tion cuts can be taken forward.
ww victimisation ov the Leaisnot an isolated case. Last year teachers from Quinton Kynaston, South Hackney, Phoenix and Garret Green schools were similarly set up for disciplinary action.
These attacks came at the time of the campaign against the Houghton report on teachers' salaries, and were ob vousiy intendea to discourage teachers trom taking any action adainst increasing unemoiovmentane une curs. nouentor seit was an attemotto ouv orr teacners by establisning a very nierarcnica. career dav structure to deter reacners from taking action against future attacks on the education service. • How was the South East Region TUC demonstration raised in your school and Teachers Association?
In the context of the consistent explanation we have made about the implications and effects of the education cuts. We have repeatedly urged and attem Pred to burd a campaign against tne cuts wiien would invo ve the whole labour movement.
Teachers cannot fight the cuts alone - the fight to defend education spending is a mont for ine workine class as d whole. We felt that this demo was an important Tirst step in bunding such a class-wide campaign. • Why did you take strike action?
Teachers were frustrated by the NUT bureaucracy s accision not to call to action, musicad or suboorne te cemonOn 21 October 1975 more than 10,000 students, teachers and other workers marched through the streets of London to protest against the Labour Government's slashing atacks on education spending. Among them was MIKE COLLEY, the National Union of Teachers representative at Clissold Park Secondary School and a committee member of Hackney Teachers Association.
Colley had been delegated from his school to attend the demonstration, which had been called by the South Eastern Region of the TUC. Now he faces victimisation by the Inner London Education Authority. Red Weekly asked him about the background to his attempted victimisation and how the fight against the educastration the No l asked teacners to go along atter scool and lobby their MrS.
In the usual way they failed to provide any leadership or seriously attempt to organise a fight back against the cuts.
Our action was aimed at developing organisation and involvement at the rank and file level, to challenge the teddersmo and rorce ur to bura a car paign.
The NUT bureaucracy is more inter ested in disciplining its own militants unan in leading a fight against the anti-working class policies of the Labour Government.
The Executive is now recommending changes in the Union's disciplinary rules which would give them power to suspend members Detore any nearine.
This would apply particularly to any breaches ot the notorious mule cor local autonomy, which prevents any local association from taking industrial action without the authorisation of the cxecutive.
• How do you see the fight against the cuts being taken forward?
The fight to defend teachers is part of the fight against the cuts. The demonstration against the education cuts on 21 February and the lobby earlier the same day to demand a recall TUC to break with the Government's policy of cuts and unemployment are both vital steps • What has been the role of the Communist Party members on the NUT Executive?
The Communist Party has no perspective for fighting the cuts. They have not projected concerted action against the cuts but have limited themselves to teeole orotests. nev are more concerned with launching witch-hunts against the revolutionary left in the union, and writing off important issues such as the Working Women's Charter at national conference as the concern of a lunatid fringe.
OF AN CIE Communist Party member of the NUT executive Max Morris-supports rulechange attack on militant teachers, saying: 'It is unfortunate that the activities of a lunatic fringe have gained totally disproportionate publicity to the dis advantage of the profession. Clear tasks
CUTS
DEMO MUST POINT