[unclear: PSA] Forum

With an attraction like Bob Jones, the Union Hall couldn't help being packed [unclear: last] Thursday. Maybe some were curious, maybe some anticipated witnessing a [unclear: ritual] leading of lambs to the slaughter. And maybe there were some masochist types who enjoy getting their throats cut with abuse.

The occasion for all this speculation was a forum organised by the Progressive Students Alliance (PSA) called "Where is New Zealand heading?" Speakers ranged away from Jones to Labour new boys David Caygill and David Butcher, the police, Secretary of the deregistered Wellington Boilermakers Con Devitt, Secretary of the Wellington Coachmakers Graeme Cark and a Wellington Marxist-Leninist Organisation spokesperson, one Lindy Cassidy.

The $9 Deal

Cassidy kicked off with a speech picking up the news covered in a newsletter (Red Notes) her organisation had distributed at the forum: the Education Department has recommended a massive $9 increase in the bursary. This showed clearly, she suggested, that students association claims that the present bursary level was inadequate have been correct At the moment, in spite of the $4 increase announced last year, bursaries are now worth less in real terms than they were in 1975. The Department, at least, has faced up to the fact that students need considerably more money if all but the rich are to have a real chance of getting to and staying at university.

Treasury isn't expected to see it that way, of course, and the new Minister, Merv (who) Wellington is already known to oppose the proposal. If students are to gain the extra money they will need to fight for it, and fight bloody hard. Behind the scenes representations are one thing, however necessary, but they will get nowhere without mass action [unclear: t] lead the way. In fact, the current proposal doesn't arise out of NZUSA negotiations at all. At its best and simplest, it is a sign of commitment by the department to helping students.

But there is another side to it. The extra money, Cassidy explained, is thought to come from a move to place student teachers on the STB rather than their present studentship, thus drastically chopping their income. University students must stand by their own demands for a decent bursary but not at the expense of taking money away from those at Teachers' Collages. Being part of a move to split the tatter off from the bill of students in this country and continue the attacks on the teaching profession through the Colleges. University students should not approach this this matter with a blind "oh good, we're getting more" way.

Cassidy moved on to outline many of the restrictions facing students: in class sizes, over-heavy workloads and an abortive assessment system, to name a few. She tied the struggle students must wage to defend their right to a decent education to the struggle being waged by working people against the economic crisis New Zealand faces. This crisis was rooted in the unstable nature of capitalism and made worse by the deepening influence foreign capital is gaining in the country. Working people were being made to suffer for the profits of the monopoly capitalists.

The worsening international situation was briefly analysed in terms of the contention between the two superpowers and the threat of world war. Cassidy ended with a rejection of the "solutions" offered by the bourgoise parties and pointed to the need for a united front against fascism and war in New Zealand led by a genuine party of working people, a Marxist-Leninist party. Students had a role to play in this, she said, by supporting the working class struggles and combatting the trends towards fascism wherever it was found.

Drugs and Crime

The police were next, headed by Tom Cummings, director of the Police College at Trentham. He identified three problems in New Zealand society: narcotics, gangs and juvenile crime. The first, he said, caused individual tragedies in the lives of those who became addicted to hard drugs, led to petty crime and an increase in armed robbery, and perhaps worst of all, was part and parcel of the world of big time brutal crime.

Bikie gangs had caused the "demise of country policeman". while there was a clearly discernible trend towards crimes committed by juveniles who should have been in school. Arson, particularly of schools, was becoming a major problem.

The Boilermakers' Side

Boilermakers are often portrayed as the archetypal demon unionists, hell bent on destroying the country and not doing a scrap of work. Con Devitt wasted no time in getting stuck into these myths. The disputes we hear about, he explained, are not due to his members not wanting to work. They have arisen because the government doesn't have the money to build and it needs a scapegoat. Deregistration, the means by which Muldoon thought he would scare the boilermakers into silence, was not a major issue with his union. The workers made the unions, not the employees or the government. If the hearts and minds of the workers were in the union, formal recognition wasn't important. Registration had never been an issue with them: contrary again to popular opinion, they had never made that a term of employment.

On the general economic situation, he declared that he could see no evidence of price controls, but plenty that revealed wage controls were in force.

Muldoon intervened in every major dispute. His hand was in everything, and no award went by without his stamp of approval. In fact, he suggested, Muldoon was Minister of Everything, because Muldoon had a quality......"a God like quality. I believe the Pope has it, but I can't quite remember what it is." Devitt rounded off on the freezing workers dispute late last year. There was no "direct intervention" he reminded us. "Now what does that mean? Just because you're underhand it's all right?"

A Sick man without a Problem

Then it was Bob Jones' turn. He [unclear: claimed] he hadn't been asked to give a speech but did grace us with the formal: "I've come to say I'm sick and I'm not going to give a speech". Silence. Then, from the audience, "Is it personal or economic?" Jones seemed to decide to stay after all. "Personal", he stated. "The economy is fine. It is what it is." Jones it appeared, wasn't going to make a case or argue. At the stage, however, it wasn't yet clear just what he was going to do.

First a bit of sanctimonious gloating: a little story about when he was our age he used to drive out into the country and see men working for a pittance on the side of the road. "I used to feel ashamed. Now, I don't. I've matured. You will too. Now I feel good about it, especially when it's raining."

From this he moved into a style he obviously preferred: abuse. To a question on why he had more influence with National MPs than most people, he replied: "Probably because you're not very bright" to a question of equality he declared that he was not being facetious but "I'm a lot more good looking than you are. Should I have an operation to make myself look as ugly as you?" For every question he had an insult. Funny perhaps, but his utter contempt for the non-millionaires of this world and students in particular was a distinctly unpleasant thing to watch.

Jones had two themes to support his approach. One was taxes, which he hates and which he also admitted he pays less of than the average student. The other was equality, which he persistently reduced to the level of petty formal inequality. The fact that the people in the audience were not talking about the inequalitites of physsique we are born with but the qualitatively different inequalities caused by our economic and social system did not seem irrelevant to him. That the concomitant to his success was the continued suppression of the living standards of others forced to sell their labour power was no problem.

"What protection do we have against, for example, grubby land speculators?" he was asked. "You don't have any". He continued to claim, "You people are incredibly materialistic. I don't worry about money". Funny that, I'D stake the measly couple of bucks I get for writing this on the fact that the man in front of me in the queue for a cup of coffee before the forum, the man who was quibbling over his change, was none other than Bob Jones himself.

The Threat of War

Next up was Graeme Clarke, who announced that he had decided to talk on the international situation. His speech was a fiery synopsis of the dangers of a third world war posed by the contention of the two superpowers, the United States and the Soviet Union. This danger was especially real because of the determined expansionism of the latter and the fact that many people were fooled by its claim to socialism.

Clarke checked off a list of recent conflicts in which the Soviet Union and its "stormtroopers" Cuba and Vietnam had engineered coups, invasions and suppression of genuine people's struggles for independence and liberation. Angola where the Soviets had secured vastly unequal defence and trade agreements after backing one of the liberation groups against the generally agreed line that all major groups should share power. The horn of Africa, where Soviets had originally backed Somalia until they discovered they weren't welcome. So they switched sides and took up the cause of the fascist Mengistu regime in Ethiopia even going so far as to participate in attempts to crush the Eritrean Liberation movements which it had not long before supported.

The Norwegian Svalbad Islands, which it had annexed using an imperialist treaty signed under Tsarism as justification, and on which it had planted a naval base. North and South Yemen, where it had staged an assasination of a state leader and encouraged the conflict between the two states. Afghanistan, where again it had organised an army coup and set up a puppet regime.

The worst example, Clarke stated, was Kampuchea. He related how the "Socialist" Unity Party in New Zealand had taken up the claim of Vietnam and the Soviet Union that there were no Vietnamese troops in Kampuchea, despite the fact that East European journalists had reported seeing them in large numbers. These journalists also reported that they had been told not to report the Vietnamese presence, which further destroys the credibility of the Soviet attitude.

The SUP had been mentioned for good reason. Just recently, the FOL National Executive had chosen to interpret a motion from the Wellington Trades Council in a very peculiar way. That motion called for the withdrawal of all foreign troops from Kampuchea and Vietnam. The FOL executive knew this meant the Chinese in Vietnam, but somehow, because the Vietnamese had denied their own presence in Kampuchea, it was deemed not to refer to the Vietnamese actions! This reflected the strength of the SUP on the Executive and its thoroughly corrupt line. Yet in many circles these liars were still called "socialist..!

Clarke then turned to the question of China in Vietnam. Under persistent attack during the last year, he said, China has the right to secure its borders. The Vietnamese have stated that the present Chinese action seems very like that taken against India in 1962. Elaborating on this, Clarke cited the example of a journalist who condemend the Chinese action at that time roundly while writing for Time, but later, after joining the Institute for Strategic Studies and making a thorough assessment of the situation, changed his view and came down on the side of the Chinese. China claimed to have suffered 700 border attacks in the last six months, Clarke pointed out. The situation did indeed seem similar to that in India.

Clarke tallied up the Soviet activity. It was a fully imperialistic power, he asserted, seeking to dominate other countries by force and export capital for the objective purpose of exploiting the workers of other countries and building up its own flagging economy. Even in New Zealand, fishermen in Nelson were fearful of the threat of layoffs caused by Soviet fishing in the area.

The focus of superpower contention, Clarke explained, was in Europe. Technologically advanced where the Soviets desperatley needed technology, rich in industry where the Soviets needed a bigger industrial base to their economy, Europe was the much-desired goal of Soviet expansion. Already, the Warsaw Pact forces were lined up and capable of overrunning the continent. Inevitably, this situation would lead to a world war.

Clarke made it plain that he did not want a war, but suggested that hiding one's head in the sand would not make the danger go away. There were three things that progressive and peace-loving people could do to delay war's outbreak and limit the sphere of contention. Firstly, genuine liberation movements should, be given our support if they were to be successful in excluding both superpowers from influence in their countries. With this, the continued expansion of the Soviets should be consistently opposed. Secondly, the New Zealand government should be called upon to align with the smaller and medium size countries. This included adopting trade relations with them to further the cause of economic independence. Thirdly, we should counter the lies of the Soviet stooges where-ever they were found.

Labour

The two Labour MPs then had a turn at the microphone. Unfortunately for them their earnest attack on the National Party went unheeded. Time had been overrun and there was scarcely anyone left in the hall. They'll be back for a proper hearing later in the year.

Simon Wilson