The occupation of Swansea College of Education ended on Tuesday, 21 December, just less than four weeks after it started. On paper it achieved nothing. Mike Pany, the student whose political victimisation provoked the occupation, has not been reinstated. The students' demand for an independent inquiry into the whole affair has been rejected. The further demands arising from the occupation itself-no victimisations and no deduction of lectures missed from students* attendance records-have been ignored, There is even a very real danger now that there will be further victimisations following the ending of the occupation.
But to assess the results of the occupation in this formal manner-as is undoubtedly in danger of happening-would be to ignore the dynamic of the struggle both specifically and generally. Apart from the fact that the struggle at Swansea will continue-an action committee will function during the vacation and there will be further action next term-the significance and lessons of the struggle so far have been very important both for the Swansea students and for student militants in general.
The major features of the Swansea occupation The Red Mole Jan. 10 1972 Page 4 were firstly, that it took place in a sector of higher education which has previously not been noted for its militancy, and secondly, that NUS proved totally incapable of generalising or even publicising the struggle, despite the fact that the colleges of education have traditionally been an important base for executives past and present. We must be clear that much of the responsibility for what must be acknowledged as at least a temporary defeat in the struggle lies at the door of the NUS Executive and nowhere else.
It was not until nearly three weeks after the occupation had begun that Digby Jacks, NUS President, deigned to forsake his comfortable office in London for the rigours of Swansea College of Education -and then only under pressure from student unions all over the country. Having arrived in Swansea, he negotiated with the chairman of the board of governors, advised the students to proceed on the basis that the procedure for expulsions had been violated (not on the basis that it was a political victimisation) and then returned posthaste to London, stressing the importance of the bureaucratic tasks that awaited him-despite a unanimous request for him to remain. He did, however, promise to return the following morning -a promise, needless to say, which he broke as soon as he was once again ensconced in his office. He also indicated that NUS would take out a writ against the authorities rest take out a writ against the authorities restraining them from expelling Mike Pany until the question of procedure had been clarified; but this matter was still 'under discussion' a week later when the occupation ended. Meanwhile the vast majority of student unions, let alone students, were still largely unaware of the struggle- - information was included in the NUS Main Mailing but "technical difficulties' prevented this from being sent out before the end of term.
The occupation at Swansea only had a chance of succeeding if it was generalised at an early stage. In fact, only the barest details ever penetrated outside Wales. It was kept going for so long only through the determination of the students involved and in particular through the concrete support they were able to obtain from the Labour movement in Swansea. No help at all came from NUS, which in this struggle showed more clearly than ever before that with its present policies and leadership, it is totally incapable of defending even the most basic interests of its members. Only the Liaison Committee for the Defence of Student Unions was able, belatedly, to mobilise some outside support for the Swansea students. Militants who are still wavering between the NUS and the LCDSU should learn the lessons from this struggle. The LCDSU does not pose itself as a separate organisation outside and against the NUS; what it does stress is that the present policies and leadership of NUS will hinder rather than develop student struggles, and that there is an absolute need for a body which will not only fight for a change inside NUS, but will also take its own independent initiatives as the struggle demands-as the struggle at Swansea has already demanded.
Swansea was defeated, if only temporarily. But there will be more Swanseas and they must not be allowed to be picked off in turn. A defeat for one is a defeat for all. Only if its lessons are understood, if the need to build the Liaison Committee as a body which can generalise such struggles is recognised, will that defeat not have been in vain.
-Martin Meteyard
MOLE ЗИ TAHW "We don't support the IRA, constable"