Over the last few weeks Red Weekly has interviewed a number of Labour MPs who have on paper declared their opposition to statutory incomes policies. This week we are pleased to carry an interview with Joan Maynard, MP for Sheffield Brightside, a member of the Labour Party national executive, and Vice-President of the Agriculturai Workers Union.
Joan Maynard makes suggestions on what can be done to oppose Healey's measures. If most of her proposals are put into practice - by herself and the other 'left' MPs - they could find an echo inside the mass organisations of the working class. But the key question is whether they will really be fought for now that the crunch has come.
The first test of this comes with the vote in the House of of Commons. Opposition to Healey and his proposals is • Will you vote against the Healey proposals?
I shall either vote against or abstain. I will certainly not vote for an incomes policy.
• Should Foot and Benn stay in the If it comes to a statutory incomes policy Foot and Benn should resign. No left-winger should stay in a Government that has a statutory incomes policy.
• Even if the penalties are not directed at the workers, would you still oppose it?
I would still oppose it. The end product would be the same. Also I feel that doing it that way is giving encouragement to the employers to be strike-breakers. Also I see this as a move towards a corporate state. • What should be done to organise opposition to the proposals outside Pariiament?
Two things. Firstly to try and get the organised trade union and labour movement mobilised. This involves getting as many public meetings on joint trade union and Tribune platforms as possible - not only to argue against the proposals and build support against them, but also to put forward alternative socialist policies.
In order to encourage the movement outside the House of Commons, MPs also have to use their positions by opposing the proposals and going into the dividion lobbies. • What should the workers do?
They should make clear through their trade unions that they are not prepared to accept these proposals. They must make clear that they are not prepared to have the crisis of the capitalist system put on their backs.
I think we are reaching rock bottom when Wilson makes an appeal to the miners to put loyalty to the nation first. It makes me want LO VOTEL.
• How do you think the labour movement should tackle the economic We should do a number of things. I think we should immediately put a stop to capital leaving the country, and put on selected import controls - if the EEC regulations allow these, which is probably a bit doubtful. These measures are needed to protect our industry until we are able to put in the necessary investment, which has not been there for at least thirty years.
In my opinion that means the Government investing, because I don't think private industry is going to do it. They haven't done it for thirty years, and I can't see why we should the Parliamentary 'left' who vote against these measures, Wing class. We can therefore only judge her words on her practice. companies, the rest of the land and some of the profitable manufacturing industries.
•What do you think of threats to cut social spending?
I'm very much opposed to cutting social spending. For one thing it will only make unemployment worse. One of the ways you can control investment at the moment is through social spending, because local authorities are part of the public sector. To cut back on it now would be bad for employment and bad for our social services, which need to be expanded.
We need to spend a lot of money on our meaningless unless it is translated into action. If Joan Maynard goes into the Division Lobby against the Government measures she will have put the stamp of reality on her opposition. That action, and the action of other MPs from the could act as a catalyst inside the organisations of the workBut that is only the beginning. Every group of workers who go into struggle against the new 'pay laws' will be subjected to a barrage of hostile propaganda. They will find ranged against them not only the media and the right-wing Labour leaders, but also arguments from people like Michael ment.
Photo: PETER HARRAP (Report) • What actions would you like to see to stop them?
I think there are a number of us in the House of Commons who will vote against the cuts if we get the opportunity. We are particularly determined to vote against rent increases. But much more important than what we do inside the House of Commons is the need for us and other people of like mind- to mobilise the working class movement outside, because that is where we will be the most effective.
For example, on the Industry Bill the Government have now capitulated completely by making it voluntary for companies to declare their policies, programme, profits and what have have vou This makes the Rill hechutely nce. Foot who will say 'by your unconstitutional action you are forcing a statutory incomes policy. So it will not just be a case of voting against the measures. It will also mean actively solidarising with all workers defying the Government and trying to smash the £6 maximum.
The vote in the House of Commons is the starting point. It is on the picket lines that the issues will be decided. The 'left' MPs must decide which side of the picket line they stand —either with the employers and the Labour Government or with the working class. It is their actions and not their words which will determine the credibility of the Governments's opponents in the eyes of the labour movechopped around - it certainly wasn't as good as it was in the Labour Party election programme - but now it has been completely emasculated. In this situation we need to be mobilising not only to stop the Government travelling its present path - which I consider to be an absolute disaster for the working people of this country, because we've never had a Labour Government that would stand up to the City and this one has iust capitulated - but to re verse its direction and get it back on the path of the manifesto with which we fought the last two elections.
• What is your attitude to Wilson remaining as leader of the Labour Party? He is not the leader I would vote for. He has never been a socialist. I would like to see the leader of the Labour Party elected by the whole movement.
I hope there is a flood of resolutions on this matter at the next Conference of the Labour Party. I believe the leaders of the Party must be accountable to the Labour Party.
We also need to make MPs much more accountable to the people they go there to represent. I would like to see a situation where every Labour MP had to face a selection conference at every general election, along with other prospective candidates. In other words they would have to give an account of their stewardship. In my experience of public life I have found that if you can't make representatives accountable you're in a hopeless position. They just do as they like and that is what really goes on in that place in London -they feel they are safe, established.
• In that case, would you support the moves against Prentice in his constituency party, and the move by the Yorkshire miners over the NUMsponsored MPs who voted for the I think that with the Prentice case it's really a matter for the local Labour Party. If they feel their MP is not satisfactory then they are entitled to say that they will not sponsor him or nominate him next time. I think that is a healthy sign in the labour movement.
I think the same thing applies to me. I'm a sponsored MP, sponsored by my own union, and I know I would not be an MP today if it were not for the support of my union over many years. It is important for me to remember that all the time, because that place in London is very insidious. It's not our place, it's the other people's place, and it would be easy to forget the people you go there to represent. It strikes me as extraordinary that sponsored MPs don't feel they have a duty to the people who sponsor them - not only a duty to represent them in Parliament, but a duty to report
i _ workers' plan AP , red week BE