dissatisfaction among working people there but the issue was not simple. In Britain there was resistance to the formation of splinter trade unions. The TUC certainly needed to be able to discuss with Soviet trade union representatives the issues raised by the dissident group. The motion was seconded by Mr Drain of NALGO who recalled the long association of his union with Russian counterpart organisations. He felt concern about developments in the Soviet Union and, while Soviet trade unions could not be written off, the case of trade union dissidents in the Soviet Union could not be ignored. Soviet citizens had been treated in a way that no member of a British trade union would be treated and after 62 years of the regime there must surely be room for more flexibility and greater opportunity for free expression. NALGO had informed a Russian delegation that it would be better if they did not come to Britain as had been agreed previously. Taking up the point to which Mr Jones had made reference in his introductory speech, Mr Drain said that Soviet answers to TUC enquiries had been unsatisfactory. He said that the TUC could not maintain double standards and could not condemn Chile without making it clear to Soviet colleagues the strength of feeling in Britain about events in the Soviet Union. He urged all affiliates of the TUC to address their Soviet counter- parts and demand from them answers to questions raised about trade union rights. The motion was carried.
Peace
14. The sharpest exchange of views in the course of the international debate took place on a motion put forward by the Inland Revenue Staff Federation concerning peace. The motion recognised that all advances sought by the trade union movement to improve conditions of work and life were in constant jeopardy unless they could be achieved against the background of a stable and lasting peace. It referred to the rapidly deteriorating international situation and called on the General Council to mount an urgent national campaign to counter the current revival of cold war propaganda and to reassert the principles of peaceful coexistence in the interests of the British as well as of all other peoples. There were two amend- ments to the motion. One, which was accepted by the movers, expressing regret that no progress had been made on a pledge not to make first use of nuclear weapons, welcoming the UN Special Session on Disarmament, expressing appreciation of the efforts to achieve agreement on mutual and balanced force reductions in central Europe and urging all trade unionists to work for a peaceful world as the first essential need of mankind. This did not give rise to any controversy, but a second amendment, put forward by the EETPU, proposed the addition of the words "and other features of the Stalin eta" after the word "propaganda" in the motion. This was vigorously opposed by Mr Jack Jones on behalf of the General Council.
6
/Mr Chapple
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.