|
|
ILC INTERNATIONAL NEWSLETTER NO. 138 International Liaison Committee of Workers and Peoples ----- PRESENTATION In this issue of the ILC International Newsletter we continue the report-back from the June 12 ILC Conference in Defense of the ILO Conventions and the Independence of Trade Union Organizations in Geneva. You will find the presentations of Victor Mora, coordinator of the National Workers Union (UNT) of Venezuela, and of Julio Turra, a trade unionist from the Brazilian United Workers Confederation (CUT). >From Bolivia, we publish an appeal "…" The leaders of the UNT who were present at the 93rd Annual Session of the ILO call for the continuation of the "Campaign for the Defense of Genuine Trade Union Freedoms and the National Sovereignty of Venezuela." You will find the speech of Bayla Sow, a union leader from Senegal, on the importance both of the May 29 referendum in France and the struggle of the Bolivian Mine Workers Federation and the Bolivian Workers Confederation (COB) for the nationalization of the gas and oil. You will also find the document written in relation to the declaration of the G8 to "cancel the debt." Finally, we are publishing an interview with Sidi Said, general secretary of the General Union of Algerian Workers (UGTA), given to the Labor News newspaper of the French Workers Party. Support the campaigns of the ILC! ----- TABLE OF CONTENTS: p.1 Introduction ----- THE AMERICAS Joint Appeal Issued By Bolivian Workers Confederation (COB), Bolivian Mine Workers Federation (FSTMB), COR El Alto, COD La Paz and the International Liaison Committee (ILC) Let's Organize Together a Continental Conference: - In Defense of the Nationalization of the Natural Gas and Resources
of Bolivia! (August 12-14, 2005 in La Paz, Bolivia) Dear Brothers and Sisters: The Mine Workers Federation of Bolivia (FSTMB) and the Regional Workers Central (COR) of El Alto - both of which are affiliated with the historic organization of the Bolivian workers, the Bolivian Workers Confederation (COB) - have fought side by side with the FEJUVE organization of El Alto, as well as with unionists, urban and rural teachers, peasants from the 20 provinces of La Paz, university students, and workers in transport and health care to force, through mass mobilizations, the resignations of Carlos Mesa, Hormando Vaca Diez, and Mario Cosío from the post of President of the Republic. At the same time, we are conscious that the fundamental demands of the Bolivian people were not solved with the constitutional appointment of Eduardo Rodríguez as the country's provisional President. For the working class organized in the COB, as for the indigenous and popular sectors, the question of the nationalization of 100% of the oil and gas has been a life-or-death question since October 2003. These riches, which belong to the Bolivian people, must be used for the benefit of the people - not as plunder for the corporations. It is therefore an essential question, one that will determine the survival of our people. The unity and sovereignty of the Bolivian people today are threatened by the policies of imperialism and its accomplices, which under the pretext of autonomy, are subverting the true sentiments of the people of our country. Our struggle is the same as the struggle of the peoples of Latin America and the world. We all suffer from the consequences of the policies of war and super-exploitation led by the Bush government of the United States, a government that is also attacking the labor movement in its own country. It is a struggle against imperialism and its drive to destroy our nations! The struggle for the nationalization of the immense resources of our subsoil is bound up with the struggles against privatizations, in defense of public services, against the "free trade" agreements, in defense of social and labor rights, and for land to the landless peasants. These struggles are gaining steam throughout the continent. The working class and people of Bolivia are showing their will to control their own destiny. All peoples share this goal. In the process of the struggle, the self-organization of the workers, peasants, shantytown dwellers, and students into a National Popular Assembly- with delegates elected on the basis of a concrete mandate, delegates who can be recalled, delegates who express the popular and sovereign will to fight against the corrupt oligarchies that are at the service of imperialism - is a historic step that we must all fight for together. We cannot allow them to fool us again by negotiating behind the backs of the Bolivian people to continue this intolerable situation. Today, a new wave of mobilizations is brewing. It is therefore a perfect time to draw a balance sheet of the situation, which includes the fundamental question of building international solidarity with the struggle of the workers and people of Bolivia. Through solidarity we can break down the walls that imperialism and its lackeys construct to divide us. Due to the urgency of the situation in our country, we propose - on the basis of this initial call from the Mine Workers Federation (FSTMB), COR El Alto, COD La Paz, affiliated with the Bolivian Workers Confederation (COB), and the International Liaison Committee of Workers and Peoples (ILC) - to bring together leaders and activists from the workers' and popular movements of the continent. Let's bring together all those who are struggling against privatizations and for national sovereignty, so that we can organize joint campaigns that will strengthen all of us. Therefore, we propose to organize a Conference in Defense of the Natural Gas and Resources of Bolivia, Against Privatizations, and In Defense of the National Sovereignty of our Peoples. The Conference will take place in the city of La Paz, Bolivia, on August 12-14, 2005. We call on all workers' and popular organizations that support this appeal to participate in this Conference. La Paz, June 23, 2005 signed/ The Organizing Committee of the Conference will be located in the headquarters of the FSTMB: Plaza Venezuela 1470, La Paz, Bolivia [In the United States, for more information about the conference, and/or if you are interested in participating, please contact the OWC Continuations Committee at the contact nos. in the header.] ******************** Introduction: The International Liaison Committee of Workers and Peoples (ILC) organized on June 12, 2005, in Geneva, the 12th Annual Conference in Defense of ILO Conventions and Trade Union Independence. In attendance was a delegation from the Venezuelan National Workers Union (UNT). One of the conference decisions was to relaunch the international Campaign In Defense of Genuine Trade Union Freedoms and the National Sovereignty of Venezuela. Published below is the appeal issued by the unionists of the UNT who were present at the 93rd Annual Session of the International Labor Conference of the ILO. In it they call on trade unionists throughout the world to sign the appeal and support this campaign. June 28, 2005 ****** Appeal from the UNT to Continue the Campaign In Defense of Genuine Trade Union Freedoms and the National Sovereignty of Venezuela (translation by ILC International Newsletter) We, leaders of the National Workers Union of Venezuela (UNT), address, once again, the unions and workers throughout the world. First of all, we want to thank the 500 or more trade union leaders in 24 countries of the Americas, Europe, Africa, and Asia who signed the "Open Letter to the Workers' Group of the ILO" that we initiated in February of this year. This Open Letter helped to re-establish the truth about the situation of the Venezuelan labor movement and about the struggle of the workers and people of Venezuela. The results of the discussion on Venezuela at the 93rd Annual Session of the ILO that just took place in Geneva make it necessary that we continue our campaign, particularly in light of the fact the Administrative Council of the ILO will be meeting this November. Brothers and Sisters: As we explained in the "Open Letter to the Workers' Group of the ILO," the bosses' organization in Venezuela, FEDECAMARAS, and the Federation of Workers of Venezuela (CTV), have filed complaints with the Commission on Trade Union Freedoms of the ILO accusing our country of violating trade union rights. In reality, these complaints are seeking to cover up the fact that these two organizations have taken part in actions that have nothing to do with ILO Convention 87, such as the coup d'etat against the government elected by the sovereign Venezuelan people as well as the sabotage of the oil industry (December 2002 - January 2003). The meeting of the Administrative Council of the ILO that took place last March referred the decision concerning FEDECAMARAS' proposal to create a Commission of Inquiry on the Situation of Trade Union Rights in Venezuela to the meeting scheduled for November 2005, after the annual conference which renewed its composition. Stop the Bosses' Offensive Nonetheless, the attacks against Venezuela and the UNT continue. Particularly, the Commission on Norms of the ILO's annual conference, discussed the specific case of Venezuela in relation to ILO Convention 87. This offensive was led by Mr. Edward E. Potter, the delegate of the United States, spokesman for the Employers Group (bosses), and director of labor relations for Coca-Cola! Yes, this is the director of the very same Coca-Cola company that has persecuted unionists in Colombia, India, and other countries and that has been accused of assassinating union organizers. This is the man who, in the name of the bosses, had the nerve to call for the condemnation of the Venezuela for violating trade union rights! It is understandable that the bosses' representatives to the ILO deliberately try to equate the participation of leaders of the FEDECAMARAS and the CTV in a coup d'etat with normal "union activities." Their intent is not to defend democracy but to protect their class privileges! The fact that the only person to defend the perspective of the General Secretary of the CTV in the Commission on Norms was the spokesperson of the bosses, Mr. Potter, shows the degree of degeneration that has taken place in the leadership of this organization which claims to represent the Venezuelan workers! Unfortunately, in the resolution adopted by the Commission on Norms and submitted to the General Assembly - which, we, representatives of the UNT, observed - the following unacceptable paragraph was introduced at the behest of the Employers Group: "The Commission invites the [Venezuelan] Government to cease the restrictions on the freedom to travel imposed on the leaders of FEDECAMARAS, particularly Mr. Fernández and Mrs. Muñoz." Albis Muñoz is the current president of FEDECAMARAS, and Carlos Fernandez was the former one. Both their cases are being reviewed by the Venezuelan legal system for actions that have nothing to do with trade union rights, but rather with the actions taken against the sovereignly adopted Constitution; namely, the coup d'etat in April 2002. Of course, any citizen has the right to their own opinion concerning the judicial process against these two individuals. But in what capacity is the ILO qualified to "invite" the government of a sovereign nation state to "cease the restrictions on the freedom to travel" of these people? Isn't asking the government to not follow the national laws of Venezuela an impossible demand to comply with, a demand that interferes with the sovereignty of the Venezuelan people and state? In any case, we think this proposal contained in the resolution of the Commission on Norms is in contradiction with the ILO's mission of guarding democracy. We think it is in contradiction with the ILO's traditions of objective discussion concerning the application of the norms and conventions pertinent to trade union and labor rights. The ILO cannot be the place for political manipulations that transform coup d'etats and lockouts into the "free exercise of trade union rights." Who will this serve? To be sure, it will not benefit the workers and their organizations, who are the principal proponents of democracy. Democracy means the recognition of the existence of trade unions that are independent from the bosses and governments, so that we can defend our conquests and rights against the destructive offensive of capitalist globalization. To accomplish this, we are again addressing ourselves to our class brothers and sisters throughout the world: It is necessary to reaffirm and deepen the rejection of the proposal by FEDECAMARAS and the International Organization of Employers (IOE) to apply against Venezuela a Commission of Inquiry concerning the situation of trade union freedoms in our country. As the 93rd Annual Session of the ILO has demonstrated, the bosses are continuing to pursue this objective at the meeting of the Administrative Council that will take place this November. At the same time, we are renewing our invitation to unions throughout the world to attend the Congress of the UNT on July 28-30. At this congress, the workers will be able to directly find out the truth about the trade union situation in Venezuela! Class and trade union greetings, In Defense of the Sovereignty of the Venezuelan People! Geneva, June 16, 2005 Leaders of the UNT present at the 93rd Annual Session of the ILO: Marcela Máspero, Orlando Chirino, Marco Tulio Diaz, Servando Carbone, Hugo Peña, Victor Mora, Angel Marcano, Marco Garcia y Anastasio Rodríguez. ********************
PRESENTATION BY VICTOR MORA, coordinator of the Venezuela National Workers Union (UNT) After the coup d'etat, we workers of Venezuela organized ourselves and founded this workers' federation that today is here in Geneva. The UNT is a progressive, revolutionary, class organization that defends the Bolivarian Constitution of Venezuela with its principles and rights. We defend the Venezuelan workers. The UNT is preparing its second National Congress, which will take place from July 28 to July 30 to discuss all the issues in relation to the UNT elections that will take place at the end of October. These elections will enable the workers affiliated to the Union to directly elect their leaders. Our federation has great challenges ahead of it. One of these is to help the workers occupy the factories which were closed down during the coup d'etat - factories which have been unused by the big factory owners. Today, we have occupied these factories, and have administered them through a type of self-management process. For example, we have occupied Venepal and some textile factories, among others. On May 1, we organized a massive demonstration of more than a million workers where we submitted a draft law for co-management so that the workers can administer the companies. This is the third time that we have come to the Annual Session of the ILO. Concerning Convention 87, we have seen how the president of the Commission on Norms violated the basic principle of participatory democracy by cutting off our speaker from the UNT while she was reporting on the situation of trade union freedoms in our country. We know that FEDECAMARAS, the bosses, and the CTV sabotaged and almost defeated the working class. They brought the country to the edge of the abyss. The workers and peoples correctly defended the Bolivarian Constitution of the Republic of Venezuela. Yet again, today, we the workers and peoples have re-constituted the Constitutional thread. We decided that the president should remain because the majority of the people voted for him. We are seeing the ILO undergo profound changes but we must not let them destroy the Conventions, which are more than 25 years old. In effect, there are some countries which, for the past 27 to 29 years, still have not ratified the conventions. I think that the ILO should harmonize with the reality of the current situation of the world. The unemployment rate is very high and de-industrialization is spreading. There is the social and foreign debt. The GDP of the world economy for the year 2004 grew by 5%, but employment grew only by 1.5%. We see the enormous gulf between the growth of the economy and unemployment in our countries, notably in the African continent. We must create pressure and demand that the G8 accomplish its promises from 2004-that is, to eliminate poverty by 2005. We are seeing that, in reality, they are continuing down the same path and lining their pockets while the vast majority of the population is getting poorer. One of the proposals should be to cancel the foreign debt so that the freed-up resources can be used for development and to change the norms of international trade. Today, we think that the ILO is a leverage point to demand the ratification of the Conventions. But we also think that the ILO should be democratized. If we are unable to democratize the ILO, we will not be able to defend the workers because we have seen that, for the last three years, the Conventions and resolutions have not been implemented. Today, we need the support of our brothers and sisters in other unions throughout the world. Thank you. **********************
The introductory report dealt with the question of "good governance," and I think that this concept is a dangerous attack against the workers and their rights. This attack did not just begin yesterday. One of the aspects of this good governance is constituted by the Social Forums which are being organized everywhere. In 2006, the World Social Forum is scheduled to take place in Venezuela. The WSF began in Brazil, and I would like to bring your attention a concrete testimony about the reality of these Social Forums. At the heart of the Social Forum in Porto Alegre is the concept of the participation of civil society. The very concept of "civil society" is meant to mix together the representatives of the workers and of the bosses, including the big multinationals (with their codes of conduct) who, indeed, finance these Social Forums. At the last Forum in Porto Alegre, the IMF and the World Bank formally participated. The idea of "civil society" attempts to erase the fact that there exists a contradiction between the interests of the exploiters and exploited. It tries to lump together the governments, the churches, the NGOs, the bosses, and the unions to "give globalization a human face." As the comrade from Guadeloupe said in Madrid: Capitalism cannot be humanized, it must be fought. Consequently, the idea is to give a social veneer to globalization-though we all know that globalization benefits the interests of the multinationals, is tantamount to the pillage of the resources of the peoples, and threatens the very existence of nation states. There are many examples of this in Latin America. In Bolivia at this moment, the people have risen up and have created a National Popular Assembly to demand the nationalization without compensation of the oil and gas. That is the main demand of the COB. There have been a lot of maneuvers concerning the issue of elections, but the central question is for the Bolivian people to keep possession of their resources. The unions, through the COB, are in the vanguard of this struggle. And who are the enemies of nationalization if not those multinationals that control all the resources of Bolivia and condemn the Bolivian people to misery? The multinationals want to steal what belongs to the Venezuelan people. Comrade Mora from Venezuela explained the role that the working class has played to keep Chavez in power. Who were the forces that supported the coup? First of all, there was the CTV, the fake workers' organization, in alliance with bosses. But there was also the United States embassy, as well as Bush. But the Venezuelan people rose up with their organizations to say "No! Venezuela belongs to the people of Venezuela!" The defense of national sovereignty has nothing to do with world governance-that is, with a world social forum of all civil society to give a human face to the military intervention of Bush in Venezuela, to the attacks against the sovereignty of the people of the Americas and in the whole world, to the preservation of the exploitative capitalist regime. It is a regime that only benefits big business and big banks, which exploit the peoples through the foreign debt denounced by comrade Mora. Things would not be as dangerous if there were not, within the ranks of our own trade union movement, those who promote the idea that we must collaborate with the bosses and that we must strive to give globalization a "human face." The biggest threat facing us is the integration of our organizations into a sort of consensus. This is not the tripartism of the ILO, which establishes labor norms and rules, but rather is a set of recommendations on how we can pursue the same attacks against workers and peoples ... but with a "social veneer." The second issue that I would like to raise is the question of the discussion inside the ILO concerning Venezuela. I think that our conference should re-launch the campaign In Defense of the UNT. What was the discussion in the Norms Commission of the ILO? What did the bosses say? Mr. Potter is the representative of the United States and the director of labor relations of Coca-Cola Co. Coca Cola is a multinational, as everybody knows, that is responsible for the assassinations of unionists in Colombia. This Mr. Potter condemned the government of Venezuela and even accused the UNT of not being representative. He claimed that in Venezuela, trade union freedoms are violated because the former president of the bosses' federation is in prison. But he didn't say why he was in prison; he is in prison for a reason that has nothing to do with the implementation of ILO Convention 87. He participated in the attempted coup, along with the U.S. embassy and the labor bureaucrats of the CTV who betrayed their class. The proof that there are trade union freedoms is that there was a delegate of the CTV in the official representation of Venezuela to the ILO. Consequently, it is a clear provocation against the Venezuelan government on the part of the bosses and the United States. They did the same thing against Zimbabwe because Mugabe had the gall to enact an agrarian reform, give land to the peasants, and take the agricultural structure out of the hands of the white colonists. What was the response of the president of the Session in relation to these two directly political attacks in the Norms Commission of the ILO? The response was to cut off the speech of Marcela Maspero because she discussed political questions. How is this possible? The complaint is directly political and when Marcela presented the position of the Venezuelan workers' movement, the president cut her off from speaking because she dealt with political questions. The response of the representative of the workers' group - P. Corteback, a unionist from Belgium - was to say that the bosses didn't have the right to dictate to the Norms Commission, but that the Commission had noted that there were progressive (but not yet sufficient) developments vis-à-vis trade union freedoms in Venezuela. It is therefore necessary for us to continue the struggle on an international scale. The struggle has already had very important results: More than 500 union leaders from 20 countries took positions against the complaints of the CTV and FEDECAMARAS against the Venezuelan people, and in defense of the UNT. But we must continue because, in November, this subject is returning to the agenda of the Administrative Council of the ILO. In the same way, the results of the elections to the Administrative Council of the ILO were important because the Governments' Group chose Venezuela and the Workers' Group did not present the candidate of the CTV, who has participated for years in this Council. Thus, there are opportunities to smash the attempts of the Venezuelan bosses to condemn the Venezuelan government. I would like to finish by talking about the situation in Brazil and about the comrades who have occupied the factories. Like in Venezuela, some factories abandoned by the bosses were occupied by the workers. A first difference between Brazil and Venezuela is that the Chavez government, under the pressure of the workers who occupied Venepal and other companies, nationalized the company. 51% of the factory belongs to the state, and 49% to the workers. The Lula government is presently in a political crisis because its policies have not corresponded to the hopes of the workers and the people who voted for the PT in Brazil two and a half years ago. There are four factories that are demanding nationalization -the government not only does not want to do so but, in fact, has begun to persecute the leaders of the occupied factories. We propose that the comrades who agree with us support the petition to the Lula government [See ILC Newsletter 136] to demand the end of the persecution of the leaders and that the delegation of workers demanding nationalization be received by the government. Thus, I propose that you support these comrades. I also want to say here that though it is true that the Chavez government nationalized Venepal (which is now called INVEPAL), there is a problem that we must discuss. The workers of Brazil are under a lot of pressure to become co-operatives and to accept co-management. The workers say: "We want the government to take over the factories and to guarantee all our rights and wages. We do not want to become small bosses. We do not want to indefinitely manage the factory because we know that is impossible to construct and island of a collective society in an ocean of a market economy." In this context, in Venezuela, there is a problem that must be discussed. INVEPAL had a union, but after the nationalization and self-management, the union disappeared because the workers now control 49% of the capital. The issue is that the union must continue to act as the representative of the interests of the workers to defend their wages and jobs. This is a permanent problem, even in factories that have been nationalized. The question is how to link together all these issues. These issues are not simple, in a number of cases they are new issues, and correspond to the revolutionary process under way in Venezuela. This is a very important task to help the UNT organize its Congress. We hope that it will be a step forward in the transformation process under way in Venezuela. *********************
The G-8 announces the "100% cancellation of the debt of the poor countries": What is this in reality? Analysis On Monday, June 13, the announcement is made for the "cancellation of 100% of the debt of the poor countries that are deep in debt." Such is the conclusion that is being presented publicly by the Summit of the G-8 (the "richest" 8 countries of world) which just took place in London. What is this in reality? 18 countries out of the 42 most in debt First of all, we are not talking about the debt of all the countries in debt, but of the 18 countries of the PPTE (the poor countries deep in debt), a subset of 42 countries created by IMF and the World Bank. The countries listed in the PPTE are those which, for a period of six years, implemented to the letter the "structural adjustment" plans of the IMF - that is, the privatizations, budgetary restrictions, market openings, that have led to ruin. So we're talking about the cancellation of the debt, in the words of the G-8, of 18 out of 42 countries of the PPTE. Next, the proposal is not actually for the 100% cancellation of the debt, but only of the portion labeled "multilateral," the debt to the IMF and the WB - that is, the least onerous debt, where the credit rates are the least high. The rest of the debt, labeled "bilateral," to states and banks, is not affected. Fifteen African countries out of the 18 are therefore affected by this cancellation. Only 10% of the Debt Would Be Cancelled The total debt of Africa has risen to almost US$400 billion. The decision of the G-8 on the "multilateral" debt would only affect $40 billion, that is, only 10%. This is far from being the "100% cancellation of the debt." "The $40 billion are not to be paid in cash, but through a pledge to ensure the reimbursement of the debt. In the end, that comes out to around $1.5 billion a year for the rich countries" (Liberation, June 13) and all that for 10 years. In comparison, the military budget of the countries of the G-8 is $700 billion a year. This is double the total African debt, and thus 466 times more than the increase in "help" for the debt cancellation. The Debt is 40% of the GDP of These Countries According to La Tribune de Genève on June 12, "the debt of 18 poor countries is cancelled by only 20% … . The PPTE, in 25 years, have already reimbursed 80 times the principal due to the interest which represents close to 40% of the GDP of the affected countries." The increase in the payment of interest on the debt is almost $39 billion a year for the PPTE. Moreover, this "help," will certainly not cost $1.5 billion a year because according to Liberation on June 13, "one question remains: will the money set aside for the cancellation of the debt be taken from the development aid, 38% of which is already devoted to debt relief?" The assessment of the reductions illustrates this point. The Continuation of the Liquidation Plans Finally, the "reductions" agreement implies the continuation of the conditions imposed on the countries that are deep in debt through the structural adjustments. And they dare speak to us about the "100% cancellation of the debt"! A "cancellation" of $40 billion out of $400 billion. A "cancellation" that will only cost the countries of the G-8 $1.5 billion a year. A "cancellation" that will largely be taken out of the coffers destined to "development aid." A "cancellation" that is conditioned by the deadly plans of "good governance," which are destroying the countries and the continent. When Bush "Helps" Africa… On the eve of the G-8 Summit, George Bush met with five presidents from Africa. At the G-8 Summit, the United States supported Britain's proposal for the "cancellation" of the debt. "The Bush administration intends to reinvest in Africa" (Le Monde, June 18). For decades, the United States let the old European colonial powers control the situation in Africa. In the last 12 years, there has been a change in orientation. From then on, in a number of countries, one can find many U.S. military advisers and the big American corporation are now present, especially the oil corporations. In April 2004, in Washington, in a conference titled "Oil and Security," the president of the American Chevron-Texaco company declared: "Africa offers one the best opportunities in the world in relation to the exploitation of new layers of oil and natural gas." For Walter Kansteumer, Deputy Under-Secretary of State for Africa: "The oil in the African continent has become a strategic interest for the United States." For his part, Robert Murphy, adviser on Africa for the U.S. State Department, stated: "The oil reserves in Africa are mostly offshore, therefore they are less likely to cause social and political problems." - Out of the 7 billion barrels of newly discovered reserves in the world, 6 billion come from the gulf of Guinea - In April 2005, the U.S. Marine operation "Sunner Pulse" was launched. Seven air-carriers and their escorts arrived in the Gulf of Guinea for military maneuvers - Another head of the U.S. administration, Charles Snyder, declared: "The United States is in the process of relaunching the security program of the African coastline to help the African security forces protect their shores and ocean resources" The Assessment of the Previous "Reduction" of the Debt "Up until the present, 27 countries have been chosen to benefit from the program of debt reduction, 23 of which were in Africa. Fourteen had already benefited and 15 others have the opportunity to join the circle of those elected. But in total, the reduction of the debt has only reached, for the moment, US$32 billion - which is far from the $100 billion planned for in the initial proposal… Moreover, the process to enter the PPTE is very costly in consultations and meetings. Not included are the missions, at a great cost, of experts from Washington in the field and those from the delegations from the headquarters of the Bretton Woods institutions to the beneficiary countries. Also, the current process prevents the possibility of loans for the countries in debt. The perversity of the system expresses itself in the fact that in the countries where the PPTE project is underway, the aid to classical developmental projects is practically ended. In Cameroon, for example, the French Agency for Development (AFD) considerably reduced its expenses for development projects as it waited for PPTE funds to be freed. And, because the countries are not able to reach the "takeoff point" - that is, to obtain the green light from the IMF to free up these funds - the government finds itself at the mercy of budgetary restrictions." (Young Africa, The Situation in Africa in 2005, hors series No. 8) AIDS in Africa: The "Assessment" of the IMF and the World Bank The policies of the "structural adjustment plans" and of the payment of debt are destroying Africa. These policies are destroying all existing public health, education, services - in the place of these services, NGOs are spreading throughout Africa, claiming to be able to replace the social services wiped out by the dictates of the IMF. Out of the 40 million people infected with AIDS in the world, over 60% live in sub-Saharan Africa. "If the rates of infection remain at their present level, 60% of youth today will not see their 60th birthday. In Swaziland, Zambia, and Zimbabwe the United Nations predicts that life expectancy for those who are born in the next few years will drop by 35 years… . In Botswana, 37% of the population carry the virus, and the economic growth is undervalued by two points every year… . In South Africa, the authorities already cited the cost of the disease as being $70 billion … . The organization of the United Nations for Food and Agriculture (FAO) sounded the alarm: the majority of countries in southern Africa will lose at least a fifth of their agricultural labor force in 2020." (Young Africa, The Situation in Africa in 2005, hors series, No. 8) In addition to AIDS, there are the famines, the other diseases (from which nobody dies in Europe or the United States), and the wars. These are the result of the structural adjustment plans, which prohibit all plans of public health care. ******************** ILC Conference in Defense of the ILO Conventions and the Independence of Trade Union Organizations, June 12, Geneva, 2005 PRESENTATION BY BAYLA SOW, General Secretary of the United Union of Air Transport Workers of Senegal (SUTAS) First of all, I would like to present to you the delegation from Senegal: Fatou Ba, the general secretary of the Employees and Insurance Workers Union; Doudou Fall Niang, the general secretary of the fisherman's union (this comrade was imprisoned, but the ILC fought forcefully and he was released a year later.) Before beginning, I would like to present in the name of the CNTS and in the name of all our union organizations our sincere condolences in the wake of death of our friend and comrade, Miguel Cristobal. We came to know the ILC through comrade Gbikpi-Bénissan, but also through comrade Miguel Cristobal who has given so much for the expansion of the ILC and the expansion of this annual conference. I already sent a message, but I had to tell you in my own voice all the sadness that washed over us after the passing of our comrade Miguel Cristobal. I would also like to thank you for the invitation that you sent to us, and which justifies our presence here. I think that the world of labor and the working masses are facing extremely difficult situations in all the countries of the world, as regions, sub-regions and workers themselves are pitted against each other. It is very hard. But I also think that in our struggle we must know how to hold onto gleams of hope. We live far from the European continent and from the European Union but we appreciated the significance of the first earthquake in the world of capital. I think that the "No" is going to be a real spark for the mobilization of the workers and working masses. Honestly, I jumped with joy when I heard that the "No" had won. And my mother asked me: "What happened?" And I told her: "The 'No' won!" She's illiterate and knows nothing about the union movement and the political movement. When I explained it to her, she soon understood. It is a real gleam of hope and I think that we must take advantage of it. We must give back hope to the worker who are under the gun due to the attacks on wages, due to precarity, and due to being driven out of the workforce. In effect, the people who have sent us here today are doubtful today, and we have trouble mobilizing them. Thus I think that we must use the results to remobilize. The second source for remobilization that I think that we must grab hold of is the result of our struggles: the beginning of the reductions and cancellations of the debt. We cannot simply let civil society say it was the result of their struggle. It was the result of the struggle of the union movement and the working masses of our countries. Even if it is only a beginning, even if it is only a small step, we must grab a hold of it to give back hope. We cannot let the NGOs say that the debt cancellation process is a victory of civil society and the NGOs. I live far from Bolivia but the events there interest me. It is the struggle of the people. For how long have we in the labor movement ceased to talk about nationalizations? And today, the workers in that country are rising to say: "We must nationalize our mineral and oil resources!" It is an important spark. It is a rebirth of the movement of the workers and the laboring masses. We must also capitalize on this. There are reasons to remain hopeful. On the specifically Senegalese question: Today, the union camp is practically atomized. It is a comparable situation to that in which many of our comrades in other African countries live. In Senegal, today, there are 240,000 workers in the formal sector and 18 union confederations. Thus, we have an atomized movement. But there is a spark of unity in action that has been created. Today, we have created a united union front which has co-coordinated different actions around five points - we have won on four of them. We are going to see very important challenges in the period ahead which can come into play in the framework of the recomposition of the Senegalese workers' movement, namely, the general elections for representativity. This can be an important spark because pluralism is a rich source in the framework of the union movement - but heavy atomization can handicap it forcefully. The final point that I would like to speak on is the question of the opening up of the ILO to the organizations of civil society. I think that we must do everything to safeguard the tripartite character of the ILO. I think this drive is the biggest threat facing the ILO today. ******************** ILC Conference in Defense of the ILO Conventions and the Independence of Trade Union Organizations, June 12, Geneva, 2005 INTERVIEW WITH SIDI SAID, General Secretary of the National Confederation of Unions of Algeria, UGTA (Algeria) How are the issues of the Labor Code posed in Algeria? In France, the government, in contradiction with the vote of May 29, decided to attack it frontally. Sidi Said: Since 1990, three fundamental laws have been passed, followed by multiple decrees that oversee the world of labor. They affect labor relations, the existence of contracts of an undetermined time, and the exercise of union rights. In 1990, I was the co-author of the law in the name of the UGTA. I proposed that the respect of trade union freedoms (thus union pluralism) be formulated. After 15 years of the implementation of this law, the UGTA called for the establishment of a Labor Code. To prevent any slipping, this code will be based on the ILO Conventions. It is a huge conquest to have the government and the bosses accept this. The three parties (government, bosses, and UGTA) each on their own, are entrusted, to draft a proposal. We, for our part, have put into place a working group of experts who visited the CGT-FO, the CGT and the CFDT to get their perspective. Next, there will be a tripartite working group to elaborate a final text based on the three texts. There are conflicts. The bosses are for the end to contracts of indeterminate length (CDI) because for them there is a fiscal obligation. The bosses want to have flexibility concerning temporary workers. They want employees that can be picked up and thrown out, without having to respect trade union freedoms. It is modern slavery. Are the youth, like with the Villepin measures, at the heart of the
offensive? What do you think about the victory of the "No" on May 29? SS: The social France was affirmed and installed. The great victory of the "No," is the victory of a France that wants to remain social. The French people opened a breach in modern globalization and exploitation. It is a universal victory. France has begun a process to break this globalization that searches for profits. We must capitalize on this victory of the "No" through an international union offensive. This victory shows that we can say no. France created the Rights of Man, and has just launched a process for the right to a social life. France has relaunched hope for social progress. This process must be taken up by the union movement, saying no to globalization as it is conceived by the financial powers. Many thanks to these small people who made the "No" victorious. How do you see the problems of the union movement? SS: The division of the unions can only do harm. It is essential to re-unite our forces. The union movement on a national and international scale is on the defensive. What is dangerous right now it to say: Let's accompany the globalization of big business. The accompaniment of globalization means the acceptance of social retreat by the union movement. In some places, we have failed to live up to our militant union mandate. There is sometimes a gap between the union apparatuses who have more of a tendency to join closer to the government than to the base. The trade union apparatus must constantly be renewed. It is necessary to elaborate another form of demand to enable the militants to take charge of union activity. Trade union "unicity" means the death of the union movement. The question is posed in relation to the future federation. Is it desirable? We must answer the following questions: What dynamic can develop in relation to the World Bank, the IMF, and the G-8? What demands should there be in relation to the debt? What proposals? The new international should integrate the solidarity without borders between the workers of Africa, Europe, and Asia. What do you think about the drive aiming to make the trade unions come closer to the NGOs in the name of civil society? The greatest danger currently facing us is the substitution of unions for NGOs. The NGOs can weakly be instrumentalized. There is a danger: it is becoming a debate in the International Labor Bureau, where there is talk about substituting tripartism for a fourth force, the NGOs. It is the putting into question of universal democracy. It is necessary to categorically oppose the invasion of the union movement by humanitarian forces. I think poorly of a NGO talking about workers' employment or security. It is the great upcoming battle of the union movement.
|
Open World Conference of Workers