiting a formal invitation from prime minister Kemakeza before finalising the deployment, so that "the operation was not seen as some kind of neo-colonial occupation". But the Solomon Islands Council of Trade Unions has branded his government corrupt. The NZ Herald reported an unnamed church leader saying, "he sees foreign military intervention as his only chance to stay in power". Dr Sarcisius Tara, a Solomons academic and peace negotiator, says Australia's planned intervention is for Australia rather than the Solomons. Tragically, the Australian Green Party has supported the intervention. The Green Party here, silent so far, should oppose New Zealand involvement in what Australia calls its "coalition of the willing" and demand that the government send aid instead. ------------------ "A small, disciplined Anzac force might readily be able to overcome the untrained and undisciplined youth of the militant groups. But that would not provide a solution to the political and ethnic problems which underlie the conflict. To the contrary, any death incurred as a result of youths taking on New Zealand troops would result in blame, anger and pay-back being directed against New Zealanders for years to come." Foreign minister Phil Goff, July 2000. |
|
'Renationalise rail without compensation' by Grant Brookes The Labour government was moving to take back partial ownership of the railways as Socialist Worker Monthly Review went to press. $44 million was handed over to Tranz Rail in June. This will be either a down-payment on a bigger $126 million deal or, if shareholders reject the deal later this month, a loan. The proposed deal involves $1 for the tracks (the price paid by Tranz Rail in 1993), $50 million for the land under them and $76 million for a 35 percent stake in the company. The government would later look to sell its 35 percent share, possibly to Australian freight firm Toll Holdings, leaving it with just the tracks. The government's moves come after a three-year campaign to "take back the track", led by the railworkers' RMT union and supported by other groups like the Green Party. Campaigners are now divided over the final goal of taking back the track and whether the current deal meets it. RMTU general secretary Wayne Butson told Socialist Worker Monthly Review last year that "the aim is not to protect the jobs and conditions of rail workers. The thrust of the campaign is public conscience". The government should just take the tracks, he said, and use control of the network to encourage multinationals to come in and set up shop. Butson didn't want the profit motive out of rail. He was personally "a great fan of profit". "I don't see any chance to get this government to turn rail back into a non-profit government department", he said. Others in the campaign disagree. NZ Rail was sold off by the National government in 1993. Even Labour finance minister Michael Cullen admits that Tranz Rail was "the beneficiary of a pretty soft privatisation". A conglomerate led by US multinational Wisconsin Central and New Zealand investment bankers Fay Richwhite paid $328 million for the company. At the time, replacement value of rolling stock (locomotives and wagons) alone was $2.8 billion. Just three years earlier, the government had poured $1.5 billion into NZ Rail. Even then, the conglomerate only handed over $107 million of their own money. They took out the equivalent of a mortgage on the company to buy the rest. Economist Brian Gaynor commented, "On day one they effectively stripped more than $200 million out of NZ Rail's equity. That equity had been contributed by New Zealand taxpayers." Between 1993 and 1999, they made profits of $381 million, quadrupling their original investment. They did it by cutting jobs, increasing exploitation so a smaller workforce made more money for the company for less pay and slashing spending on maintenance and safety. Nearly 20,000 rail workers were laid off in the 1980s and 1990s in preparation for privatisation. After 1993, Tranz Rail cut staff further from 5,326 to 3,757. According to former managing director Francis Small, meanwhile, the revenue generated by each employee rose from $91,800 in 1993 to $122,800 in 1998. Last year each worker made $177,200 for the company. Tranz Rail has not bought a single main-line locomotive. In 1993, there were 230 locos. Today there are 140. The rest have broken down beyond repair. Underspending on track maintenance has left the rail network in a dangerous state of disrepair. Tranz Rail is the most lethal employer in the country by far. Since 1994, 18 rail workers have been killed at work and hundreds more injured. RMTU industrial officer Brian Cronin is one campaigner who's not completely happy with the government's current deal. Cronin told a public meeting in Wellington on June 28 that "it could be a Tory [National] government, and it would probably still be doing the same thing". By taking responsibility for the track while leaving the rest of Tranz Rail in private hands, the government will simply relieve investors of a huge maintenance bill and boost their profits even more. "Privatising profits, socialising losses, that's the story", Cronin said. In May, corporate watchdog CAFCA called for Tranz Rail to be nationalised without compensation. The government could pass a law to take back the whole company without shelling out $126 million on the deal. Spokesperson and former rail worker Murray Horton said, "Considering the enormous damage it has wrought in its ten years on the job, this corporate criminal should be paying us compensation". Cronin agreed. "We should give them a dollar and tell them to piss off", he said. Forcing the government to renationalise all of rail will take an industrial campaign, involving the 3,000 members RMTU in defence of jobs and safety. Cabinet papers released to Dominion Post under the Official Information Act last year say that separating track ownership from train operators in Britain was one factor behind a doubling of accidents. The private owners of Tranz Rail also want to increase risks by cutting shunting crews from two to one. Rail workers have shown a willingness to take industrial action. Anger in Wellington boiled over twice last year in wildcat strikes. The union warned in May of national strikes at Tranz Rail and Tranz Scenic after contract negotiations stalled. Such a campaign could win wide public support. An NBR-Consultus poll found 67 percent of people wanted the government to take back Tranz Rail. But it would mean pressuring union secretary Wayne Butson to change his views and make the defence of jobs and safety a campaign priority alongside public interest. |
|
Reverse the flow for water 30 campaigners against water privatisation in Wellington took their lively protest to the city council offices on July 1. The protest coincided with the first day of operation for a new "council-owned trading company" controlling water in Wellington and Hutt City. The company came into existence at the same time that Labour's new Local Government Act. This law is designed to promote "public-private partnerships" (PPPs), under which corporations can run water services for profit. The councils say they don't intend to privatise water. But they're encouraging people to install water meters "voluntarily". Meters allow user-pays charging, necessary for privatisation. Campaigner Maria McMillan had earlier told a public meeting, "There is still this huge thrust towards privatisation". City councillors attended a conference on PPPs last year to hear presentations from water multinational United Water. Carrying shovels and bolt cutters to show what might happen if the councils forcibly install residential water meters, the protesters' message was, "Don't even think about it". Meanwhile in Auckland, the campaign against council-owned Metrowater is gathering pace. Metrowater already has a user-pays system of water meters. 90 people attended a meeting in Avondale on June 4, organised by the Water Pressure Group (WPG) to build a boycott of water user charges. WPG spokesperson Penny Bright told Socialist Worker Monthly Review, "We've got hundreds of boycotters, but we want thousands." They are also opposing the GATS international free trade deal, which Labour is signing up to. GATS will push councils into privatising water. Penny says Metrowater bills of $300 for three months are common. "User charges are simply a mechanism for reducing the rates for those who can most afford to pay, putting up the burden on those who can least afford to pay", she said. WPG demand that the council abolish user-charges and fund water out of general rates, set according to property value, and are backing up that demand with direct action. |
|
'Take back the power' by Grant Brookes July 5 sees the launch of an Alliance petition calling for community control over the electricity industry, an end to market provisions and environmentally sustainable energy alternatives. The petition, part of a campaign to "take back the power", comes after the electricity crisis of May and June the third big power shortage in New Zealand in 12 years. While a lack of Autumn rain meant that southern hydro lakes were low, the real reason for the crisis was corporate control of electricity and market competition. Competition between rival companies, each owning a piece of the electricity system, has undermined the ability to plan its overall development. At the height of the crisis, a hydro generator in Taranaki was spilling water because the lines couldn't carry any more power to the national grid. The generator and network owner had been scrapping over who should pay for extra power lines. Profit-driven electricity corporations, meanwhile, have no interest in building spare power plants or stockpiling fuel for use in "dry years". New Zealand electricity is dominated by three state-owned enterprises Meridian, Mighty River Power and Genesis. Genesis chairperson Brian Corban said that extra capacity for dry years "doesn't actually accord with the financial imperatives that are imposed on us as a state-owned enterprise". Under the law, he said, the company's job is to make a profit. Mighty River Power closed down a power plant at Marsden Point. Meridian has built new plants in Australia, where profits are higher. Labour's energy minister Pete Hodgson admitted that "the market does not encourage generators to hold stand-by generation that will run only in very dry years". "Such generation", he said, "will not pay for itself by normal commercial criteria. It will sit idle most of the time earning nothing for its owners." Since the creation of the electricity market in 1996, commercial users have seen power prices fall by 16 percent in real terms while residential prices rose by 8 percent. The Comalco aluminium smelter near Bluff, which uses 15 percent of this country's power, pays around 2 cents per unit a fifth of the price to most householders. When the power crisis hit, instead of taking control off the market, Labour launched the "Target 10 percent" national campaign. Householders were told to save power for the benefit of the country. But little of the unused power was actually "saved" and the main benefit went to the electricity generating companies, who simply sold the power that wasn't used in peoples' homes to big industries on the "spot market" at twice the price. At the end of May, Labour announced its long-term plan for solving electricity shortages. The government will pay for reserve power plants and fuel stockpiles. This won't be funded by taxing commercial users who've profited from the electricity market, or by taxing the generators who refused to build "dry year" capacity. The law requiring state-owned enterprises to put profit first won't be changed either. Instead, Labour will slap a new tax on ordinary householders to raise $190 million a year. In line with business wishes, the government-funded generators for dry years will be fired by fossil fuels. These release greenhouse gases and cause global warming. On June 24, Greenpeace activists intercepted a coal ship in Tauranga harbour. Greenpeace climate campaigner Vanessa Atkinson said, "Genesis and Solid Energy have exploited the energy crisis to embed polluting coal in our energy system. The government is adding to the problem by planning more fossil fuels power stations as 'dry year reserve'." The Alliance electricity campaign co-ordinator, Quentin Findlay, told Socialist Worker Monthly Review that he's found at public meetings that "people are just sick to death of market provision". But prime minister Helen Clark has stated her firm commitment to the electricity market. Rolling back corporate control will take a mass campaign, built by a broad coalition and involving workers, who have the power to stop the market's flow of profits through industrial action. |
|
The dirtiest word in parliament For years it's been the dirtiest word in parliament; now the Alliance is using it frequently. Alliance journal Red & Green aims at "encouraging discussion and debate about themes and issues relating to our political orientation socialist." Union organiser Quentin Findlay advances "a possible popular socialist vision for the Alliance - a programme for fundamental shift in economic, social and political relations between labour and capital." People who've talked with Alliance activists since their latest conference know that raising socialism as a practical alternative to capitalism is being vigorously debated inside the party. If the Alliance comes out to bat for socialism, it will be a big plus for workers' industrial action. When unionists struggle against employers for better wages and conditions, they do so from a position of disadvantage. Employers have vast financial resources that no union can match; they also have the forces of the state to call on when things start getting tough. In this unequal struggle, one thing, which can help workers, is the power of ideas. The history of the labour movement is, in part, the continuous development of one great idea, the idea of universal human equality. English radicals the Diggers tried putting the idea into practice in 1649, by demanding communal ownership of land. The Russian revolution of 1917 fired workers' imagination worldwide with the idea that a totally new system was possible. The Diggers were swiftly crushed by landlords. Destroying the Russian revolution took longer. But whilst Soviet Union stood as a socialist country (and even during the later years when it was socialist in name only) the idea of a "socialist sixth of the world" stood as a beacon of hope for workers. To many, the Soviet Union was proof that capitalism was not the only possible type of modern society. After the collapse the Soviet Union, apologists for capitalism claimed final victory in the field of ideas. They crowed that capitalism was the only system which could possibly work, that variants of capitalism had always been in existence, that capitalism arose from "human nature" and that it could never be changed. All those arguments are demonstrably untrue, but they're frequently repeated today, and accepted by many, including, probably, a majority of trade union officials. That's indicated by the widespread top union level acceptance of Partnership. CTU president Ross Wilson, and leaders of the biggest unions such as the Public Service Association and the Engineers Union constantly call for union "partnership" with employers and the government (itself a major employer). Partnership suggests an on going mutually supportive relationship between equals. It confers a raised air of status on top union officials for them to present themselves as employers "partners", but for most workers in capitalist society, partnership with their boss is a joke. Under capitalism, employers own the means of producing the necessities of life. They run their businesses in the way that will return maximum profits. Full employment, environmental concerns, regional development, health, safety and other social considerations are always secondary to private profit. In this set-up, genuine partnership, with workers needs getting equal status with corporate objectives, isn't possible. The bitterly fought 82-day Kinleith mill dispute is just the most recent reminder of that. Partnership means trusting and sticking up for your partner. In negotiations with employers, partnership implies identification with "your" company instead of solidarity with other workers. It implies making concessions to help the firm in the hope that there might be some sort of reward later, "when times get better". In real life union struggles a partnership mindset from workers results in half-hearted efforts from the union side, so as not to overly damage their partner. Anyone with the slightest experience of union negotiations knows employers never take that attitude themselves. At the bargaining table, employers are always hard out for their side, and the only thing they like better than that is not bargaining at all, but dictating terms absolutely. Some union officials argue for union concessions to help keep firms viable, so workers can keep their jobs. Thousands of former freezing workers know it doesn't happen that way. Concessions made "to keep works operating" were no guarantee of employment when it suited the bosses to shut up shop. The best way for unions to counter employer's dictates is to present a solid front of total commitment to the workers. That means always putting workers interests before the company and before anti-worker government laws. Socialist ideas help unionists do that. Instead of looking to the company, which will disown them at the first downturn, socialists look to the power of unity with workers on other jobs, and in other countries. Instead of constantly being denied justice by anti-worker laws, socialists break through those laws by mass organisation. Socialist ideas also liberate us from the deadening capitalist message that "this is as good as it gets." Socialism offers the inspiring possibility of replacing capitalism with a new society run by workers themselves. Such hopes inspires workers to fight with more confidence in the here and now. Alliance members are represented at all levels of the union movement. Their revival of a socialist current inside unions would provide a much-needed breath of fresh air. |
|
The highest stage of capitalism A squad of US troops kicks in a door and forces an Iraqi man to the ground. Not too far off, the first shipment of Iraqi oil is pumped onto a waiting tanker. Tooled-up "robocops" in Sacramento, California, emerge from an armoured personnel carrier and crack the butts of their M-16 rifles down on GE free protesters, while US-engineered genes spread unseen across Gisbourne corn fields. Men with guns, in Australian and New Zealand army uniforms, drill in preparation for deployment to the resource-rich Solomon Islands, to the quiet approval of shareholders. "Keeping the peace", say the rulers, "weapons of mass destruction", "ending hunger in Africa". From the cities of Iraq to the public services of the West, from the reaches of outer space soon to be invaded by orbiting missile defence systems to the microscopic building blocks of life, corporations are extending their colonisation through fraud and force of arms. Control is being taken out of the hands of the vast majority of people on the planet and vested in the market and the generals. All of this has a name imperialism. Imperialism is not a product of this president, or that "unethical" corporation. It's not driven solely by the arms industry, or the oil industry. Imperialism is, as the Russian revolutionary Vladimir Lenin put it over 80 years ago, "a stage in the development of capitalism". In most nations today, one or two giant corporations dominate entire branches of the economy. They compete across the globe through military force. Imperialism is not new. 150 years ago, British troops were confiscating Maori land. But with the long term outlook now showing a failing US economy, the Bush administration has gambled on using its military superiority to give US corporations a competitive advantage. By escalating imperial aggression, they're pushing the planet towards a new world war. In this country, hundreds of thousands of Labour voters are disturbed by the way the world is heading. But far from standing up to imperialism, the Labour government is backing one colonisation after another. Workers hired to produce and provide the goods and services needed by society, along with their families, make up about three-quarters of New Zealand's population. Their numbers, their key role in the economy and their workplace organisation make workers the only class able to confront imperialism. The threat has become so extreme that Labour's working class supporters and Greens, Alliance activists and revolutionaries, agree on many more issues than in the past. Our common ground is expanding. The possibility is growing for the left to unite around a broad programme for action, and start mobilising the working class to defeat imperialism and take the power back. |
|
The union's not for show by John Anderson On June 27, the management of Sante Fe Gold learnt a lesson in workers' rights they're unlikely to forget, after a picket sent a message directly to their wallets. Santa Fe Gold, who manage several major adult entertainment bars in Auckland including Showgirls, sacked five cleaners after they joined the Unite union. The workers had contacted the union after being subjected to continual verbal abuse and racist comments. One worker was even assaulted. Management had also failed to meet minimum legal requirements. The cleaners received no sick pay and weren't given days off in lieu for working public holidays. They had to work 6-7 hours without a break. After three weeks of attempted mediation, Unite director Matt McCarten pulled the plug on talks. McCarten told Socialist Worker Monthly Review, "The employers are happy to sit in the courts and workers can often be marginalised by the legal process. "We decided to use the lost art of applying pressure to the employer directly through their pocket". The picket was held outside Showgirls in downtown Auckland on the Friday night. Starting with 15 people, it grew to over 40 at its height.Despite police harassment, it lasted two hours. In that time, only five people went in. Hours before a second picket planned for the following night, Unite received a call from the management, who asked them not to go ahead. They claimed the picket the night before had cost them well over $10,000 and they would like to meet with the union the next day. At the Sunday meeting, the management agreed to investigate all of the union's allegations and promised to remedy any wrongs and reinstate any worker found to be wrongly dismissed. They also agreed to consider favourably an employment agreement and acknowledged the freedom to join unions. Unite is now watching to see whether the employers will keep their word, but is ready to carry the industrial struggle in to the streets again. "The bosses don't like fronting up to the public to explain themselves", said McCarten. "I know it works." |
