The Heresy

Mauritius Times – 70 Years

By Peter Ibbotson

At the time of the general election last year, I stated that I foresaw a Labour majority in the Legislative Council for many years to come. I also mentioned that I expected to see only a couple of Parti Mauricien MLCs in the new Council; the two I had in mind were MM Koenig and Duval. In the event, only Mr Koenig (of these two) was elected; but now Mr Gaëtan Duval has won the Curepipe by-election. It is hardly surprising that he has done so; actually, in such a constituency whose boundaries seem (if we judge by the Electoral Commission’s Report) to have been drawn to provide a safe Parti Mauricien seat, his majority should have been much larger than it was.
The Labour defeat, which may ultimately turn out to be a salutary blessing in disguise (just as, for the Tories, the loss of some by-election seats was a blessing in the two years before the 1959 general election), can be attributed to three factors apart from the natural swing away from the majority party, which psephologists have remarked upon as a phenomenon worthy of further study. These three factors are:

1. The communalism of the Parti Mauricien.
2. The confusion caused by the activities and speeches of certain trade unionists (once Labour supporters).
3. The behaviour of the IFB candidate and supporters.

All these three factors reflect little credit on the anti-Labour elements in Mauritius. Lacking a coherent positive policy, the Parti Mauricien (PM) stooped (as is its usual parrot-like wont) to communalist propaganda of the basest, most ignoble kind. About the only word they forgot was khoonist. PM supporters had clearly learned their racial lessons well; their master’s voice repeated the arrant rubbish that used to deck the pages of Le Réveil before a section of the sugar industry grew tired of the antics of the Parti Mauricien and withdrew its subsidy from both party funds and Le Réveil.

The second and third factors displayed all the arrivisme that is the very devil in the political situation in any territory emerging toward full internal self-government. We had the unenlightening spectacle of the IFB’s supporters canvassing for votes on behalf of the PM candidate! The IFB’s role at Curepipe was to produce a smoke-screen, intended to make gullible people think that the IFB and PM were in fact opposed to each other; whereas, of course, each is opposed to the Labour Party and both are really working hand-in-glove against the Labour Party-Moslem Action Committee (cam) alliance.
Playing on people’s gullibility is one of the stock-in-trade items of both reactionary parties. The communalism of the Parti Mauricien and the arrivisme of the IFB reveal all too clearly those parties’ joint roles as the destroyers of the future Mauritian society. Each pays lip service to the idea and ideal of L’Entité Mauricienne; each, by its actions at the by-election, worked against that lip service.

Even worse, however, is the confusion caused by the defecting Labour supporters, mainly trade unionists, whose actions in the past few months have been to seek to destroy the traditional link between the political Labour movement and the industrial labour movement, between the Party and the Unions.

Last year, on June 5, a letter appeared in the Mauritius Times, one of its signatories being Mr Boyjonauth. In this letter, which dealt with a campaign to organise the sugar labourers’ unions, political speeches in support of or against any political party were abjured. Mr Boyjonauth was one of the prime movers last year in making the trade union movement non-political. Yet now we see this non-political gentleman standing as a candidate in a by-election and accepting the support of a political party, the IFB. Where does Mr Boyjonauth now stand? Is he still preaching the desirability of being non-political?
Lest any trade unionists think that Mr Boyjonauth is making sense in advocating that trade unions should eschew political action, let me remind him and them that many trade unions in the UK have rules positively committing them to political action. For example:

Union                          Political Action desired by Union Rules

Railwaymen               Supercession of the capitalist system by a socialist order.
Plumbers                     Ultimate control of the industry.
Clerical Workers      Democratic control of their industry.
Engineers                     Control of industry in the interest of the community.
Vehicle Builders        Transfer of the means of production to the People.
Boilermakers              Co-operative system of ownership and workers’ control.
Miners                            Complete abolition of capitalism.
Shop Assistants          Control of those industries in which members are employed.
Tailors                            A socialist co-operative commonwealth.
Transport                     Control of industries where members are employed.
Electrical trades        Workers’ control of industry.

In the rules of all these eleven important unions, therefore, we read that the rules provide for positive political action to get rid of capitalism, establish socialism, and have workers’ control of various industries. One union, the Mineworkers, did have a rule that the union should work for the public ownership and control of mining; and in fact, this aim was achieved over 10 years ago when the mines were nationalised.
Mr Boyjonauth is barking up the wrong tree in seeking to make trade unions non-political. He described himself last year as assistant secretary of the Mauritius TUC; perhaps he would be interested to learn what the British TUC has to say on this question of unions being political or non-political. The rules of the British TUC provide for the aims of the TUC to include:

Public ownership and control of natural resources.
Nationalisation of the land, mines, railways, and minerals.
Workers’ participation in control of industry.
Extension of state enterprise.

What are all these but political aims, which can be achieved only by political action?
The lesson of the Curepipe by-election is clear. The anti-Labour forces will stoop to any form of chicanery to discredit their opponents and gain support for themselves. In this, they are aided and abetted by people who call themselves friends of the workers and who are active in the trade union movement. The Labour Party must therefore close its ranks and ensure that the people know who their true friends are — the Labour Party and those unions that support the Labour Party.

7th Year – No 286
Friday 12th February 1960

In the Civil Service
Appointments

The following appointments to the Public Service for the week ended 11th February 1960, are released to the Press for general information:

Mr J.R. Thomas appointed Clerical Officer with effect from 1st November 1959.

Mr N. M. Duportail appointed Gate-keeper, Health Department, with effect from the 15th January, 1960.

Miss N. Man Yang Ng Wong appointed Temporary Typist with effect from 20th January 1960.

Mr V. Persad appointed Temporary Messenger with effect from 12th January 1960.

Messrs V. Rughooputh and A. Dusmohamed appointed Temporary Messengers with effect from 1st February 1960

Establishment Division, Colonial Secretary’s Office, Port Louis

11th February 1960

Mauritius Times ePaper Friday 18 October 2024