THE WORKING CLASS AND PEOPLE must be very vigilant about what the government is setting out to do with the Referendums on the Welsh Assembly and the Scottish Parliament. Fundamentally, the government's aim is to head off the struggle for national independence of Wales and Scotland, in the context of the "decentralisation of government" and consolidating the rule of the rich.

The Scottish and Welsh peoples are nations living in their own national territory. As such, like all nations, they have the inalienable right to self-determination up to and including secession. As people in the modern age also, they have the inalienable right not only to have a voice or be represented in all affairs affecting them, but themselves to participate in governance. These rights cannot be given or taken away, they cannot be diluted or bargained over. They exist. Any legislation only recognises them or does not recognise them, as the case may be, and acts accordingly.

What is abundantly clear is that the White Papers on Scottish and Welsh devolution published by the government last week do not recognise these rights. They do not respect the aspirations of the people in Scotland and Wales, which have grown stronger over recent decades, that such rights should be realised through constitutional change.

The White Papers spell out with no equivocation that should the proposed referendums give Yes votes and a Scottish Parliament with limited tax-raising powers and a Welsh Assembly without such powers be established, then the Westminster Parliament will be and will remain sovereign. In the White Paper on Scotland it is openly stated that the right of secession is not recognised. Moreover, not only will both bodies be subordinate to a Westminster Parliament which has not changed fundamentally since it was consolidated 300 years ago in the interests of the "men of property", where Cabinet rule of the majority party and the Royal Prerogative ensure that power is kept from the people, but the method of proportional representation proposed for both bodies, the additional member scheme, actually strengthens the domination of the big parties.

The Labour government of Tony Blair was brought to power to carry through the agenda of the rich in circumstances where the Tories were arousing the people's opposition to the anti-social offensive and the whole political system was becoming discredited. The White Paper proposals are entirely consistent with this, erecting a great smokescreen about radical changes, about giving the people a voice, under the signboard of "devolution", but continuing to deny the Scottish and Welsh nations the right of self-determination and keeping sovereignty away from the people. Many of the proposals also are an attempt to streamline the ability of government to put the entire economy in the service of robbing the public purse to pay the rich. One example of this is the proposal to merge various government agencies in Wales into one "economic powerhouse", the Welsh Development Agency, to oversee "inward investment" and provide facilities for the monopolies.

The working class and people must fight for modern sovereign states of England, Scotland and Wales, as well as self-determination for the whole people of Ireland, in which it is with the people of each state that sovereignty rests. This is the only sure guarantee of the national rights of the respective peoples. Each people should have their own parliament and exercise sovereignty in their own affairs. This is not to say that it is impossible to have a union of the nations in a modern state. The people may decide that, speaking of England, Scotland and Wales, a union of three governments within one state in which each people and each government have equal rights is the way to right the historical injustice which is deeply entrenched in the present British state. But such a union cannot and must not be imposed on the people of England, Scotland and Wales or Ireland but must be based on the equality of the freely participating nations. Such a union is consistent both with the national aspirations of the peoples and with the class aspirations of the working class for emancipation and socialism.

The referendums are to ask the following questions as published in the government Bill: In Scotland: Firstly – I agree/do not agree that there should be a Scottish parliament; Secondly – I agree/do not agree that a Scottish parliament should have tax-varying powers. In Wales: I agree/do not agree that there should be a Welsh Assembly. However, those questions are to be preceded on the ballot paper by the statement that Parliament has decided to consult people in Scotland/Wales on the Government's proposals thus giving the Labour government the opportunity to claim a mandate for implementing its proposals based on denying the right of self-determination of the Scottish and Welsh peoples and keeping the people from power. This cannot be called a modern agenda for the 21st century. The occasion must be used in Scotland, Wales and England too to step up the fight for modern sovereign states of Scotland, Wales and England. In particular, there is a need to proclaim a modern constitution which will amongst other fundamental laws codify the right of the Scottish and Welsh nations to self-determination, and ensure that the right of Scotland and Wales to secession is guaranteed and lay down the conditions under which a modern and voluntarily entered into equal union could be brought about.

For a Sovereign Scotland!

For a Sovereign Wales!

For a Sovereign England!

AT THE Regional Consultative Conference held in London on June 22, four important resolutions were adopted (see Workers' Weekly, No. 14, July 5) on advancing the work to Improve the Content, Extend the Readership of Workers' Weekly. The South London Branch of RCPB(ML) has reported to Workers' Weekly on its work and discussions to implement these resolutions. This is indicative of the struggle going on to turn decisions into practice, and Workers' Weekly is very encouraged to hear of such work and awaits with interest to hear of its results.

The Northern regional committee of RCPB(ML) has reported to Workers' Weekly on its response to reading of the London Consultative Forum and its resolutions in the newspaper, based on discussion in that region. Among other issues, they emphasise that in organising for people to study, write for and disseminate Workers' Weekly one of the most important methods of work of the Party is placing work, research and views at the disposal of the collective for discussion. Collective discussion and collective work within the basic organisations set up by the Party and within the higher bodies of the Party gives the possibility to expose wrong thinking and correct it. In their region, they report, the crucial question is what measures are needed to improve the collective discussion and collective work of the basic organisations and higher bodies on the study, writing for and dissemination of Workers' Weekly among the comrades and activists of the Party.

Workers' Weekly will further report on how the implementation of the programme to Improve the Content, Extend the Readership in the second half of 1997 is progressing throughout the Party in future issues.

AT THE SUMMIT IN MADRID which took place in the second week of July, NATO formally issued invitations to Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic to become full members. This flouts growing international public opinion against the very existence of the aggressive NATO military alliance. According to the initial logic of NATO, it should have been demolished when the Warsaw Pact became defunct and the carving up of the world into spheres of influence between the two superpowers collapsed. However, the imperialist powers are taking NATO in the opposite direction. While the people are being told that NATO's expansion will bring increased "security", it is in fact revealing a sharpening of inter-imperialist rivalry both within NATO itself and between the US-led alliance and the powers outside of NATO. It is further giving rise to a great threat of military intervention throughout the world and is proving a huge source of profit for the armaments and military equipment manufacturers.

A US Congressional Budget Office study in March 1996 estimated that Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic would have to increase their defence budgets by a massive 60% to meet the costs of membership. The same Office reported to the US Congress earlier this year that the total cost of NATO expansion would be between some $35 billion and $76 billion over 15 years of which the US aims to pay a mere $2 billion. The results of allowing this warmongering alliance NATO into a country has been made vividly clear by the recent events in Bosnia where NATO forces carried out blatant interference in the affairs of the peoples resulting in the execution without trial of a political figure.

The Madrid Summit also set NATO's sinister sights upon the Mediterranean region with a press release stating: "The Mediterranean region merits great attention since security in the whole of Europe is closely linked with security and stability in the Mediterranean." And at this summit a Mediterranean Co-operation Group, i.e. a new committee was set up to deal with this area.

The question of which countries should be admitted to NATO is an example of the contention between the big powers. The US refused to change its pre-determined position of opposition to Romania and Slovenia being also included in the first phase of expansion, as some European powers, notably France and others, lobbied for their inclusion in the eastward expansion. Britain was among those who vigorously supported the US. France also refused to go ahead with an earlier declaration that it would rejoin NATO's military structure, and the US again rejected France's proposal that the Southern Command at Naples, responsible for the US Sixth Fleet, be shared with Europeans.

Russian Foreign Minister Yevgeny Primakov said that, despite the fact that Russia signed the NATO-Russia Founding Act in May, "We still consider expansion the biggest mistake in Europe since the end of World War Two."

The developing contradictions within NATO reflect the contention between the US and the European imperialists as to who will win out in the domination of Europe. US imperialism is quite unwilling to let go of its leadership of NATO through which it penetrates and attempts to dominate militarily in Europe. In this it has the backing of Tony Blair and the Labour Party, according to the formula, "Strong in Europe, Strong with the US." This comes into contradiction with the other European powers, particularly France and others who would like to use NATO, but also see the future in terms of developing the EU with its own military arm.

All these developments mark a heightened danger not only for the people of Europe but of the people of the world. With the British government putting NATO at the centre of British foreign policy in the way that the new Labour Government is doing, it is even more crucial that the working class of this country oppose the very existence of blocs like NATO which should be dismantled not expanded. Not a penny should be spent on such military blocs. Instead the working class and people should demand that Britain withdraw from NATO immediately.

THE GOVERNMENT has called for a wide and deep-going debate on constitutional issues. It could be asked, with only seven weeks to the referendums in Scotland and Wales, how serious a suggestion this is! It is, however, important that the fundamental principles be brought out.

One example concerns the future of the United Kingdom. The Tories are clamouring that the White Paper proposals will break up the Union. Labour vehemently deny this and claim that their proposals will strengthen the Union. What is not raised is the character of the Union that both parties say they are for and what is so sacred about it! The Welsh and Scottish peoples have the inalienable right to national self-determination. This right has been suppressed both by force and by treachery and deception since Wales and Scotland were incorporated into Britain in the 16th and 18th centuries respectively (Wales constitutionally became part of England, Scotland united with England to form Great Britain). The working class, on the contrary, recognises their right to self-determination, which is part of the world-wide movement for national self-determination and recognition of the sovereignty of nations.

The bourgeoisie would like on this, as on other questions, to create divisions among the people as to whether governmental bodies should be set up in Wales and Scotland, and whether they should have tax-raising powers or not. In this way, the rule by the English bourgeoisie is actually strengthened. Confusion is further sown about the nature of "Britain" and the "British". It is covered over that the British state as it exists is an anachronism, a block to progress, being founded on the subjugation of first the English, then the Welsh, then the Scots and the Irish, and vast millions of the world's people. At the same time, the devolution proposals are part of the bourgeoisie's moves to make sure the whole of society pays tribute to the rich.

It is up to the working class to raise the question of sovereignty in relation to the Referendums, both the national sovereignty of the Scottish and Welsh peoples and that of the peoples of England, Scotland and Wales in relation to their own governance. In this context the question of the English nation and its rights also inescapably puts itself onto the agenda.

The working class pinpoints its struggle against the whole basis of the British state. At the same time, it puts forward its own programme which affirms the rights of individuals and collectives and demands that the state take responsibility to ensure that the claims of these individuals and collectives on society are met. In this context, the working class raises itself to the leading class that gives content to the struggle for socialism. In joining in elaborating the political programme to Stop Paying the Rich – Increase Investments in Social Programmes the working class and people will give shape to this project whereby the nation controls its assets and controls what happens to what it produces. It is this new socialist society which will open up a path for all people, not just the English. It can be said that the working class and peoples of Britain are faced with a historic decision at this time, as to whether the old system should carry on or a modern system be established based on the requirements of the times. They can and must rise to the occasion.

THE CONTRADICTION between the universal franchise and the unrepresentative nature of parliamentary democracy constitutes the basis of the serious crisis of the parliamentary system. The Labour government came to power on the back of the propaganda that it represents the centre ground and that it should be supported as the party of the unity of the left with the centre. In organising for it to come to power, the aim of the rich was to prolong the parliamentary system and stave off the day of democratic renewal which is needed in order to overcome the crisis of the parliamentary system. Now New Labour is losing no time in bringing in a series of measures which will assist in prolonging the rule of the rich.

Measures such as the referendums for regional bodies for Wales and Scotland and for a Greater London Authority set out the aim of overcoming the "democratic deficit", giving the people "more control over their affairs within the United Kingdom" with the purpose of overcoming the crisis of parliamentary democracy. These however do not deal and are not meant to deal with solving the problem of the people participating in governance. Another ploy which deserves a similar amount of contempt and suspicion is for the Labour Party to strengthen its role as the leader of a coalition of the centre ground and of the centre-left, which is the basis on which New Labour made its bid for power. Tony Blair's decision to give five Liberal Democrat MPs seats on a newly created consultative Cabinet committee is a step in furthering this trend. It takes further the agreement between New Labour and the Liberal Democrats before the election for a joint programme for constitutional reform. In this manner, they hope to cement a permanent centre-left coalition that has ditched socialism and supposedly represents everyone except the hereditary aristocracy which are to be reformed out of existence. Meanwhile, William Hague is attempting to shake up the Tory Party in order to create a centre-right grouping and restore the Tory Party as a credible force in parliamentary politics, however long it may take. At the same time, the system of proportional representation is being increasingly mooted in order to further strengthen the Blair type of coalition politics. The suggested Party into Power proposals also come within this category.

None of this can alter the fact that the government represents the interests of business, essentially and primarily the financial oligarchy, and that Tony Blair's government is sweeping together the maximum number of sections that benefit from the capitalist system, while riding roughshod over the interests of the marginalised and vulnerable sections of society. It is stepping up its programme of paying the rich while slashing funding for essential social programmes or handing them over as lucrative sources of profit and investment for the rich.

While this is giving rise to howls for the days of a "more equal society" from some quarters, the way forward for the people lies in fighting for a programme to stop paying the rich, and in particular to fight for democratic renewal, a political system in the interests of the working class and people.

"THE UK is a massively more unequal society than it was 20 year ago. And that level of inequality is here to stay." This is the conclusion of a study published on July 28 into the growing inequality in Britain by the Institute of Fiscal Studies. The study, "Inequality in the UK", says that on virtually any measure poverty has increased dramatically over the past 20 years.

The findings indicate that the richest 10% of the population now enjoys the same level of income as that of all the poorest half of households put together. The report highlights that the divide between rich and poor has increased among all age groups, in all regions and among all sections of the population. It points out that although London is the richest region, it is by far the most unequal, and that over the past two decades families with children have come to make up a much greater portion of the poorest group.

It was revealed by the government on July 30 that radioactive waste had been dumped in at least eight previously unacknowledged sites in the sea for four decades up to the 1970s. The previously unknown dump sites, detailed in a Commons written answer, include: Firth of Forth off North Queensferry – scrap from a Ferranti radioactive valve manufacturing unit dumped between 1954 and 1957; North Sea – UK Time Ltd disposed of tens of thousands of luminised dials in 1949 and during the 1950s; explosive disposal site off the Isle of Arran – ICI Ltd dumped two anti-static devices prior to 1958; Garroch Head on the Clyde – material from the clear-up of a former radium factory at Balloch in 1963; North Sea beyond the Thames estuary and the Firth of Forth – liquid wastes or sludge containing small amounts of radioactivity disposed of in the 1960s and early 1970s; Liverpool Bay area, and possibly Morecambe Bay and the Humber estuary – sludges from industrial sources containing enhanced natural radioactivity were disposed of during the early to mid 1970s; North Sea – mildly radioactive solutions from early experiments at the Ministry of Agriculture Fishery and Food's Lowestoft laboratory.

These revelations follow the disclosure earlier in July in documents from the Public Records Office that since 1947 liquid radioactive effluent has been discharged into the Thames. Up to 20,000 gallons of water containing tritium and other radioactive substances have been pumped into the drinking water supplies for London from the UK Atomic Energy Authority Establishment at Harwell, the Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston and from Amersham International plc at Staines.

Not long before, it was revealed that radioactive waste had been dumped into the area known as Beaufort's Dyke under shipping lanes in the Irish Sea, along with other military waste which is constantly washed up on the coast.

These examples are but the tip of the iceberg. The nuclear programme has been pushed through for over 50 years using deception and secrecy and without regard to the welfare of servicemen involved in nuclear tests, of naval dockyard workers, of nuclear workers and of residents around nuclear plants among many others. And a vast stockpile of highly toxic nuclear waste has been built up to threaten future generations.

The British government has also been prepared to spread the programme's dangers to neighbouring countries, following the same logic which allowed it to claim a "special place" in the world as a member of the elite "nuclear club".

This programme is highly profitable for the capitalists and highly dangerous for the people. The authorities persist in claiming publicly that the nuclear industry is "safe", that the radioactivity levels are "small", while in secret recognising the extreme and often incalculable dangers to human life and to the environment.

The intimate relationship between nuclear weapons and nuclear power in Britain began in 1946. A secret Cabinet committee took the decision to start a British nuclear bomb programme on the grounds that this was needed to maintain Britain's "world power" status. The decision was hidden even from the rest of the Cabinet and the programme's scope and costs were kept secret for years.

A network of facilities was set up around Britain at great speed for the processing of the necessary materials and the production of bombs. Later, in order to cover up their true purpose and because some of them produced electricity as a by-product, these were described as being part of a civilian nuclear programme.

Dangers of Nuclear Waste

A key requirement for manufacturing nuclear bombs is the production of plutonium, which does not occur in nature. This is possibly the deadliest substance known.

Radioactive waste results from all parts of the nuclear production process. This can be classified into high, intermediate and low-level types. In particular, no solution is in sight to the problem of dealing with high-level waste, which needs to be contained for 100,000 years.

An underground dump for high level nuclear waste at Sellafield has been proposed at a cost of £2 billion. £200 million has been spent so far in preparatory work, but this has been running into geological difficulties. The local Council has accused the authorities of choosing Sellafield not because of its suitability but because of opposition at other potential sites.

Dangers of Nuclear Radiation

While the dangers of high-level radiation have been more obvious, the hazards of low-level radiation are increasingly coming to light. Continuous exposure to it is said to be as harmful as short bursts of higher level radiation, especially for young children.

Estimates of what constitutes a "safe" radiation dose have had to be continuously revised downwards. Thus, in 1990 the radiation exposure limit for nuclear workers was cut by 60% compared with the limit established just 13 years earlier in 1977. Some risks had been found to be up to three times greater than previously thought.

Radioactive waste has been continuously dumped into the sea or emitted into the atmosphere. Radioactive matter can be ingested through water, food or air. Radioactivity can enter the food chain through fish, while it is suggested that plutonium which falls to the sea bed can be stirred up from there, washed ashore, dried and blown inland, causing problems for centuries.

Sellafield

Tons of radioactive waste have been discharged from Sellafield (formerly named Windscale) into the Irish Sea, which became the most radioactive sea in the world. The Irish government has protested to Britain about Sellafield's role in nuclear pollution.

Early in 1997, in the latest in a catalogue of such incidents at the plant over many years, there were two radioactive leaks in as many days at Sellafield. Six workers were contaminated by an emission of radioactive dust and a faulty valve led to a leak of radioactive liquid.

Dounreay

Recent evidence has revealed that for almost 20 years officials at the Dounreay nuclear plant on the north coast of Scotland breached nuclear discharge and waste-storage rules, exposed workers to harmful radiation and covered up a series of accidents and explosions there. In one incident, thousands of radioactive particles were blasted onto local beaches and the site contains a 30-year-old shaft full of unstable radioactive waste. Norway has protested to the British government about the large amounts of radioactive waste which have been pumped into the Atlantic ocean.

Nuclear Waste Trains

Trains carrying nuclear waste in flasks travel weekly from power stations through towns and cities such as London and Birmingham for reprocessing at Sellafield. Each flask contains as much radioactivity as a small nuclear reactor and continuously gives off measurable amounts of radiation.

Overall, people in Britain are said to get a larger dose of radiation from nuclear waste trains than from nuclear power stations. As well as the danger of radiation, there is the ever-present danger of a catastrophic accident, especially one involving a fall from a high bridge or viaduct, or a fire in a tunnel.

In February 1997, a train carrying nuclear waste was derailed in France while on its way for reprocessing at Sellafield, and there has been a series of accidents on nuclear train routes in Britain over the years.

There has also been a widespread and vigorous movement of opposition to the nuclear waste trains.

Aldermaston

The government's Atomic Weapons Establishments (AWEs) are responsible for nuclear weapons production. The best known of these is at Aldermaston. In 1978 it was reported that plutonium had been found in the lungs of 12 workers there and an enquiry made a series of recommendations to deal with the problems.

A 1993 report suggested that over 40 years more than 100 workers had been contaminated, injured or killed at Aldermaston and there had been 252 fires there. It also found that the recommendations of the 1978 enquiry had not been implemented, probably because of the rush to produce warheads for Trident missiles.

A subsequent report by the Health and Safety Executive into AWE operations was severely critical, but it is reported that the licensing process for such plants is to be speeded up and pushed through.

Redundant Nuclear Submarines

Britain is one of a handful of countries which has a nuclear submarine fleet as part of its self-declared "world role".

There are 11 redundant nuclear-powered submarines stored in Britain. Radioactive and toxic sludge collected from them has already filled 43 tanks. There is no known way of reprocessing their spent fuel, while each submarine contains 850 tons of radioactive material which cannot be disposed of. Despite this, in March 1997 the government ordered three new nuclear-powered submarines.

Nuclear Warhead Convoys

Nuclear warheads are regularly transported around Britain by road in convoys. These have had a number of breakdowns and crashes over the years, while the government refuses to inform local authorities of their movements.

Nuclear Weapons Accidents

Details of a series of accidents involving airborne nuclear warheads in the 1950s and 1960s at various British and American airbases in Britain were publicised in 1996. These involved one instance of the dropping of a bomb from an aircraft and two of the burning of bombs, including the release of radioactivity.

At sea, the same Polaris nuclear submarine collided with a merchant ship in 1969, hit the seabed in 1974 and was found to be leaking in 1987.

The government database of such nuclear accidents remains top secret.

Transporting Nuclear Materials by Air

A plan was revealed in 1996 to increase the amount of nuclear material which is flown from Britain. This is said to be to avoid the protests which have followed earlier land and sea shipments. To cut costs, lighter, less expensive containers than are currently allowed would have to be used.

Redundant Nuclear Power Stations

Nuclear power stations have a design life of 25-30 years. Twenty-six of these in Britain have already been taken out of service, or will need to be in the coming years. No safe method of disposing of them has been devised and any method will be lengthy, dangerous and extremely expensive. The lake at Trawsfynydd nuclear power station in Wales contains 1.5 million cubic meters of radioactive waste.

The committee is likely to include six senior Labour MPs and five Liberal Democrats. It will be chaired by Tony Blair and will also include the Liberal Democrat leader Paddy Ashdown. Other Labour members will be Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott, Chancellor Gordon Brown, Foreign Secretary Robin Cook, Home Secretary Jack Straw and Leader of the Commons Ann Taylor.

It is likely to meet on a monthly basis and will begin its business after the summer break by discussing constitutional issues. The committee will then move on to other areas of mutual interest as agreed by the participants. These are likely to include European policy, northern Ireland and the make-up of the electoral commission which will prepare for a referendum on voting systems for elections to parliament.

A Downing Street spokesperson said that Liberal Democrats on the committee would not be bound by collective responsibility – the norm by which all Cabinet members back publicly all decisions made in Cabinet. Nevertheless the Liberal Democrats will have to sign the Official Secrets Act and they will face restrictions on publication of their memoirs in the same way as government ministers would. The spokesperson said: "The government is the government and the government will continue to make policy. But on issues of mutual concern, the most obvious being the constitution, there is no reason why they should not have an input." The workings of the committee were agreed in an exchange of letters between Tony Blair and Paddy Ashdown.

ON JUNE 27, the Russian newspaper Izvestiya reported on the poverty figures released by the State Statistics Committee for the period from January to May 1997. According to the report, the income level under which Russians are considered to be living in poverty now stands at 407,000 roubles per month, around £42. According to the statistics compiling agency, during the first five months of 1997 the number of people earning less than the subsistence level dropped by 9.7 per cent compared with the same period last year, to about 31.5 million people.

The report also says that the wealthiest 10 per cent of the population, as a group, earned an estimated 32.3 per cent of the total income in Russia, while the poorest 10 per cent earned about 2.6 per cent of total income.

The compiling of such statistics on poverty gauging the extent to which the poor are getting poorer and the rich are getting richer is one of the signs of Russia's adoption of not only the "free-market economy" dominated by the financial oligarchy, but also all of the attendant ideo-political trappings. One such is the illusory promise that poverty will be eliminated through the "trickle-down effect" of the free-market economy and by increasing numbers of workers becoming "entrepreneurs".