nineteenth century JOHN TULLY - December 7, U P to one million workers struck in the state of Victoria on November 10, and around 200,000 thronged the streets of Melbourne in what was probably the biggest demonstration in Australian history. Tens of thousands of others also demonstrated in provincial towns and there have been large demonstrations in other states.
The upsurge follows the introduction of a package of draconian anti-union laws and austerity measures introduced by the incomino Tiharl that io
1992 by rolling strikes. On December 10, electricity and public transport workers will effectively shut down industry for 24 hours.
The electricity workers, significantly, are covered by a federal award and are thus legally beyond the state government's reach. The workers, however, are taking action both out of solidarity with workers on state awards and in protest against the threat by the federal Liberal opposition to introduce practically identical legislation if the angry reception given to Labor MPs who appeared at rallies, and the resounding applause given to militant union leader Bill Deller, who declared that if the government did not back down, it had to be brought own.
Another spin off of Kennett's attacks is that the seemingly impossible may have been achieved in the federal political sphere. Until Kennett's rampage, the federal Labor government was trailing the Liberals in opinion polls, and Paul Keating was rated the most unpopular Prime Minister in Australian history. The situation appears to have been reversed and some jittery Liberals are calling for the brakes to be incoming Liberal (that is, conservative) state government in Victoria. The government has effectively abolished the right to strike, outlawed various forms of trade union solidarity action; provided for the criminalization of strikers and the sequestration of union assets; and moved to abolish the existing industrial award system.
Workers will be forced to negotiate individual contracts with their employers. The government has also raised charges for essential services, imposed a "pre-tax" of $100 on ratepayers and slashed spending on education, health and welfare. Tens of thousands of public sector workers face the sack.
### Pomp and ceremony
These "reforms" have been accompanied by pay increases for parliamentarians and a return to the expensive formal pomp and ceremony of the past. Small wonder that, only a matter of weeks after the elections, the new government is detested by a growing proportion of the population.
Neither has the upsurge against the government waned since the mammoth demonstration of November 10. On November 23, for example, over 10,000 education workers from Melbourne's Western Suburbs demonstrated outside the Education Ministry, despite threats of a lock out and organized scabbing.
Public transport, the metals and engineering industry, the building trades, the 16 docks, aviation and hospitals have been hit it is returned to office in next year's general elections.
The massive fightback must have come as a shock to the state government and federal opposition. Victoria's premier Jeff Kennett is on record as saying that he believed Australian workers would meekly accept their fate.
He was extrapolating from the New Zealand experience where similar, if less draconian, legislation was introduced by the National Party government with minimal opposition.
Kennett, however, has shown no sign of backing down. He insistently stresses his so-called mandate, but, while it is true he did win a landslide against Labor in October, even clear sighted conservatives dismiss his claim. In fact he refused to divulge most of his industrial policy before the election and claimed that working people would be no worse off than under Labor.
Kennett probably hopes that the storm will abate, leaving him free to pick off the small groups of workers who disobey his laws. Many workers, however, have pledged to fight on to victory, and it is probable that many thousands would go to prison rather than pay fines. Even the rightapplied.*
Leftwing MP sacked by High Court IN WHAT may prove to be an unfortunate move for the ruling class, Australia's High Court has upheld an appeal against the election of popular leftwing independent Phil Cleary. Cleary was elected earlier this year in the federal seat of Coburg in Melbourne, following the resignation from parliament of former Labor Prime minister Bob Hawke. His election indicated that where the voters perceived a viable alternative, they would turn against both Labor and Liberal.
The High Court upheld an appeal from a disgruntled rightwing independent who managed to get only around 300 votes out of a total of around 50,000.
Cleary was dismissed because the court agreed that at the time of his nomination for election, he had occupied a position of profit under the Crown". This is doubly absurd, as Cleary was, in fact, a high school teacher on extended unpaid leave, at a time when thousands of teachers are being made redundant.
Cleary is almost certain to be re-elected if a fresh by-election is called, and the result will be seen as a judgement on the policies of the Kennett state government, the federal government and the federal opposition with its so-called "Fightback policy". *
International Viewpoint # 241 • December 21, 1992