BRITISH Ll&KAKi
2 1 MAY 1984
BEAVER
NEWSPAPER OF THE LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS
STUDENTS-UNION
No. 226
Thursday 17 May 1984
As sure as God made little apple^i, He made Cecil Parkinson smooth . . .
UNITED AGAINST THE FRONT
Few people can fail to be aware by now of the going on at North London Poly. The presence of Patrick Harrington, a National/Front student organiser, nas so incensed the students that they have organised pickets on the entrance to keep him out. Harrington has taken out several injunctions to
Erevent anybody from locking his way. The response has been an escalation in opposition, culminating in a mass pickct drawing students from all over London, (40 of them from LSE). As a result of the preceding night's television publicity, Harrington, forewarned, failed to turn up for his lecture last Thursday and the picket was regarded as a success.
Harrington has claimed all along that he is being denied his right to an education. His prominent position in the National Front has, however, given rise to very strong suspicions that he is
really a "plant". As one of the opposition campaign organisers said, "Harrington is not being denied the right to an education, he is being denied the opportunity to disrupt a multiracial, pluralist college."
The pickets are now in contempt of court, and Justice Mars-Jones has ordered that photographs which identify 20 people, (including PNL's union executive), to be handed over the Harrington's counsel. Clearly, this will result in their names falling into the hands of the National Front - an unpleasant prospect. The students, who have a great deal of support from NUPE and NATFHE workers at the Poly, believe that the only way to beat Harrington is a mass blockade. They called on students from all London colleges to join them at 2pm on May 15, andlO.30 am on the 17th, (this Thursday). We await developments.
NUS Conference Overseas Students Feature
Prof Griffiths Profile
Letters
Arts
Book Reviews Opinion Page
On the 9th May, Cecil Parkinson delivered an eagerly-awaited talk to a full and tense Old Theatre on issues related to his last ministerial post in charge of industry and trade.
Mr. Parkinson arrived modestly enough in a taxi and there was
no
demonstration as had been rumoured. However, when introduced by the Chairman of the PCS, there was generous applause from the Tories and an equally loud dose of boos and hisses from the left.
Mr Parkinson began by describing a trip he had recently concluded to the Far East which had included Singapore, South Korea, and Japan. Predictably, what struck him most in these countries was the success of their industries. In a meeting with a Japanese trade union leader, he was told of the essence of their success -that management and labour worked harmoniously to create profitable results. Moreover, these industries combined the political role with that of the industrial; thus the Chairman of Toyota's proud reminder that his company had last been on strike 33 years ago.
Ffocussing on the issue of strikes, Mr. Parkinson turned to Britain. Upon mentioning Mr. Scargill's name, members of the left cheered loudly, as he tried to argue that the leader of the NUM had created a gulf not only between management and worker, but also between the miners. Moreover, Britain was now producing only a seventh of Japan's motor-vehicle output and, he continued, "If we don't produce, our competitors will sell more cars, and we win sell less, which means there will be fewer jobs for our industry" adding that it was "almost a scandal". The mention of the word scandal led to a tumult of witty and scurrilous respon.ses to which Parkinson replied aggressively, "You read the papers in October, congratulations - your reading is better than your manners". This curt response provoked further applause from the Tories, and also increased the tempo of shouting from the gallery.
INSIDE
Mr. Parkinson moved on to a new theme when he posed the question to the audience: which government was to take the blame - the one which had refused to tackle the nation's problems, or the one which had to make changes to keep Britain's ailing industries alive? He cited two cases, the BSC and BL as examples of this. In the former, he exclaimed, the Labour government shelved the Heath administration's plans for a 22 million tonne steel industry and replaced it in 1979 with a 15 million tonne industry. This had become necessary because in the interim BSC had lost £2.5 billion. On BL he said "jolis have been lost, and in large numbers, but who caused the unemployment?"
Turning to the economy, Parkinson said that the government was not following a strict monetary policy. If it were, then interest rates would have had risen above 30%. Moreover, he claimed his Government had maintained the value of pensions since 1979, had increased health service spending by 17%, and defence spending by 3%. The aim was to strike a balance between revenue and borrowing. He emphasized that borrowing was economically unsound. In 1976, when Labour were in power, Britain borrowed more money from the IMF than any country ever had. This money was needed by "intrinsically poorer" countries. And, more recently, the socialist government of France had to abandon its radical economic policies because they were leading to undesirable levels of borrowing.
Summarizing his talk, Mr. Parkinson referred back to stike action and said that the next time a person heard a national demand for strike action it would be damaging not only to the industry involved but would also, at the end of the day, benefit Britain's competitors.
The first question raised was about resistance, through borough elections, to the abolition of the GLC. Mr. Parkinson's answer was straightforward: the Government would continue to abolish the GLC. At this point, the occasional interjections turned into a sporadic barrage of shouting as a number of people angrily confronted the MP on the right of Londoners to decide the issue of abolition. But he remained adamant on this point.
A question ostensibly on the miner's stike turned out, as the questioner said, to correct "Mr. Parkinsons lie" to which the former minister answered, "You only understand the answers you want to listen to". The final question was on the invitation of P.W. Botha. Mr. Parkinson personally opposed apartheid but felt that Britain and the South Afri can government should be allowed to discuss the present situation.
This concluded an hour's entertainment during which Mr. Parkinson managed to deflect a considerable degree of heckling, and was pretty much on top in a raucously received talk.
Rajat Kohli
Would uoii like to uiuh'rtim' thnt lok
Pa^e Tu\)
BEAVER Thursdny 17 May 1984
Letters
Defence without tears.
Another reply to JD
Dear Editor,
After waiting for other concientious Americans to take the issue of the overseas and General Course students seriously in countering certain baseless allegations directed against them in your publication, I feel it is necessary to set the record straight for your Senior Treasurer who is surprisingly still in office. First of all the concern for raising costs being unfair is simply overstated.
Overseas students especially in America are really getting a "good deal" compared to the fees they pay at home universities. Most of all my friends, when asked, feel that it is a relief to spend some time at L.S.E. even on their parents' wallets. There are a great many, in fact most students at universities in the U.S. who are on some sort of Grant or Loan to enable them to pay fees. Thus, the allegation that they are all rich kids is a flat out lie. Of course, anyone who attains entrance to the L.S.E. is in a priviliged class in some way, simply because L.S.E. picks out privileged the sound minds which will perform. Anyway, kids who face trouble costs abroad are usually jware of the need to secure capital at home, and many pay travel expenditure themselves as I have.
As regards to the unmerited squeeze on places because of overseas student and the General Course, overseas students are judged on their merits in obtaining entry to departments on an equal footing with home students. And as a General Course student, I was told even what departments were not available for consideration. There have been General Course students at the LSE since 1911. The number has been increased by a recent drive to get a better sample of highly qualified Americans from across the
Principles
Dear Editors,
Philip Groves once informed me that he had "absolute principles", according to which gay people were allowed to exist, but any sex between them was abhorrent, and to be stamped out if at all possible.
On Wed 9th May Cecil Parkinson, adulterer, illegitimate father, and former chairperson of the Tory Party, addressed a meeting at the LSE. Not only did Philip Groves, as chairperson of the Tory Club, sanction that meeting, and chair it, he even shook the adulterer's hand, and smiled at him several times during the meeting.
I can only predict the immediate breakdown of society as we know it. Yours sincerely,
Richard Snell
U.S. and in other countries as well. As a result, there are proportionately fewer Ivy League East Coast "preppies" and a more proportionate representation of American students.
This drive has resulted in the increase of competition and applications along with strong adherence to the high standards of previous years, leaving hundreds of applicants with rejection letters who were ready to pay LSE fees.
The course is called "hardly rigorous" (rigorous?) because of its description in the LSE handbook which can hardly be more specific than it is, because of the hundreds of different variable requirements "students" Home Universities have on the acceptance of LSE credits. Some universities don't even require that we take exams, although most students take two; or more. There are, as J.D. well knows plenty of Home students who opt out of exams and put them off or do papers instead. 1 suggest that the only students who dislike the General Course students are those xenophobes who write drivel like that of our Senior Treasurer. His continual lies about a Come and "Study in the Atmosphere of Dickens" video are weak and insultory insinuations. (There in fact was a short film made about the LSE but it was shown to English Sixth Formers!!)
The final insult which I feel bound to clarify is that in the course of writing this article, Mr. Donkersley infers that Canadians and Americans are given language courses to improve our English. One more paranoid flex of that canine muscle between your Senior Treasurer's ears!
Hugh Clines
Ultra vires..
BEAVER STAFF
Editors: Irene IN^borg-Andersen, Iqbal Wahhab Beaver Team: Robert Alan, Justin Anthoiw, James Bailey, Lucy Cohen, Iain Crawford, John Donkersley, Eleanor Edwards, Alan Harris, Gautam Khandelwal, Rajat Kohli, Toby Kramers, Malcolm Lowe, Percy Marchant, Jim McCallum, Simon Morris, Alan Peakall. Beaver is published by the London School of Economics Students' Union, East Building, Houghton St., London WC2A 2AE. Copyright Beaver and all authors, 1984. Telephone 405-8594 X30 '^pesetters Gee Graphics Ltd. Paste-up Frank Donovan. Printers Cambridge Heath Press.
SPECIAL THANKS TO:.
Dear Sir,
In the last issue of Beaver, Mr. Parmar advocated the expulsion of "all US bases, troops, and missiles", withdrawal from NATO, and "an end to all types of war preparation -both nuclear and conventional, as they are both disasterous". But, he added, "We must oppose the Warsaw Pact".
With what?
You don't tell us, Mr. Parmar. Perhaps you have in mind a speech made by Tony Benn in which he held out the cheerful prospect that the experiences of Afghanistan, Viet Nam, and Algeria "may prove that a determined people is the best guarantee against permanent domination from outside". A nuclear-free Europe might become another Afghanistan, Viet Nam or Algeria, but no need to fret - the domination from the outside world would not be "permanent".
Dear Editors,
The Senior Treasurer, John Donkersley, is wrong when he tells the students' union that donations to the NUM from the games machines accounts would not be "ultra vires". They quite clearly would, for the simple reason that these accounts are subject to the saine tax exemptions as the central union block grant and arc therefore part of the union's charitable funds.
Needless to say, if any such payments are made, appropriate action will be taken.
Your sincerely Philip Groves
Mayuri Kuwahara Ann Boswell Carol Billinghurst
Perhaps you believe that we don't need to worry too much about our defence, because the Soviet bloc will liberate itself and our problems will disapear. I do not presume to speak for all East Europeans, but having talked to a few of them, privately, over a number of years, my eyes and ears refut this illusion completely. And 1 am not alone in this impression. Neal Ascherson wrote in the New Socialist of March 1982 that, "Most young Poles. . . .appear to regard the peace movement in the West as something negative, because they suppose it will weaken NATO without correspondingly weakening the Warsaw Pact". And I wouldn't put too much weight on those peace demonstrations with slogans critical of both superpowers, so expertly stage managed by their countries' rulers.
Perhaps you believe, as E.P.Thompson does, in the force of
"peaceful European opinion. . . .negotiating between the superpowers and ultimately reunifying Europe". As an adjunct to our diplomacy, maybe, but as our first line of defence? Permit me to tell you a fable, told originally by the Spanish delegate to the League of Nations Disarmament conference half a century ago. "The animals in the jungle," he said, "got together with a view to living at peace with one another. The Tiger eloquently proposed that the eagle should dispense with its talons, the elephant that the wolf should have its fangs drawn, the hedgehog that the adder should sick up all its poison, and so on, until at last the bear opened up his arms and invited all present to join him in a loving hug".
Yours faithfully,
Andrew Dekany
Sexist calendars.
Dear Editors
Residents of Carr-Saunders Hall will no doubt be familiar with the controversy surrounding the display of pornographic and sexist calendars in their Hall Bar.
A number of residents took it upon themselves to investigate the possibility of having the offensive items removed. Upon contacting the Bar Managers, they were encouraged to obtain a consensus of opinion on the matter, upon which the Managers would presumably act. (Note that the Bar Managers sought
no such consensus when deciding to display the offensive pin-ups in the first place). A petition was organised, which although not widely distributed to every single resident, quickly gained 177 signatures. This is considered to be a more than adequate sample of prevailing opinion in the Hall.
The petition was presented to the Bar Managers who have since treated it with great contempt and taken no action whatsoever. At present, the calendars remain on display and the Bar Managers argue
feebly, that there are many people who wish them to remain. This is simply NOT GOOD ENOUGH. If the Managers had any respect at all for their customers they would acknowledge the petition and act on it.
The purpose of this leter is to bring this controversy to a wider audience. We hold out no hope that the Bar Managers can be persuaded by rational or peaceful means to acknowledge the opinions of their customers.
Carr-Sauiiders Action Committee
Mixed Fortunes for LSE Tearn




5 -A"

c ;()()> IK
NiADDLN
la c;as
nhwman
> 0 b u
L. S. E.
Above is our semi-victorious University Challenge team. On Wednesday, 14th March, a coach carrying around thirty students, including a well-equipped group from the Three Tuns, left LSE for Granada studios, Manchester, not being previously . told who the opposing teams would be. As the coach pulled up outside the studios, one of the passengers noticed that the coach directly in front of ours was from Cambridge. Uiipeturbed, team coach Mike Mos-zynski led the noisy LSE contingent into the studio's foyer where the Cambridge supporters (from Queen's College) were already sat; elegantly clad and looking sophisticated.
After years of bans, the LSE team were on their best behaviour for our return to the University Challenge circuit. What wasn't catered for.
however, was the behaviour of our supporters. When ushered into the studio, through corridors pleading for silence, our crowd were singing, "We want Bamber Gascoine, we want Bamber Gascoine". Once seated in the studio, half a dozen security guards were sent to keep the boys from LSE in check. They need not have worried. Once the cameras began to roll, stage fright seemed to have struck, and the most they managed to evoke was the odd cheer - not for LSE, mind you, but for Queen's College. Notwithstanding, the LSE team were victorious; largely due to a magnificent performance from Eddie Lucas, we beat the pseudo-intellectuals by more than a hundred point margin.
Bitterly disappointed by an LSE triumph (especially since it was inspired by a Liberal) the Three Tuns
group adjourned to the local pub, only to miss what would have been the highlight of their evening - an LSE defeat. It was against York, whose team included two members who had represented the university for three years running, which some would say gave them an unfair advantage. Nevertheless, it must be said that the Oxbridge rejects (York, that is!) were exceptionally good, scoring in excess of 300 points.
All in all it was an enjoyable day out. Whether viewers in London will ever be able to see the games is still open to question, but the programme's director said that if it is decided to be shown in the South East, London will see the first match against Queen's on July 1st, and the one against York on the following Sunday.
Iqbal Wahhab
BEAVER Thursday 17 May 1984
Page Three
NUS LOBBY WESTMINSTER IN FARES PROTEST
Matthew Price at the Union
Yesterday saw a lobby of parliament by students from all over the country (except, of course, Scotland) organised by the N.U.S., to protest at the intended changes to the travel element of maintenance grants. Giles Radice and Clement Freud were to speak to the lobby, and it was hoped that Peter Brooke, the Minister responsible, would be able to attend also, to answer questions and hear the students opinions.
Whether this will alter the course proposals. They show that, at 1983
of the "cost cutting" exercise being run by the Department of Education and Science remains to be seen, but the N.U.S. feel they have presented a strong case for the retention of the current "excess fares reclaim" system, at least for current students, and that Mr Brooke is ignoring their evidence rather than admit the scale of hardship involved for many.
The plan is to replace the present £50 travel element in L.E.A. grants -with excess expenditure reclaimable at the end of the year - with £100 and no reclaim. This has already 'been amended to allow £160 to students studying from home, who have high daily travel costs, and now as a further concession existing students will be able to claim expenditure over £250 (£310 if living at home).
The N.U.S. evidence comes from answers to a wide ranging survey of student financial needs undertaken in 1982/3. The travel section answers have been re-analysed to show the winners and losers under the new
fares, 64% of students made no claim, or claimed less than £50 (£110 if living at home). These people would be better off in future, though none by more than £50. On the other hand some 8-10% of students, including 20% of those living at home, had such expenditure that they will still be making claims, which will leave them worse off by the £150 gap between the travel element in the grant and the claim threshold. The remaining 25% would lose £1-150 a year.
The most interesting finding however, is that the average expend-' iture of a London based student was £155, that of a Scottish based student £135. Yet the Scottish education department has decided to retain the old system due to the hardship it would cause and the high percentage of students travelling daily from home. The number of students with long (over 6 miles each day) daily journeys is greater in Ulster (30%) and London (24%) than in Scotland (20%), yet the D.E.S. and the North-
ern Ireland office do not see this as a problem.
Other localised blackspots are campus Universities where the student population exceeds the accomodation. At places such as Lancaster and Warwick the nearest alternative accomodation is several miles away, and while "on site" students will get £50 more, "off site" students will have to find most of their £200-250 daily fares themselves. London students not in halls will do well to avoid needing a 2 zone travelcadd, and while this is excellent value at £18 a month, it adds up to over £120 for an academic year, and that is after fares from home to London!
Late last week neither the D.E.S. or N.U.S. could report any further negotiations. The students only hope is that yesterdays lobby will mobilise sufficient support from M.P.'s to have the Statutory Order, due to be made in early August, ammended. The D.E.S. did not anticipate any further changes however, and also said that, although it is procedurally possible for a Statutory Instrument to be challenged and changed after it has been published, this has never happened with Maintenance Grants.
Alan Peakall
LIBRARY PORTERS' PAY DISPUTE
A long-standing dispute between the School and the porters staffing the library spilled over and affected the students on the 3rd and 4th of May as the porters refused to do voluntary overtime, effectively closing the library at 7.00pm and 5.00 respectively.
The dispute stretches back to December when the porters working in the library put in a claim for parity in pay as they were being paid less than the other porters employed by the School. Moreover, at present the library porters work compulsory overtime two times a week until 10.00pm, but also have to do voluntary overtime because there is a shortage in staffing levels. The School began discussions. However, it talked of trying to get one set of porters rathr than discussing what is essentially a pay claim. The slow approach of the School in dealing with this matter thus led to last fortnight's events, which was supported by students.
NALGO and the AUT are not involved in the dispute as they
do not represent the porters, who are members of the T and GWU. The School has asked the library porters to continue doing voluntary overtime for the next three weeks, and that within that space of time it will arrive at a solution. When asked about the dispute, the porters on duty had nothing further to add to the information available except that discussions were continuing with the School.
Debbie Hindson, the General Secretary of the SU, has written a letter to Dr. Challis, the Secretary to the School, expressing the students' concern and their support for the library porters, and urged for a quick solution con-sicfering that the examinations were approaching rapidly.
Rajat Kohli
Council Housing for Students
Several students have approached the Welfare Office this year with enquiries about the possibility of obtaining council housing in London. Nearly all council housing is allocated on the basis of a 'points' system, which means that particularly needy groups such as families, the disabled or chronically sick, and the elderly get priority; as a result, very few student applicants are ever offered council housing.
However, a small number of students have recently managed to secure cheap, unfurnished council accommodation (generally 'hard-to-let' flats in tower blocks or tenements) through the GLC Mobility Scheme. This Scheme is not operated on a points system (except in a few Boroughs) and is therefore
worth a try if you need cheap and/or unfurnished accommodation and aren't too bothered about the environment you live in. Most of the flats are for 2, 3 or 4 people but very occasionally one-person flats become available.
The Scheme at present allocates flats in the following London Boroughs: Lambeth, Lewisham, Southwark, and possibly Tower Hamlets, Hackney and Wandsworth - but these are liable to change. Students living in any London Borough may apply for a flat. If you are interested in applying, come up some time to the Welfare Office (Room E294) to obtain more details. Phil Wood,
Welfare Assistant

, / > V'- ¦
WELFARE REPORT
It's exam time again - when the Government can deal severe blows to student standard of living in the knowledge that they are safe from mass demonstrations.
Travel grants have already been altered; a flat rate is being introduced to cut administrative costs. Under this system London students stand to lose between £100 and £150 per annum. The Guardian on Wednesday, 9th May carried a story telling of proposals to introduce a similar scheme concerning Housing Benefits. From November, there will be a flat rate of £15.35 per week; rent paid over this sum will be reimbursed. At first glance, this wguld seem to benefit students; at present the sum is £19.45.
However, under the new proposals students will be unable to claim the whole of their rent during the Easter and Christmas holidays; nor will they be able to claim rent rebates during term time. These proposals will hit residents of the Carr-Saunders flats especially hard; they stand to lose at lease £135 which they can claim for the holidays under the present system.
The proposals have been circulated without consulting the Department of Education, the University and College authorities, the NUS, or MPs. These secretive methods have been employed as the Government knows it is unable to justify these callous proposals in terms of student hardship. The proposals are just one more example of Tory attempts to erode the right of all to a proper education, it is rapidly becoming not a right, but a privilege.
Lynn Huggins Welfare Officer.
A POLITICAL ANAGRAM
Now don't let your fine academic minds run away with themselves, but can you solve Nigel's political (and of course copyrighted) anagram?
This consists of turning the three words printed below into two new words (including the definite article).
All answers to 10 Downing Street please, and not to the esteemed editorial ofice of your erudite and illustrious newspaper 'Beaver'.
You'll find the answer at the bottom of page 10.
The anaeram is:
IT'S IN THATCHER
© N. Racine jaques, 1984
I The End Of The Whig Supremacy
It's often been said by overseas students that the Union General Meetings are a copy of the House of Commons, while those on the left prefer to see it as a revolutionary I convention and live in the hope of I Guilotining the decadent aristocracy 1 of the right. But the Union is not i sophisticated enough to be either of 1 these and is not like the decadent I House of Commons of the 18th [ Century.
I Firstly, there are the Whigs who live i in memory of revolution they are all [took young to remember (1968 [instead of 1688). Within this group 1 there are court Whigs, that phalanx [of pensioners and placemen (or 1 place people in 1984) who have t walked the corridors of power in the [ East Building for the past few years, I some using the Senior Treasurer's [ office as their common room, others J making up the kitchen cabinet of the General Secretary. There are also I those who see themselves above the factional intrigue of the politics of [the Whig Oligarchy, (Labour [caucus). Occasionally we see an [appearance of the Levellers and the [ ranters (though S.WS.O. seem to do [more ranting than levelling). Leader [of this group is LSE's answer to the I slimey Horace Walpole, Mr. John [Donkersley, master of faction and [chief financial minister. He, like I Walpole has to look after a monarch I with limited command of spoken [English.
[Opposing the Whigs there are the [various shades of Tory. On the [extreme right there are the danger-[ous Jacobites Freely, Collins and [Brewer; suspected of treason by the [left and ready to betray the LSE into [the hands of its enemies (then the I French, now Sir Michael Havers). I There is Philip Groves like Boling-Ibroke returning from exile and heav-ling so often it's impossible to place jhim anywhere on the political spec-Itrum of the Tories. The Jacobite iTories though have not given any Ireal hope for the cause but he
hanoverian and Independent Tories have 'stormed the closit (E205 in our | case). They accuse Donkersley's Whig ministry of being based upon 'party' (politics and party are always a sin when the Tories are housing) and what want is a ministry with a broad bottom unlike Mr. Donkersley's Mininstry which has a narrow bottom. This broad bottom comes in the form of Mr. Edweard Lucas, Mr. Malcolm Lowe and Mr. Iain Crawford.
But the Independent Tories are right; not everyone is a Whig or a Tory. Upon the balcony sits the country supporters, suspicious of the court whether under Whig or Tory control and voting solidly this year to overthrow the Dorkersley-Hindson Whig ministry. Though on the whole it has Whig sympathisers it is this group hat must be counted on in order to ensure success as the placemen and party phalanxes are often fairly even. For example the country will vote infavour of giving money from the games m.achines to the miner's strike fund, but not to granting them £500 from union funds.
What happened this year in the union is that during the lent term the Ministry managed to keep Whigs of all shades together but then like Horace WEalpole, John Donkersley met a major crisis, not not the bursting of the South Sea Bubble, but the appointment of paul Whit-taker as bar manager. This led to the balcony's loss of confidence and impeachmewnt of our two chief ministers, Donkensley and Hindson. As the sesion draws to a close the Tories must beware of the old Whig tactic of pushing through controversial mesures when most of the country members have retreated to their country houses, normally known as the Lionel Robbins Building.
So how will this 'ministry all the talent' (less) fare in the year to come? Their survival depends upon their ability to win over the country members on the balcony, as even the dreaded 'evil minister' Keir Hopley, attacked vociferously from the left, was able to stay his term of office. Meanwhile the Whig Junta (the Labour caucus) will not be short of criticism whatever the new ministry >iut they certainly need a rethink of -heir own tactics. Probably the Whigs will test out their strength upon one of the flagging members of the 'Cabinet' (Executive) in the first term bedorfefore moving into the really big fish early in the lent term, though an impeachment before Christmas, probably of Moszynski, is always issible. Whatever happens it wem be the most interesting year in LSE politics for a long time.
The Executive
Andrea Bartlett (Independent Student): Publicity and External Affairs
Simon Ellis (Labour Club): NUS Officer
George Elwin (Conservative): Societies Officer
Lynn Huggins (Labour Club): Welfare Officer
Rajat Kohli (Independent): Postgraduate and Part-timers Officer
Malcolm Lowe (Liberal): Services Officer
Rory O'Driscoll (Conservative;): Academic Affairs Officer
Richard Scott (Labour Club): Academic Affairs Officer
Shakhunt Shah (OSCAR): Overseas Students Officer
Fiona Sorotos (Indepoendent Socialist): Women's Officer
Exams
Students who are ill prior to, or during, their exams, and who wish to have these factors or any other taken into account should see the Registar, Mr Ashley, in H308, Con-naught House, as soon as they can.
You may be asked to provide medical certificates or other information relating to the circumstances that have affected their performance. The Examining Board judges such candidates' identitites anonymous.
Students who want help or information on this should see the new Academic Affairs Officers, Richard Scott and Rory O'Driscoll (messages can be left for them in E297) or the Student Union Welfare Officer, Felicity Criddle in E295.
By-Election Results
On the penultimate day of last term, a by-election was held for the posts, of general secretary and senior-treasurer after Debbi Hindson and John Donkersley were censured for alleged incompetence in their handling of the Thr' "^uns dispute. The election was a predictably low-affair; and equally predictably Debbi and John were reinstated. The job being for the summer term only, the problem for the opposition candidates was that if they won, what would happen about their exams? Each candidate seemed to have a different answer to this question, ranging from "1 don't take exams in my course" to "I'll fail mine anyway". Noteworthy runners up for the post of general secretary were Dominic Freely and Inderjeet Parmar (whom some thought should not be allowed to stand, being an external student) and for senior treasurer, Phil Hague. Iqbal Wahhab
Pn^^e Four
BEAVER TInirsday 17 May 1984
SHERMAN ATTACKS CIVID SERVICE 'DISHdNF.STVl
In a public lecture at the L.S.E., Sir Alfred Sherman, special advisor to Mrs. Thatcher and currently an aca'demic visitor at the School, has alleged that civil servants dishonestly manipulate information to secure the defence of the status quo. One example he gave concerned the suppression of information which demonstrated the failure of the comprehensive schools programme in the 1970's to secure greater equality. "Once policies had been accepted," he said, "careers depended on their continuation, so they continued." Sir Alfred made these controversial remarks as part of Government Department lecture on May 1st entitled "Leadership and Advisorship" and chaired by Professor G. W. .Jones. An audience of about 80 people listened as Sir Alfred used a damning critique of the civil service establishment to justify the role he sees for special advisors in government. The co-founder of the Conservative Party's 'Centre For Policy Studies' also spoke of his ambition to set up a 'policy college' to assist in the policy-making process.
Sir Alfred began by explaining why he thought a politician needed special advisors; it was because the reality of the state in this country meant that politicians were no longer able to control the monster they had created. In an age when the pressures upon politicians were enormous, qualities of leadership and informed decision-making were of the utmost importance. Civil servants, "conduct-orientated, not policy-orientated", could not provide these; they led cloistered and risk-free lives. A vast collective like the civil service, merely acted as a cover for departmenatlism and civil servants were very good at protecting themselves by leaking plans not in their own departmental interest. The consequences of policies were not thouht through and the Cabinet Office, deprived of supra-departmental power, was a vheicle for horse-trading between departments. The chief result of departmentalism ws the perpetuation of "failed policies".
"Failed Policies"
The "failed policies", whose perpetuation Sir Afred held the civil ser-
vice as responsible for, inclucded; the building of hugely expensive high-rise flats in the 1960's when civil servants continually brushed aside grave doubts as to the safety of reinforced concrete technology with the idea that "the worst won't happen if you don't think about it"; the dogmatic accepance of Commonwealth immigaration regardless of the social cost; and the building of new and expanded towns, planned to solve inner-city problems, but creating problems of transport and also the channeling of Commonwealth immigrants into deserted inner-city areas. "Policies" were scorned: regional pllicy was throwing money at declining areas while at the same time blighting growth areas. Industrial policy was propping up old and declining industries with taxpayers' money with the "occasional flutter on new industries". The coal industry Sir Alfred described as a "consumer", not a producer, the NCB being a huge bureaucratic presiding over a loss-making industry. Subsidies had invariably helped anyone but the people they had beendesigned to help; travel subsidies were a case in point.
Advisors were useful to avoid such policy errors. No only would they have no interest in defending the status quo but they would be able to examine the past, provide analysis and moniter policies. Advisors were in the real world and their advice would sometimes be derived from contacts which a politician has neither the time nor the energy to cultivate. Sir Alfred quoted a fellow advisor to Mrs. Thatcher, Alan Walters, as saying that ministers never make new friends and can easily become out of touch. He had also said that an advisor should only tell hie client what he or she has not heard before and that it must be obvious! Sir Alfred agreed with this and ended his short lecture by contrasting Edward Heath's formal structure of advisorship with Mrs. Thatcher's more individualistic style, which he preferred. The knives came out at question-time, but not before Professor Jones put from the Chair the first question relating to who Sir Alfred believed to have been a good advisor. Sir Alfred replied by pointing to the role of
advisors, especially Bernard Donoughe, in the 1966-70 labour Government. He accepted that Harold WEilson had had an 'Inner Cabinet' at the time, but not that Harold Wilson had actually been a member! Sir Alfred, with characteristic modesty, was reluctant to talk about himself, apart from remarking that the number of enemies he had could ot have possibly been garnished if he had been ineffective! He spoke in glowing terms of the work of Alan Walters, in preventing massive rail electrification by the state, in initiating the dollarization of the Hong Kong exchange rate, and inbe ing the virtual creator of the 1981 budget.
At this juncture, Norman Strauss, a member of the Downing Street Policy Unit until 1982, delcared icily:' "In politics, nothing is to the credit of any one person." COuld this outburst reflect the tension which undoubtedly existed between Mrs. Thatcher's official policy unit and special advisors like Walters who had the ear of the prime Minister, without being fully inside the system?. One suspected so. In reply. Sir Alfred merely reitereated something he had said previously, namely that "history is made by individuals", to which Struss added "not individually".
Civil Service 'Thatcherised'?
The next question was the Sunday Times journalist, hugo Young, who wondered whether the civil service had not itself been 'Thatcherised' tending more towards the role of a heterodox advisor, he suggests that "judicious promotion" had, perhaps, been greater under this government than before and that the civil service had assisted the Government far more than vice versa. Sir Alfred, though, was not convinced. He stat^iat the civil service has "stdppecff^the denationalization of shipping and had ensured that the subsidy tocoal quadrupled. "All this happened because ministers are acquiscent". Young countered. To this. Sir Alfred said that - on these two issues - civil servants had deliberately misled ministers by withholding vital information from them. He saw the civil service, through its informational and bureaucratic power, as moulding a
minister, a process which could only be offset by the use of advisors.
A retired civil servant now decided that it was time to tackle Sir Alfred on "this splendid fantasy of us pushing ministers around". She took us back to 1981 when minsters, clearly unwilling to take on the miners, decided against implementing pit closures. She did not think it fair to blame civil servants for this situation and said: "If a chap knows what he's doing, civil servants will carry out". She added: "I'd be very pleased to meet one!" In replying. Sir Alfred made it clear that he did not see politics as favouring the strong-willed; politics created politicians. At the same time, the civil service had a monopoly of information within the machine. With regard to the coal industry. Sir Alfred gave his own examples. He alleged that, in 1971 to 1972, the NCB Chairman Sir Derek Exra backed the NUM in private and deliberately suppressed figures about miners' pay, so that he could maximise public sympathy for the union. Exra was quite prepared to see the mass picketing of the Saltley Coke Depot succeed and force a Government climb-down. Sir Alfred explained this attitude by saying that the NCB fully realized that the closure of mines would mean a proportionate reduction in the size of the Coal Board itself! On a topical note. Sir Alfred offered us an insight into the current coal dispute by revealing that Mrs. Thatcher had made it plain to the police that if they did not control picketing, she would establish a 'National Riot Police Control' squad out of the police budget. He added that the initiative for this had not come from the Home Office. Returning to the initial question, he spoke of the imbalance between a few politicians and a large number of civil servants.
SLIDE TOWARD DESPOTISM?
Professor Maurice Peston, of Queen Mary Colege, began his question with a rather barbed remark on Sir Alfred's political views, in particular his opposition to large-scale immigration, and he cited football hoologans as the most likely supporters of what Sir Alfred was advocating! Professor Peston accepted that the civil service dampens the political system and he recalled civil
service opposition to plans for comprehensive schools but, he argued, "non-commited people want a system where civil servants do induce compromise." Radical advisors were, therefore, a threat to democracy, he suggested, before adding: "I was as anti-civil servant as you were before I heard you speak!" To Sir Alfred, however, weak government could be as much as a threat to democracy as strong government. He quoted Machiavelli as putting the question of how society could be prevented from sliding into anarchy or despotism. The great question now, according to Sir Alfred, was the overwhelming power of the state. People had lost faith in it, with an accompanying decline in public responsibility. Turning to compre-hensives. Sir Alfred readily acknowledged that civil servants had fought the plan tooth-and-nail but once it was policy, he argued, departmentalism came into effect and evidence contrary to the scheme was filtered out. Sir Alfred now met Professor Peston's initial jibe head-on. Devas-tatingly, he quoted from an essay Professor Peston had published in 1965 in which he had argued for more Commonwealth immigration on the grunds that immigrants would accept low pay and conditions, worse housing and would take unemployment far more easily than the indigenous population. "Those views". Sir Alfred declared, "have laid the seeds for our problems today."
The final question came from Professor Donald Watt, from the L.S.E. History Department, who was at pains to point out that there was no single civil service viewpoint and that, from the civil servants' position, there is no agreement as to what has constituted a victory or defeat for them in the past. Sir Alfred agreed that history was very badly examined by civil servants: his answer would be to strengthen the centre through better advisorship. He maintained that certain departments, such as the Foreign Office, had a strong departmental viewpoint which could easily swamp the most diligent minister. More special advisors would help to counter departmentalism.
Philip Groves
A Profile of the New Sabbaticals
Edward Lucas
Michael Moszynski
After the second recount Michael Moszynski pipped Labour Club	Last year, during election time, Ed Lucas was described in 'Beaver' as	Phil Hague ("everybody's friend") was always the favourite for the
candidate Richard Snell to the post by three votes. Moszynski now	a 'retired hack . . . obviously looking for a Gladstonian comeback,	job of social secretary, and won quite comfortably considering far
claims that he was 'half-right' about a prediction made in a recent	being called out of retirement by a grateful nation'. Well, Eddie has	more stylish and impressive campaigns were run by his two major
letter to 'Beaver' about the 'Labour controlled union', in which he	certainly made his comeback, and with a vengeance the Labour Club	opponents, Simon Bexon and Simon Brewer (respectively second and
said that he'would like to appeal that readers do not give up hope, as	could not have foreseen. Ambitious to the point of making Keir	third). Phil has wanted the job for some time, and not only because it
an independent union with a rational approach will soon be with us'.	Hopley look like a hermit in comparison, Ed's designs on Parliament	will give him another year to postpone his exams. Phil's own
Michael's vision and popularity seem to know no bounds; not only	are far from covert. In fact, he has already managed to weasel his way	statement in the last edition of 'Beaver' sums up why he is the best
has he been president of the Debating Union and University	into getting his name mentioned in Halitosis Hall as the person who	person for the job: 'Having had three years experience in Ents,
Challenge team coach, but on the same day as being made senior	broke 'the longstanding socialist tradition of the LSE'.	written and produced two pantomimes, been Rag chairperson and on
treasurer he was also elected delegation leader to the recent NUS	the executive, I should be social secretary'.
conference.	Iqbal Wahhab
Fhv
BEAVER Thursday 17 May 1984
In Conversation With Professor J. A. G. Griffith
"We live in a highly authoritarian society, fortunate only that we do not live in other societies which are even more authoritarian. We must accept judges, as part of that authority, to actin the interests as they see them of the social order."
It was statements duch as these, made by the Welsli born, Taunton School/L.S.E. educated sexagenerian Professor Of Public Law J.A.G. Griffith in his 'brilliant little book' - "The Politics Of The Judiciary' 1977 which incurred the wrath of the present Lord Chancellor - Lord Hailsham, who felt "Such men are dangerous" because they attempt to rock and endanger the very foundations on which society is built!
As The Professor himself put it 'he sneered at me because I was somebody who wrote in the New Statesmen as if that was about the absolute nadir of journalistic achievement.' Lord Hailsham in his work 'The Dilemma Of Democracy' 1978 could very well have been referring to Griffith when stating, 'By some academic writers the idea is being seriously fostered that in arriving at their decisions judges are influenced by social class and political prejudice. This can only be believed by dedicated marxists who genuinely consider that anyone who does not consistently promote socialist principles is ipso facto a Tory or class enemy.'
Let me assure Lord Hailsham that Professor Griffth is no Marxist, radical he may be, and a modest one at that. As he says of his writings they have always had 'a very modest ambition to describe things as. they actually are, not as they are said to be.'
1 recall back in October the anticipation with which 1 looked forward to Professor Griffith's first lecture, I had heard so much about this Solzynesyn like bearded Public Law Don, However rarely in life does the reality live up to the fantasy and my "confrontation" was not all 1 had hoped for. However the flashes of brilliance were evident and the sartorial splendour the best 1 have witnessed. "How that man goes on and on" was the passing reference
he made when reading out Lord Hailsham's name and age on the ministerial list in Mrs. Thatcher's Britain,
Unable to match the brilliance of his words via the medium of my pen 1 let him do his very own talking on why he decided to become what he is; namely an academic.
"Once in my extreme youth when I emerged from the army in 1946 after 6 years 'of hell', mostly caused by excruciating food in unspeakable parts of the world (for my inglorious academic career was preceded by an inglorious military career,) 1 decided to be A Writer. The rough idea was that 1 would contribute a few brilliant articles each week to various journals, excoriate a few extremely well known and established authors in savage book reviews so that 1 would become the Terror of Fleet Street and call myself B. Levin or someone else, and then rehre to a country cottage where 1 would entertain a succession of lovely ladies and write A Great Novel. I put this, in a somewhat toned-down version, to an eminent journalist of the time who was very kind and wise and told me to get a job that would pay me a regular salary preferably each week and certainly no less frequently than each month and from that base to see if in fact 1 had any literary talent at all."
Even to my inexperienced eye during my conversation with J.A.G. if 1 may call him that 1 could see the love he bore for the L.S.E. For him it was largely his teachers that made the man and in his years there were those greats like Sir Ivor Jennings, Otto Kahn Freund, William Robson and Harold Laski who shaped his being to some extent. In the three and a half decades he has been at the L.S.E. the place has changed; not only has it got bigger (perhaps too big in his view) but definitely richer enhanced by the increasing overseas and postgraduate student intake. He
Opening the annual conference of the National Union of Students in Hull, NUS president Neil Stewart expressed concern about the standards of teaching in Britain's universities:
"Universities have lost over 4000 staff while polys and colleges have taken on an extra 50,000 students with the prospect of 2000 less staff soon. Standards of education cannot take such a battering without suffering."
"Our lecturers know their subjects
-	their PHD's testify to that - but can they teach them to students? Can they maintain the standards of teaching under such cuts without proper training? We believe not, and have noted that the thirty polytechnics have one hundred staff working full-time on lecturer training, vifhile the forty-five universities
-	to their shame - have only about thirty. We call on Sir Keith Joseph to put his money where his mouth is on standards and to invest in proper lecturer training,"
"The cuts and the fear of unemployment have also shaken the confidence of many students in the examination system which is long overdue for an overhaul. It is time it was admitted that all university degrees are not up to the same standard, and nobody is quite sure what the standard should be. It is time the universities considered the sort of independent validation used by the polytechnics. The lecturers may value their academic freedom but the consumers want guarantees of minimum standards".
Turning to the freedom of information in colleges Mr Stewart said:
"Examination marks are the property of the student. At the moment the examination process is often more secret than the masons and in some colleges enjoys as much trust and confidence. In the current Data Protection Bill the universities are trying to wriggle out of their obligation to make examination marks available, I hope that MP's will not bow to this pressure and that an open examinations system will lead to improved course design and restore confidence of students which has been so shaken by recent cuts". On the Government's recent introduction of a flat rate travel grant for students, Mr Stewart said:
"There was never a more ill-considered measure, framed with such haste and so little information as the change in student travel awards. 125,000 students will lose between £1 and £150 in the coming year. London will feel the full force of these unjust measures while a student from Scotland studying the same course in the same college, living in the same accomodation, travelling by the same means will continue to have their travel fully reimbursed. Where is the logic in that - there is none except that the Scottish ministers never made ill-considered public pronouncements promising to cut travel - while Sir Keith Joseph did, and does not have the courage to admit that he was wrong."
Turning to independence for young
Prof. J. A. G. Griffith
fervently hopes that the L.S.E. has taught a student to think for himself for that surely is the pourpose of educatif^n.
As 1 sat there in his room talking to him I was struck by the natural ease and charm by which he conducted himself which projected itself in the witty passage that precedes this.
"When a student first comes in the professor especially someone as old as me is regarded as the 'fountain of all wisdom'. This lasts for at least a fortnight. By the end of the second term he is 'the silly old fool' who doesn't know anything. By the end of his third year he realises that there possibly are one or two things which he doesn't know as well as the professor does."
For him the L.S.E. is undoubtedly the best place for law and politics in the country and in many.ways is as good as Oxbridge and in some considerably better (take heart all you Oxbridge rejects). And so Professor Griffiths completes his 36 years of academic service to the L.S.E. and goes into semi-retirement. Age has not wearied him nor the years condemned. He has fulfilled many of his boyish hopes and dreams and the joy he has got out of teaching he has shared with all of us lucky enough to be there. And so like in the ballad, 'Old Soldiers Never Die They Just Fade Away', this Academic leaves us.
Characteristically of all the epitaphs that he's heard the one which has appealed to him most is that of Heinrich 'The good Lord will pardon me, that's his job.' Perhaps that sums up Professor Griffith better than the rest of this article,
Percy F. Marchant
NUS Want Guaranteed Standards of Education
people - a major theme of NUS' current campaign work Mr Stewart said:
"The assertion of independence could not come at a more important time as the government, led by Norman Fowler and Rhodes Boyson sets out to roll back the gains made by young people in the past twenty years."
"In the government's establishment of a committee to look into young people and the social security system lies the clear threat that all financial support for anyone not in work will be taken away leaving the young in education and on the dole totally dependent on the parents."
"The government's desire to reduce social security payments, to deny young people and students housing benefit, tampering with travel awards and refusing to establish a minimum grant for the thousands of students with no money, all point to an attack on our independence."
"The roots of this attack are not just financial, they are ideological. This is a social experiment to see if they can take away not only the financial independence of young people but the independence of thought that led young people to rebel against the Victorian values this Government holds so dear. An experiment to see how a section of society will react when faced with the full weight of Conservative ideology and market forces. We are to be the guinea pigs."
"Among us, however, there are some who believe in these ideas. I refer of course to the newly elected leaders of the FCS, people who are willing to toy with racism, insult women with sexism and generally parade their ignorance and pred-judice to the world in their publications. They are a blemish on the Young Conservatives and a cancer which is killing conservative students from the inside. Never was there a group more deserving of a 'Panorama' investigation than them, and the sooner they get it the better."
Turning to the battle for the leadership of NUS, which would take place during the conference, Mr Stewart said:
"Democratic conservatives were defeated at FCS Conference, but there is still a place for them in NUS. 1 hope you will remember that when it comes to the elections."
HALLI
iSlEWSI
Carr Saunders
As President of Carr-Saunders I see one of my jobs as keeping in touch with people in the Hall. By this I mean letting them know what the Committee and I have done and intend to do and to get their feelings and ideas on various issues. This can be done in several ways. As well as talking to people as often as possible, 1 intend to produce a newsheet and write a regular feature in Beaver, of which this is the first one.
One of my first tasks, together with Andre Atkins, the Treasurer, has been a complete review of the budget in order to make savings. The first item tackled was the newspaper bill which at present costs the Hall Society nearly £40 a week. The newspapers were written to asking them if they do any sort of discount scheme or if they did not, whether they would be prepared to make one up for us. At press, this has resulted in a saving of £81 a year, but more savings in this area are expected.
We are also looking into the possibility of buying or re-renting the video and two televisions. At present, we hire them from Radio Rentals who are one of the most expensive rental companies. Buying them raises the problem of maintaining them, but providing this can be sorted out, we should be able to reduce the cost of providing this service by up to £20 a month.
Another area I am looking into is security. Whilst vandalism and theft are the inevitable results of Carr-Saunders being in a high crime area much can be done by prevention and insurance to lessen the effects. Most thefts in the Hall occur because people do not lock their doors. It takes only a matter of seconds for a thief to burgle an unlocked room so it cannot be emphasised enough that people should always keep their doors locked even if they are only going out for a few minutes. Some posters are already up stressing the dangers but they are obviously not striking enough so I intend to put up
some more. Further reasons for the high number of thefts in Carr-Saunders are that security doors are often wedged open and that some people open the doors for people they do not know without questioning them first. In the final analysis 1 can do very little if people are not a bit more strict about this.
One of the ways to reduce the effects of crime is insurance. We have been offered a universal insurance scheme by Norwich Union. The advantages of the scheme are that it is cheap (they are offering us a £12.50 policy for £5), it covers all the basic needs of students and it may be extended. The main disadvantage is that everyone has to join. If we agree to it, it will come into operation next year being added onto the first Hall bill.
Finally, may I remind people that the dinner inspection will continue and fines will be imposed if someone is caught. People in the flats or visiting friends may buy meal tickets at the lodge.
Elwyn Watkins President, Carr Saunders Hall
Rosebery
Rosebery Hall will be having a disco on Friday, 18th May, before the start of the exams so it will be an ideal opportunity for everyone to come along and let their hair down after all that studying. There will of course be the usual late licence and large bar subsidy so it shouldn't be too fnuch of a problem to drown your sorrows.
The society has recently purchased a new television set, to replace the faulty TV in the small TV room, and the committee are currently considering the updating of the main TV to one equipped with teletext and stereo sound.
The bar is in the process of acquiring new glass glasses to replace the plastic ones now in use, and the lighting in the bar has recently been changed to achieve a better effect. Two new video games have been installed in the common room this term.
The term should end on a rousing note with the traditional summer term dinner on Friday June 15th. The dinner will be for hall residents only. After the dinner there will be a disco with a bar subsidy and late licence when all will be welcome. Alan Harris
BEAVER Thursday 17 May 1984
REVOLUTION UNDER ATTACK:
Interview with Jose d 'Escoto,
Nicaraguan Ambassador
by Roger Howe
Nicaragua's d'Escoto, a
Ambassador 47 year old
in
is Senor Fransisco Jose the Spanish School of
London graduate of
Diplomacy. During the Samoza years he worked for UNESCO and after 1977, lobbied for the Sandanistas in Washington. His elder brother, a Marinole priest, who was responsible for his political conversion is now Nicaragua's Foreign Secretary.
Q. How would you describe the composition and ideology of the Sandinista Front government?
A. The Sandinista Front is a group of liighly patriotic Nicaraguans who took their ideological line from General Augusto Cesar Sandino. Sandinismo is nothing but nationalism: it means having a national identity: it means Nicaraguans come first in Nicaragua, not foreigners as under Samoza. The majority of people in the Frente Sandinista are Christian because we are essentially a Catholic country.
We have drawn on the teachings of Karl Marx in shaping our new society, as we have drawn on liberalism in the sphere of economics. We have borrowed from all these political ideologies to help build this national Nicaraguan miracle, which is the Sandinista Revolution. I call it a miracle to have a revolution right at the foot of the Empire,
As to the formation of the government, it is highly nationalistic. We have members of the Conservative Party, people from the Liberal Party, the equivalent of the Labour Party. Also we have people from the Church, from the Popular Christian Democratic Party and of course, there are Sandinistas who have their own party.
Our nationalism does not spring from any foreign ideology but from General Sandino : We must fight for our rights. Nobody else will do it for us.
Q. VJhy, after 45 years under Samoza, did the Revolution happen in 1979? A. The Frente Sandinista for National Liberty has been fighting for 24 years now. We got more and more powerful until Samoza lost control and the United States under President Carter could no longer support him - they had no international backing.
After 20 long years of fighting, we got a clear message to the people about what we would do when we assumed power. It is important for you to understand that Samoza had always created a power vacuum. He did not allow private enterprise to develop, nor did he allow political parties to operate: any parties with nationalist tendencies had gone underground and those remaining were bought off by Samoza in the elections.
Q. Was Nicaragua inspired by the Cuban Revolution and have you learned any lessons from them?
A. Of course. All of Latin America was inspired by the Cuban Revolution. It had a tremendous impact, especially in Nicaragua because we were living under a brutal dictatorship. But the Cuban Revolution did not cause the revolution in Nicaragua. After 20 years of persecution, a new generation came along and decided enough was enough; we had to change the whole structure of our country which gave all the benefits to a minority and marginalised the majority. The Frente Sandinista included middle class people, peasants and even some rich people.
1 cannot say what lessons we may have learned from the Cuban Revolution because 1 do not know it well enough, but there are considerable differences. We have political parties: we have the Church in Nicaragua, with some priests in high
government office: we have opposition newspapers and our system of land reform is quite different from theirs. The only land we have nationalised is that which Samoza took away from the people and this is worked by the people as a business enterprise - we try to stimulate private co-operatives.
Your government and the Reagan administration call us Marxist-Leninists and say we are pro-Soviet, but I ask you, would the Latin American countries have supported Nicaragua as their representative on the UN Security Council if we had seen pro-Soviet. Our support comes mainly from the non-aligned countries of the Third World and Nicaragua's foreign policy is firmly based on the principle of non-alignment. Q. What do you think is the principle cause of Reagan's hostility to Nicaragua? A. Firstly I would say the Americans are very ignorant of Central America. Secondly, the Americans have always interfered in Central America and they do not like it when countries adopt a nationalist ideology. We would like to have good relations with the United States,'but based on mutual respect as we have with Great Britain, France, the members of the EEC and with the Soviet Union.
The other reason why the US is paranoid about Nicaragua is because of the example we have set in overthrowing a brutal, repressive dictatorship which had been sustained by successive governments in Washington for 45 years. If we can do it, the peasantry in the rest of Central America will come to believe they can achieve freedom too. In defining the just aspirations of the Central American people as 'Marxist Communism', the Americans are again demonstrating their ignorance about what they like to call 'their backyard'. Their failure to respond to the Contadora peace initiative reflects
their arrogance and their inability to accept any interpretation of the events in Nicaragua and neighbouring countries other than their own communist conspiracy theory. Q. Figures of $10 million losses due to the mining of harbours, $5 million worth of fishing vessels and $3.8 million of fishing revenue have been reported in the press. How serious is the economic situation in Nicaragua?
A. I think the figures are much higher than that. The damage to oil tanks in Corinto alone as a result of sabotage is immense.
We are extremely lucky in that we afe almost self-sufficient in food, with the exception of red beans and rice and these are improving. We do not miss luxury items because the majority of us never had them. There are less people living in the urban areas than there were a few years ago because most of the people are mobilised in defence units in the fields. In fact, the whole of Nicaragua is mobilised in response to the threat from the United States - the most powerful country in the world. This threat is increasing every day and forces us to make defence a priority.
Q. Can Nicaragua survive US hostility?
A. Yes. We can survive and we have proved to the world that we are surviving. We can survive because we are not out to destroy Nicaraguan society but to improve it. We have -not imprisoned those who don't agree with us; we have not confiscated the lands of the rich but provided them with incentives to . produce more: we have never persecuted the Church. For these reasons, the international community is supporting us. Most countries in the General Assembly of the United Nations support Nicaragua and with this support and our basic minimum requirements we will survive US aggression.
How long can we carry on? As long as it takes. America is not the whole world and if they do not want to trade with us we will find new markets for our products. Already most of our exports go to the European countries and Japan. We have had to learn the hard way because most of the people who knew how to run the administration and the banks left the country after the Revolution, but we are finding new markets for our coffee, our cotton and our sugar and we are getting higher prices by avoiding trade through the multinationals. Q. Is there a likelihood of direct invasion by the United States?
A. Yes. We think the Reagan administration has opted to invade Central America before the American presidential campaign which will really gather pace after the summer. How would the administration sell its policy to the American people after the Nicaraguan elections, which will be the cleanest, freest elections in Latin America, if the Sandanistas are confirmed in power? ' They have to do something now. Q. Do you expect US intervention in Nicaragua to be linked with intervention in El Salvador?
A. I would say yes, because that's the way they think. They justify their policy towards Nicaragua by saying that we are sending arms to El Salvador. If you look at the map you will see that Honduras lies between Nicaragua and El Salvador and in Honduras there are now 15,000 contras (FDN), about 5,000 Americans, the Honduran army and the mercenaries. In two and a half years they have failed to prove that we are providing arms to Salvador, but it is not in their interest to prove it has stopped because that is their reason for being there.
Q. could the contras alone bring down the Necaraguan government? A. No. That is why they are organised, financed and directed by the CIA. The Reagan administration recognised this right from the beginning.
Q. What sort of positive role could the US play in Latin America?
A. They could come out and support the Contadora initiative, which is supported by non-aligned and EEC countries and they could act as a true neighbour to Latin America. We are rising, but we are no menace to the United States - how could we be? They know very well that as a non-aligned country we cannot allow any superpower to have military bases in Nicaragua.
Some Americans see themselves as democrats in the tradition of Thomas Jefferson while others, like Ronald Reagan or Teddy Roosevelt, are the super-patriots; 'rough riders'.
Q. Do you see cause for hope in any of the opinions expressed during the US election campaign?
m
A. We have heard statements from the three Democratic candidates to the effect that they would change policy in Central America. Now I am not saying anything against them, or the Democratic Party, but during the 45 years of the Samoza dictatorship there were Republicans and Democrats in government and none of these gentlemen ever called on the Samoza dynasty to hold free elections.
Q. But would you expect the same degree of support for the contras from Mondale, for example, as that shown by Reagan?
A. The goals will be the same, the means will differ.
Q. How significant was the Kissinger Commission Report?
A. When Kissinger was Secretary of State, his attitude to Latin America was that it didn't really exist because nothing exciting ever happened there! The second time around he has shown that he is still incapable of understanding Central America. He has merely acted as a rubber stamp for his government's foreign policy and shown that his role is to support American policy - right or wrong.
Q. How would you describe your relationship with the other Central American states?
A. Our attitude to our sister republics is one of cordiality and nonintervention. In theory they need the backing of the United States. Honduras has taken over the role of 'intervention state' from Nicaragua under Samoza: Costa Rica cries to the heavens eternal neutrality, but in reality allows CIA-backed contras !o use their territory: El Salvador, interestingly enough, has never accused us of supplying their guerillas: in Guatemala there are mass executions of peasants. We hope that Panama after the canel treaties will behave as a nation and no longer as part of the United States.
All are servants of one master. They do not care about their peasant populations, only about soldiers and dollars.
Q. How fair is the British press and television coverage of Nicaragua? A. It depends on the newspaper and on the writer. The Telegraph generally takes the American line: the Guardian tries to be objective and takes a liberal line. We count our dead - this has to be reported too. The Economist always backs the CIA. Sometimes we suspect that pressure is exerted from above within the newspapers. Reporting really annoys the Reagan administration - in that sense it is important. Q. What reaction would you hope for in Britain if Nicaragua were invaded by the US?
A. The Foreign Office has no policy on Central America. They don't want to upset the United States. Great Britain is not interested in the Third World, its priorities are in the West. Only the Scandanavians seem to recognise the importance of the moral and political power of the non-aligned countries.
Q. How do you see Nicaragua's future economic development?
A. If you are poor as hell, you can't sink any lower. Its an uphill battle for developing countries which have to spend 85% of their export earnings on paying off foreign debt. The world price for coffee is $1.39, but we get only 65/ of that. We are in the process of industrialising our agriculture but our expansion is hampered by international agreements. Financially, Europe suits us more than America.
Sharing is what this world is all about: the developing countries know this because they are already sharing all they have.
Q. Interior Minister, Tomas Borge, has said that the battle for Nicaragua will be decided in Washington. Do you agree? A. I think the Reagan administration has discovered that the Nicaraguans are tough. Our best allies are the American people, but they don't know the truth - its as bad as the Soviet Union when it comes to foreign news. They would not give Borge a visa to go to the United States.
I think Reagan will decide whether or not to invade by reaching into the cookie jar and throwing one up in the air - yes or no!
BEAVER Thursday 17 May 19S4
Page Seivu
THE GAS PEOPLE WORKING FOR TOMORROWS
m
I

* ¦
If your home uses gas — and the chances are it will, since British Gas is the largest single supplier of heat in Britain — then you are benefiting from yesterday's planning and investment in advanced technology by the gas people.
Yesterday's research anticipated the needs of today's customers, and some of the developments produced by the gas people were revolutionary.
Did you know, for instance, that the gas people helped to pioneer the technology for transporting gas across the world's oceans — gas which would otherwise be wastefully flared-off? This was done by cooling the gas into liquid form at minus 160°C and carrying it in specially designed tankers. The transportation of LNG is now a major world trade.
The gas people also saw opportunities in newly available gas-making feedstocks and developed the Catalytic Rich Gas process for making gas from oil, rather than coal. Advances like these underpinned the transformation of an ageing industry into a highly competitive and rapidly expanding modern business.
The gas people went on to exploit the natural gas which they had helped to discover around our shores. To achieve this they constructed a network of underground high pressure steel pipelines to the highest standards. A great deal of money and technical expertise were expended in devising a means of inspecting these pipelines, and a sophisticated electronic and mechanical device called an 'intelligent pig' was developed. It works inside the pipeline while the gas is still flowing.
TOMORROW'S WORLD
Yesterday, the gas people solved what would have been today's problems, and we've given you just a few examples. But you may be more interested in the work we're doing today to solve tomorrow's.
For instance, in readiness for the time when Britain's indigenous supplies of natural gas begin to decline, and nobody knows when that will be, the gas people have already developed the technology for producing substitute natural gas from coal. The results of this pioneering work are being viewed with great interest in many parts of the world. Whichever feedstock is available at a competitive price, however, the gas people intend to have the technology to produce a substitute natural gas from it.
And because gas will still be there for tomorrow's customers, the gas people are helping to develop a new generation of appliances for tomorrow's low-energy homes. They are starting to apply ways of recuperating waste heat in industrial and commercial applications by using gas engine-driven heat pumps. These reverse the normal process by which heat flows from a high temperature to a lower and so can consume less energy than they deliver! The gas people are even looking at new ways to avoid traffic congestion — by replacing underground gas pipes without the need for digging up the road!
Much more is going on besides, so if you'd like to find out about today's high-tech gas industry, write to the Public Relations Department, British Gas, Rivermill House, 152 Grosvenor Road, London SWIV 3JL.
WONDERFUEL GAS FROM THE GAS PEOPLE-WORKING FOR TOMORROW'S WORLD TODAY
Page Eight
BEAVER Thursday 17 May 1984
THE PLIGHT OF OVERSEAS STUDENTS
Overseas Students Trust
A report published in 1982 by the Overseas Student Trust (OST)' has been the most influential document on government policy towards overseas students since Mrs. Thatcher took office. Its approach has not only been critical; but also constructive; working within what might loosely be called a 'Thatcherite' perspective, the report shows how slight changes within the current Treasury model of public expenditure can be made which would be more favourable towards overseas students. Some of the major proposals put forward include:-
1)	The right of local authorities to set their own standard of fees, rather than accept the market price.
2)	Include more students on a 'low-fee' basis, especially those from the British Dependent Territories.
3)	Increase the number of award schemes available.
Ralf Dahrendorf, director of the School, has, in a review of this report, commended it as being a step in the right direction, but also noticed many of its shortcomings. Dahrendorf^ starts by complaining that the general debate on overseas students is marred by a selfishness on the part of successive British governments to see what they can benefit from overseas students. While a case can be made for showing that it is financially beneficial in the long run to educate students from other countries, this is not the main point. What is often neglected, but is nevertheless of primordial importance, is the quality of British universities and that students of
high quality should be able to transcend national boundaries in the pursuit of this quality:-
'The real argument against the policy of successive governments is that it is uncivilised, Philistine, and destructive of quality. Of course one can turn a number of British universities into business enterprises; but by doing so one destroys their most precious value, their scholarly quality.'^ Dahrendorf therefore sees policies which drain the financial resources of overseas students - commercialising education, in other words - as bullying by the government; in the scramble to cut back in public expenditure in the most innocuous of ways, what could be easier than to pick on a section of the community which has no electoral comback?
Notwithstanding these criticisms, the government has gone a long way in implementing many of the proposals put forward in the study. In February of 1983 it was announced that an extra £46m was to be made available over the next three academic years for overseas students. Approximately a third of this sum will go towards subsidising EEC students to pay the home student rate. The rest will go to various award schemes.
Iqbal Wahhab
Refs: 1 - 'A Policy For Overseas Students', Overseas Student Trust 1982.
2	- 'Overseas Students-Whither Now?', Polifical Quarterly, Vol 53 no.4
3	- ibid.
ALL enkolmciuts OF ovtnsgAS ^u5>ewTs
IN	TINANCC^
1150/^1 - (191/X
So^e. ; OS-r ;	polk./far O-trtOoi
taile. -2H.
10-»l 71-TZ	«-73 W-74- 74--7S	W-76 ¦»-7»
Common interest in Fighting Tories
From the perspective of the L.S.E. Labour Club the crucial question remains the level of public resources invested in higher education and the on going effort by the Thatcher government to restructure the already woefully inadequate system of universities and polytechnics. We would maintain that this assault on academic institutions must be seen in the context of a much broader attack on social spending. Begun under the last Labour Government and pursued with great ideological vigour by the Tory regime, the retrenchment of the welfare state and especially provision for higher education cannot be obscured by a bogus 'controversy' about alleged anfi-Americanism on the part of Labour students.
Since the Universities Grants Committee vowed humbly to the Tory government by its imposition of the so-called economic cost of education on overseras students, the Labour Club has consistently fought this discriminatory profile, with its implicit national cauvinism. The L.S.E. administrtion, in effort to regain lost state funding, has invariably exceeded the proposed "minimum" fee for students from abroad, thus reinforcing the tendency to exclude
5» 400
foreign students who are not from well-to-do families. In a very real way the policies of the current government have strengthened the class barriers to further education as well as diminishing the quality of academic programmes, slashing jobs at all levels, and further restricting the access of women, racial minorities, and mature students. The Labour administrtions of the Students Union have maintained the hardship fund at a high level, but we are painfully aware that this does not provide a real answer. As socialist we seek the support of oversedas students as potential allies against the Thatcher government and the increasingly unstable system of capitalist production which it defends with mounting ruthless-ness. In this light we have sought to defend overseas students as the government exploits them economically and all but denies them access to the crumbling N.H.S. Along with independent socialists. Labour Club members have offered the only serious resistance to fascist activity in our own midst.
We look forward with hope to the day when this school becomes a truly cosmopolitan community where the motto of the students'
union is realised in practice. The Labour Club has already attracted the active support of a number of overseas students including Americans,(aside from myself) and does so on the basis of explicitly standing against the drift toward privatisation at the L.S.E. as a cosmetic remedy for the effects of Tory cuts. Once again the Labour Club happily accepts the presence of foreign students but decisively rejects the extraction of exorbitant fees to cover the tracks of a government bent on attacking the living standcard of students. For all its shortcomings, the labour Club inrecent years has fought with and for the vast majority of overseas students at the L.S.E. In conclusion: As the end of the school year approaches, 1 would ask all of us who are committed socialist to redouble our efforts on behalf oif the miners' struggle upon whose outcome rests the very future of British trade unionism and with it the ability of students to combat the rising authoritarianism of the current government.
George Binette - Labour Club representative on the Committee for the Welfare of Overseas Students.
1984/85 FEES
The level of fees for overses students for the next academic year are almost finalised. At the General Purposes Committee meeting on 2nd May, on which we have student repreenta-tion, the director described the proposed fees level for discussion. Not however fordecision. What was proposed was that fees for EEC students should rise from £480 to £500, in line with home student fees. Post Graduate students from the EEC will be charged £1569. For overseas students from non-EEC countries who have been at LSE since 1st September 1980, i.e. the so called 'continuing students', will continue to- pay the same level of fees as this year. New students beginning September of this year) will not however pay £200 above the DES recommended level which is the normal school policy since the DES has increased the minimum by 8.6%. Therefore they will only pay £100 above the DES minimum making the level of fees for nbew students beginning in September at £3250. Graduate students will also pay £3250.
John McCallum
t
^1
r
if
<A 01
ao 200-»oo
A Sample O	Pgr THE. L.S.E.
lo IS lb

vSt
I 111 P
f
^ i I t
Liberal Policy and Response
The Liberal Party reaction towards government policy on overseas students has been predictable. Phil Middleton, reseach assistant to Alan Beith (Liberal Chief Whip) mentioned that his party was continually opposed to the current state of affairs on four accounts:-
1)	It made no sense in educational terms,
2)	It would deprive many further educational institutions of cultural and intellectual variety,
3)	It was unfair to the students and,
4)	The policy hit the poorest countries worst as they sent out the lowest number of applications.
There was stern criticism of the 'Pym Package', announced in February 1983 by the then Foreign Secretary, Francis Pym. Mr. Middleton said that it was 'nakedly self-interested'; the EEC countries now receive £17 million for the 'subsidy' of students from these nations, who pay the home rate of fee. It was reckoned, claimed Mr. Middleton, that Great Britain received, in return, favourable trade'agreements. The 'Package' was a partial folly of government policy as there was simply not enough money made available for overseas students.
Mr. Middleton further added that a government which preached anti-communism ended up, through its own policy, driving overseas students to Eastern Bloc countries, thereby losing Britain potential investment in developing countries in the future. In addition, to starving universities of cultural and intellectual diversity, other unwanted results were being created. Middle-ton claimed that overseas students were keeping alive many courses, possibly at the expense of home students. Furthermore, universities were canvassing abroad (especially in the USA) to attract students to their colleges, which was considered to be unethical. And many courses were thought to be of dubious academic ability.
There is at present no hard and fast Liberal policy but a proposal has recently been put forward taking a more charitable line which groups overseas students within the context of total overseas aid. The eventual outcome, said Mr. Middleton 'was too depressing to contemplate'. It was educationally undesirable and morally and socially indefensible as it was no more than a mixture of 'callousness and incompetence'. Rajat Kohli
Page Niue
BEAVER Thursday 17 May 2984
Foreign Students in the USA
The enormous increase of foreign students which the United States experienced during the Seventies has reached at least a temporary plateau in the worldwide economic
recession of the early Eighties, according to Dr. Richard Krasno,
President of the Institute of International Education (HE), the largest U.S. higher educational exchange agency. The results of the 1982-83 HE census of foreign students at U.S. colleges and universities were as follows:
The 1983 total of 336,985 foreign students represented a 3.3 percent
increase over the 1982 figure of 326,299. During the latter half of the Seventies the rate of growth never
fell below 10 percent and twice exceeded 16 percent, but has been decreasing since.
Dr. Krasno attributed the smaller increase largely to the world-wide
economic recession, which has particularly affected the developing nations from where over 80 percent of foreign students in the US originate. A recent HE survey of changes in higher education policies towards foreign students suggests that a second factor in the declining growth rate may be more stringent admissions requirements by American colleges and universities. Actual declines in foreign student numbers that varied from 6 to 10 percent occurred in the Middle East,
Central America and Canada. Numbers from Africa, Oceania, and the Caribbean increased minimally (from 0.5 to 2.5 percent).
Increases above 3.3 percent occurred only in Asia, Europe, and south America (where the increase was accounted for almost entirely by one country, Venezuela). The Asian region, accounted for most actual
foreign student growth: Asian students numbered 119,650 in 1983 (106, 160 in 1982), a 12.7 percent" increase.
Middle Eastern Predominance Declines Among OPEC Students
Although Iranian student numbers have decreased by nearly fifty percent since 1980, Iran was still the leading country of origin, with
26,760 students. Taiwan was second, followed by Nigeria, Venezuela, Malaysia, Canada, Japan, India, Korea, and Saudi Arabia.
Nationals of the OPEC nations accounted for 26 percent (88,707) of all overseas students in 1983. Among the eight Mideast OPEC members, enrolment from Iran (down 25.4 percent), Libya (down 26.9 percent), Saudi Arabia (down 9.5 percent), and Algeria (down 9.6 percent) continued to decline. In contrast, non-Middle Eastern OPEC members continue to represent a source of growth. In 1983, students from Nigeria, Venezuela, Indonesia, and Ecuador accounted for 48 percent of all OPEC students, up from 41 percent in 1982.
Growth rates from several Asian countries were particularly notable in 1983; Malaysia (up 49.4 percent to 14,070); People's Republic of China (up 43.2 percent to 6,230); Korea (up 40.8 percent to 11,360); and Indonesia (up 23.6 percent to 5,030).
Twenty Third-World nations -OPEC members and populous or economically strong Asian countries - accounted for approximately 200,000 students in 1983. The remaining 134 less-developed nations sent only 75,000 students, an average of just over 550 per country.
Engineering continued to be the leading field of study (23 percent). Business and management were next with 18 percent, while science, mathematics, computer studies together attracted 16 percent, indicating the career and technology orientation of international students. Some 110,000 foreign students studied at the graduate level.
Foreign students are enrolled at over 2,500 U.S. higher educational institutions, but just 70 schools with more than 1,000 foreign students each accounted for one-third of the total enrolment. Most such institutions were large universities. The single largest international student population continued to be at Miami-Dade Community College (community colleges now account for approximately one-sixth of the international students in the United States).
Only 15 percent of foreign students indicated a US source as their major source of funding. Of these, only two percent received primary support from the US government.
According to the US-UK Educational Commission (6 Porter Street, WIM 2HR) tuition fees vary widely among US colleges and universities and no two institutions charge the same fees. Generally, tuition for public (state) universities ranges from $2000 to S5000, and tuition fees for private universities range from $5000 to 59000 (as of 1983-84). Living costs also vary and are highest in big cities, in the Northeast and in California. On the whole, living costs are no higher than in London and may be somewhat lower in certain parts of the US such as the South and the Mid-west. Overall living costs range from about $6000 to $7000 per academic year (9 months) which is IN ADDITION to the university/ college tuition fees.
¦FINANCIAL AID-
The only source of financial aid is the university or college to which you are applying. State universities almost never give any financial aid to foreign students. Private universities sometimes give partial scholarships to foreign students which may cover one-half or even all of your tuition fees, but not your living expenses. Full scholarships which cover total expenses are rare, so unless you can contribute at least $5000 a year from your own resources, it is hardly worth applying. Some universities announce financial aid for foreign students specifically. A list of the more substantial of these may be obtained from the Student Adviser's Office. A considerably longer list is given in the book "Study Abroad", published by UNESCO, in the US section. This publication is available from Her Majesty's Stationery Office and in some public libraries.
Irene N. Andersen
HIGHLIGHTS OF THE 1982/83 INTERNATIONAL STUDENT CENSUS
Total Foreign Students in US Colleges and Universities:
Leading Countries of Origin	Academic Level
Associate Bachelor's Graduate Intensive English Nondegree Practical Training
Two-Year Institutions Four-Year Institutions Public Institutions Private Institutions Married Single Male Female
Iran	26,760
Taiwan	20,770
Nigeria	20,710
Venezuela	15,490
Malaysia	14,070
Canada	14,020
Japan	13,610
India	12,890
Korea	11,360
Saudi Arabia	9,250
World Regions	
Asia	119,650
Middle East	67,280
Latin America	56,810
Africa	42,690
Europe	31,570
North America	14,570
Oceania	4,040
Primary Financial Resources	
Personal/Family	228,500
Home Govt.	43,240
College or Univ.	29,810
Foreign Private	9,520
Employment	7,970
US Govt.	7,430
US Private	6,060
Other	4,460
336,985
44,740 158,020 110,270 13,130 7,210 3,620
47,912 289,073 218,940 118,045 66,900 270,090 238,910 98,080
Total of enquiries	received by US-UK Educational Commission
10 0ct-30Sept	Total
1977-1978	25,281
1978-1979	33,688
1979-1980	35,471
1980-1981	34,173 1981 -1982	26,563 1982-1983	24,738
Includes letters/calls/visits.
NUS CONFERENCE
REPORT Hull 16-19 April 1984
To the uninitiated, NUS Conference, appears to be like one large political circus, with the performers practising their acts for when they go out and play in the big arena of the 'real world'. The reality is though, that despite the clowns, strong men and acrobats, some important student related issues do get discussed. Recent Conference reforms have made participation by delegates easier, although there is a vast web of bewildering procedural motions to entrap the unwary. These were used by some Tory anti-NUS delegates to try and disrupt Conference and succeeded in wasting some of the time allocated for guest speakers.
When a Yorkshire Miner was brought on to speak (although not the one who had been voted for) there was absolute uproar as ome of the Tories used every trick in the book to prevent him from addressing Conference. When this failed one shouted 'Play up and play the game. The Gatlins jammed and the Colonels dead. But we'll march forward and get the red.' So into the valley rode the six (the other 594 stayed at home) and stormed the stage as if it were Port Stanley itself. This was the cue for the vanguard of the proletariat, Trotsky himself as organising the counter attack.
Score: 15-love to the Revolution.
On a more serious note, seven main motions were discussed as well as three Emergency Motions which were all passed, brief details as follows (anybody wishing to see the full, amended texts please contact M.Moszynski).
Main Motions
1. Further Education: Discussion of
problems faced by this sector and condemnation of government publication of White Paper without consultation of the groups concerned.
2.	Students with disabilities: Campaign for greater access to ejducation by seeking to initiate a central fund for restructuring of Colleges. Some of the speeches were by disabled students which were extremely moving and statements such as 'the political will given to the miners should also be shown to disabled students' and that they are 'disabled by nature - handicapped by society' ring true and should tighten our resolve to work on this issue at the LSE.
3.	New Deal: Campaign for fair grants and £30 a week minimum for all students in Further Education. M.Moszynski spoke against Amendment Two to highlight the need for a fresh look at campaign styles away from stale sloganising.
4.	The Law, Civil Liberty and the Police Bill: Brought upto date current NUS policy on this issue with reference to recent incidents, such as the shooting of Steven Waldorf. Similar to LSE SU policy.
5.	Student Union Financing: Declaration of SU autonomy, but amendment to confront authorities on issue of ultra-vires defeated. NUS policy do not make any such payments and to advise colleges on this issue.
6.	Racism and Fascism: On lines of LSE policy but dissent in delegation on whether to support amendment by the National Executive giving no platform to any declared racist or fascist.
7.	National Health Services: Declared NUS opposition to Government 'cuts' and the two tier system being
created by the private sector. A reminder to all those who support direct action: Give blood on May 21.
The presentation of the NUS estimates (budget) went smoothly, although Conference was surprised to discover that the travel expences of the Welsh President were over £4000 last year. When Phil Woolas (present National Treasurer) was asked to explain why this was so high, his reply was that he has to go everywhere by car because there are no trains in Wales. Maybe our new NUS President knows something British Rail does not? Or did he mean whales?
Easter Conference was held over Jewish Passover for the second year running which thereby excluded Stephen Haffner (Ind. Student/Passover probert) from attending who was first reserve for the LSE delegation, after Archie Dunlop pulled out The LSE delegates were M.Moszynski (Ind, Student), delegation leader, R.Aitken (labour), J.Anthony (lib), T.Baxter (Cons) and three observers; C.Atack (lab), G.MacMa-hon (lab), plus second reserve H.Wilson (SWSO). Voting was according to LSESU policy, although T.Baxter and J.Anthony voted against No Platform and T.Baxter voted against all the Emergency Motions. Attendance by the delegation was remarkably good compared with Blackpool Conference. Either the Hull Conference was so scintillating that the delegation could not bear to leave (as this time we all stayed until the end) or the attractions offered by the City's amenities were not quite so awe-inspiring as the Golden Mile.
Mike Moszynski
NUS Conference Elections
For the majority of students at L.S.E. the N.U.S. elections must seem a rather strange spectacle. Even for those at the conference, where all the main debates and issues had been about how we as students can most effectively fight the Tory Government's attacks upon students and workers, it does seem odd that the main challenge to the continued pre-eminence of the Labour Party in student politics should come not from the conservatives, or even from the Liberal/S.D.P. Alliance, but from a group called the Left Alliance. In spite of the lack of student awareness of the Left Alliance it is the group which was dominant in N.U.S. politics until two years ago when the Labour Party came to power, leaving the Left Alliance as simply an alliance of Liberals, Communists and a few independent Socialists. Even more strange to the average student would be the efforts put in by the Labour leadership to
ensure the election of one Conservative on to the Executive.
At the beginning of the Conference the L.S.E. delegation voted on a split vote to cast all our votes as a block, however the right wing delegates refused to comply with this so as a compromise was reached whereby in the S.T.V. system each delegate could put their personal preference first but would transfer as the delegation as a whole decided. Liberal delegate Justin Anthony and Tory Tim Baxter followed their party lines throughout voting, respectively, for the Left Alliance and Conservative candidates. The Labour and Socialist Workers representatives cooperated with each other to ensure that the delegation transferred their votes to left wing candidates, however, in the elections to the executive all of them showed a preference for the Socialist Students in N.O.L.S. candidate (S.S.I.N, being a left wing group of
Labour Students in opposition to the Labour leadership). Michael Moszynski found himself in the difficult position of having no-one to vote for who shared his professed belief that politics are irrelevant to students, and his votes ranged across the political spectrum from Conservative and Social Democrats to voting for Socialists and Communists candidates of the Left Alliance (could it be that he was simply voting for whoever he thought could keep labour out?).
In the end Labour Students won the elections though very narrowly leaves the future politics of N.U.S. quite open to change, with the Labour leadership feeling pressure from two sides, the resurgence of the Left Alliance vote and the sizable left wing opposition among Labour Students which got S.S.I.N, candidate Karen Talbot elected. Rob Aitken
NUS Conference Emergency Motions
1. Travel Awards
This motion criticised the Government's proposals for changing the method of paying students' travel costs. It was noted that London students would be particularly hit. NUS would campaign against the change in the system. The first amendment would have set up a campaign committee but it was defeated. (For: none. Against: Anthony, Moszynski). The second amendment noted that changes in London Transport's structure would increase fares and cause more hardship. This was passed. (For: Aitken, Anthony, Baxter, Moszynski). The substantive motion was passed. (For: Aitken, Anthony, Moszynski. Against: Baxter).
2. Miners' Dispute
The original motion recognised the miners' struggle as the same as that of students against cuts. It offered the NUM the use of student union facilities. But the first amendment, which was passed, deleted the original motion and replaced it with one which gave only token support to the miners and merely proposed sending letters to McGregor and Brittan amongst others. (For: Anthony, Baxter. Against: Aitken, MacMahon). The second amendment proposed that the NUS should make a donation to the NUM, this was defeated. (For: Aitken, MacMahon. Against: Anthony, Baxter). The substantive was passed. (For: Aitken, Anthony, MacMahon. Against:
Baxter).
3.	South African Rugby Tour
This motion condemned the tour and urged students to picket matches involving England tourists, to demonstrate at Twickenham on April 28 and to picket the airport from which the team leaves. Perhaps most significantly it called on Athletic Unions and Rugby Clubs to condemn the RFU and the tour. The motion was passed.
4.	Liverpool City Council
This could not be discussed as the allocated time had run out. This was due to time-wasting and disruption by conservative delegates.
Gerard MacMahon
BEAVER T}tursda}/ 17 May 1984
THE MARVIN GAYE STORY
I BOOK REVIEWS |
A Review of Citizen Ken by John Carvell
It had to happen sooner or later; not quite three years after he became Labour leader of the GLC and won himself national media attention, here is the first biography of the politician who The Sun called 'the most odious man in Britian'.
Ken Livingstone: accident-prone clown, bogeyman of the tabloids or radical-populist hero, the great white hope of the man and woman on the street? This book promises to find the answers to these questions.
'Citizen Ken' is an entertaining piece of journalism which has been diligently researched by The Guardian's local government correspondent. It claims to have been based on the most extensive interviews that Livingstone has ever given.
It was obviously written for commercial reasons and although it will be the least definitive biography of the man, it will probably turn out to be the most readable. Several cartoons are included which are an ingenious way for the author to show the extreme bias of the press without directly criticising his colleagues in Fleet Street.
Only one chapter is devoted to Livingstone's life before he became GLC leader. He was born in 1945 in South London, the son of a merchant seaman and an acrobatic dancer. As a child he was confidently
Survey on Unwanted Sexual Advances
Women students are requested to return their completed questionnaire as soon as possible. We hope to have the survey completed by the end of the term.
Will anybody interested in helping over the summer with the production of the Student Union Handbook, please contact either Iqbal Wahhab or Mike Mos-zynski. Any suggestions for themes would also be welcomed.
Britain's judicial system is, at least in theory, independent of party politics. This means that Parliament, or the party in government, cannot influence 'the course of justice'. In this way, the people as supposed to be protected from governments which exceed their authority, and seek to tyrannise them. This is also supposed to prevent people being tried for their political beliefs.
The way in which the judicial system, and its accompanying legal institutions, work in reality is the subject of Peter Main's latest book, 'Political Trials in Britain', published by Allen Lane at £12.95. He challenges the assumptions about the way the judiciary works, especially as regards the political influences in it.
Hain sees the British legal system as "part of a system intended to preserve and advance certain political views and the interests of certain groups, and to oppose the views and interests of others". He considers the legal system as only a part of an essentially undemocratically governed society which is "rigidly stratified, with pronounced class divisions . . . and effective political power exercised by a few". To this
extrovert and one of his former teachers remembered thinking at the time that he would have a future in advertising or journalism, rather than politics.
However, after joining the Labour Party at the age of 23, Livingstone rose rapidly within the Norwood Labour Party and Young Socialists, which as he himself pointed out, had more to do with the alienation of most of his own generation from the compromises of the Wilson government than with his own ability;
The book deals at length with the political battle over the 'Fares Fair' policy and points out that the GLC could have been made bankrupt if Michael Heseltine had not been forced to withdraw his first Local Government Finance Bill by pressure from Tory backbenchers.
It also examines Livingstone's "Maveric" political style and sense of fun which has made him the most quoted and misquoted man in British political life. After his first meeting with the Transport Secretary, Norman Fowler, he told the waiting press, 'He asked to see me again. 1 think he must want me for my body.' In a political environment where self-important mediocrities can achieve national prominence, some people may find it appealing that Livingstone, although he is in
This book is a collection of the writings of Richard Casement, who died at the age of 40 in 1982. Casement founded the Science and Technology section of The Economist, which was a radical departure for a business and political journal. His purpose was to bring the world of science and scientific research in business to the ordinary nontechnical reader. The book covers
extent, a remedy cannot be found to the country's legal problems, without a complete overhaul of society -presumably in Hain's eyes, on socialist lines.
Whether your political convictions are the same as Hain's or not, the evidence that he uses in this assault on the legal system is worrying, at best, and frightening at worst. This evidence is also very well researched, with twenty pages of references to 290 pages of text. Contrary to what might be expected from the title, the book is not just a collection of case-histories, but an examination of the various legal institutions, and the way that their actions can be seen as political.
The book is certainly worth reading, although perhaps not worth buying. The subject matter is very thought provoking, even if you disagree with Hain's politically based conclusions. I do not expect that anything will change as a result of this book, although perhaps it ought to, maybe this is because, as Labour politicians would be quick to tell you, the Press favours those same parts of society as does the judiciary. Malcolm Lowe
control of a metropolitan authority with a budget larger than the GDP of many countries, does not take himself altogether seriously.
It has been alleged that his impulsiveness, whether in cracking jokes or in linking himself to causes unpopular with many Labour voters like Sinn Fein or gay rights, is counter-productive. Carvel says that this is exactly the reason why Livingstone was given so much access to the media in the first place, yielding him opportunities he would not otherwise have had to. talk about, like Fares Fare and the small business scheme.
Carvel also rejects the view that the reason why Livingstone supports Sinn Fein and other controversial causes is to appease Labour militants. He sees the dominant factor as being is basic sincerity as a man who derives his beliefs from his experiences rather than from political theory. His pragmatism is often stressed and he admits that his main concern is to hold the Labour Group together for its full term rather than to try to impose his political views on his colleagues. This shows him to be less doctrinaire than he is often portrayed, both by his friends and his political opponents.
Charles Walker
the whole four years during which Casement developed the Science and Technology pages, and is divided into five main parts. 'The sorts of research and innovation that do and do not work' includes such gems as 'How to get a bright idea'. There is a large section on the human brain and another on the computer and information revolution. 'Darwin vs the Creationists' includes a very succinct introduction to the philosophy of science. The fifth section, entitled 'Insights, opinions and plain good fun', is a potpourri of material that is highly interesting but which cannot be pigeon-holed. 'Why incest is not nice' competes with a gamut of other fascinating topics, including the discussion 'Are British professors relevant?' This book is great for dipping into, and is well worth it at ony £4.95. It is available from The Economist, Publictions Department, 25 St James's Street, London SWl. Richard Bacon
The tragic death of Marvin Oaye has been added to the long list or rock musicians who have met premature and violent deaths.
Marvin Hence Gaye was born on April 2 1939. The son of a Baptist minister, Gaye's earliest musical influence was his father's Holiness Church and school yard doo-wop groups. After a brief spell in the US airforce which he described as 'disastrous' he was discovered by producer and endearing friend Harvey Fouqua. It was Fouqua who introduced Marvin to Berry Gordy at Motown records; it was to mark the start of a turbulent career between Gaye and Gordy.
Marvin began his career as a session singer and drummer on some of the early Smokey Robinson tracks. 'Let your conscience be your guide' was his first single. He never really liked it. In July 1962 'Stubborn kind of fella', apoppy swinger was a sizeable hit for the Motown artist. This was foUowed by , 'Can I get and witness' and on the B side, the single 'Where ever I lay my hat'.
Motown promoted Gaye as the tall, handsome, sexy star, an image that did not go down well with him. To keep up this image Motown paired him off with female stars, once again not always to his approval. This lack of 'cooperation' was rummoured to be one of his traits and contributed to the delay of 'I heard it through the grapevine'. After partnering Terri Well,s Marvin Gaye was paired with Kim Weston and in 1966 produced British chart success with 'It takes two'. We had to wait until 1969 for his first solo hit in England, 'I heard it through the grapevine', the previous year it being a hit for Gladys Night and the Pips. Gaye himself was not very optimistic about Grapevine although it sold nearly four million copies.
On March 16 1970 Tom Tirell died following a brain tuma. Marvin Gaye had withdrawn from stage appearances since Tom Tirell's collapse on stage, he now stopped recording and a two year exile followed. He emerged from exile a different person, a deeper, thoughtful troubled man. Out of this period emerged the 'What's Going On?' LP described by some as the social epic of the seventies. It was based on things around him; urban decay and ecological abuse. The album was sombre and dark, as Gaye himself explained: 'The war.... My brother was in the war at the time and the world problems and conditions. I wanted to write an album that could be translated into any language and still hold its meaning, not to be particularly an ethnic statement, that other nations or people could det into it'.
In the couple of years following
'What's Going On?' in 1970 we saw the penguin suit replaced by the bobble hat and jeans. The sensual single 'Let's Get if On' foUowed in 2973 and by todays standards made Franke Goes to Hollywood look like the magic roundabout. The LP it was taken from was based on the Joys of love and sex in complete contrast to 'What's Going On'. 'Let's Get It On' sold two million copies in a fortnight, with the LP not far behind.
On his own admission Gaye's financial hiccups were his own doing, 'too much wine, women and song' as he stated. At the time of the 'I Want You' album he was forced to leave the US and undergo a world tour and part of that tour was a stop off at the London Paladium. The album contained the groovy million seller 'Got to Give it up'. By now (1978) Marvin had divorced Anna Gordy (Berry Gordy's sister) and married his second wife Janice Hunter. The High Court ruled that Anna should receive the first £6000 000 of royalties from his next LP. To meet such a payment he released a double album entitled 'Here My Dear', known as the alimony album because it dealt with his stormy relationship with Anna. Gaye himself said the only people who could understand the LP were rich people who went through the same experiences as himself. Personal problems mounted as he was charged with non payment of alimony and he was served with a bankruptcy order, costing him his beloved studio. To top it all his second wife had left him for Teddy Prendergast who now occupied the gap left by Gaye. Depressed, financially and mentally broke, Marvin moved to England, having survived a suicide attempt after taking a whole gramme of cocaine.
Marvin made no secret of his desire to leave Motown and in the summer of 1983 he signed for CBS. He graced us with the album 'Midnight Love', the track 'Sexual ¦ Healing' receiving a grammy award. Marvin Gaye was on his way back, at last the years of personal tribulations appeared to have been shaken off. On April 1, a sunny Sunday afternoon, Marvin Hence Gaye died on his way to a Californian hospital, shot by his minister father after the soul legend was allegedly high on drugs and aggressive.
I grew up bopping to Marvin Gaye as a ten year old in my front room in Sheffield. I still cannot believe he is dead, his music is timeless and contained something for everybody.
Edwin Starr has recently recorded 'A Tribute to Marvin Gaye.'
Harold Wilson
MAKVIN OAYE"SOUL SUPERSTAR"
JUDICIAL IMPARTIALITY? A Review of Political Trials in Britain	by Peter Hain
A Review of 'Man Suddenly Sees
to the Edge of the Universe' _by Richard Casement_
Page Eleven
BEAVER Thursda\f V May 1984
• • f'.**'"*¦.
V
THE SECONDHAND DEPARTMENT
NOT JUST A LOAD OF OLD BOOKS!
WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING TITLES IN MINT CONDITION AND AT A FRACTION OF THEIR PUBUSHED PRICE
(AIX TITLES HAVE A CLOTH BINDING UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED.
STOCKS OF SOME TTTLES ARE LIMTTED)
BAMBROUGH. Renford; New Essays on Plato & Aristotle			
RKP.. 1965	£7.95	now	£2.00
BIEMEL, Walter: Martin Heidegger			
RKP., 1977	£8.95	now	£2.95
BLUM. A.F.; Socrates: the Original & Its images			
RKP.. 1978	£9.95	now	£2.50
EDWIN, R.E,; Co-operation & Human Values; a Study of Moral Reasoning			
Harvester, 1981	£22,50	now	£1.50
EWING, A C,; Value & Reality			
Allen & Unwin, 1973	£15.00	now	£1,25
GAUKROGER. S.; Explanatory Structures; Concepts of Explanation in Early			
Physics & Philosphy			
Harvester, 1981	£22.50	now	£2.95
GILLAN. G.; From Sign to Symbol			
Harvester. 1982	£16.95	now	£2,95
JOHNSON, A.H,; Experiental Realism			
Allen & Unwin, 1973	£9.50	now	£1.50
KOVESI, Julius; Moral Notions [Studies in Philosophical Psychology Series]			
RKP.. 1967	£7.95	now	£2.00
LEVY, Paul; G.E.Moore & the Cambridge Apostles			
Oxford U,P.. 1981 paper	£3.95	now	£1.50
McCORMICK, P, ELLISTON, F.A, (eds); Husserl. The Shorter Works			
Notre Dame/Harvester, 1981	£22.50	now	£2.20
RAPHAEL. D.P.; Moral Philosphy			
Oxford U.P,, 1981	£5.95	now	£1.95
SAMPSON, G.; Liberty & Language			
OxofordU.P.. 1979	£6.95	now	£1,50
SAMPSON, G.; Making Sense			
Oxford UP., 1980	£8,95	now	£1.50
SAYRE, K.; Cybernetics & the Philosophy of Mind			
RKP. 1976	£6.95	now	£1.80
SHAHAN, R.W. & SWOYER. C.; Essays in the Philosophy of W.V.Quine			
Harvester, 1979	£15.50 now£1,95		
SKOLIMOWSKI, H.; Polish Analytical Philosphy			
RKP. 1967	£9.25	now	£1.50
WILKES. K.V.: Physicalism (Studies in Philosophical Psychology]			
RKP. 1978	£7.95	now	£1.50
ANTHROPOLOGY
BLOCH. Maurice (ed ): Marxist Analyses & Social Anthropology
Malaby Press, 1975	£9.95 now £1.95 CRICK. Malcolm; Explorations in Language & Meaning; towards a semantic anthropology
Malaby Press. 1976	£7.95 now £1.50 FOX. Robin (ed.); Biosocial Anthropology
Malaby Press. 1975	now £1.50 HAMNETT, Ian; Chieftainship & Legitimacy: an Anthropological Study of Executive Law in Lesotho
RKP, 1975	£5.74 now £1.60 KUPER, Adam (ed,); The Social Anthropology of Radcliffe-Brown RKP.19777
WILLIS, Roy (ed.); The Interpretation of Symbolism
Malaby Press. 1975	£6.50 now £1.50 YOUNG, Michael: (ed.); The Ethnography of Mallnowski:
the Trobriand Islands 1915-18
RKP. 1979	£9.75 now £2.95
PSYCHOLOGY
CLAXTON, Guy (ed.): Cognitive Psychology
RKR. 1980	£13.95 now £2.20 COHEN, David: Psychologists on Psychology
RKPP, 1977	£12.95 now £3.00 FROMM, Erich: Man for Himsell: an Enquiry into the Psychology of Ethics
RKP, 1975	£8.95 now £1.99
GOULD, A. & SHOTTER, J.: Human Action and Its Psychological	Investigation
RKP, 1977	£9.95 now £3.00 PiAGET, Jean: The Child's Conception of Movement & Speed
RKP, 1980	£11.95 now £2.20 PIAGET, Jean & Inheider. Barbel: The Origin of the Idea of Chance in Children
RKP, 1975	£10.95 now £2.20 PIAGET, Jean: Structuralism
RKP, 1971	' £6.95 now £2.00
BRUCE, M.: The Coming of the Welfare State
Batsford, 1972	£15.00 now £3.00 DAVIES, M.: Support Systems in Social Work
RKP, 1977	£4.95 now £1.00 GEORGE, v.: Social Security & Society
RKP, 1973	£5.75 now £1.20 HART, John: Social Wor1< & Sexual Conduct
RKP, 1979	£7.95 now £1.00 JORDAN, B.: Poor Parents: Social Policy & the Cycle of Deprivation
RKP, 1974	£6.95 now £1.00 RAYNOR, J. & HARDEN, J.: Cities, Communities & the Young: Readings in Urban Education vol 1
RKP, 1973 paper	£1.25 now 60p RAYNOR, J. & HARDEN, Jane: Equality & City Schools: Readings in Urban Education vol 2
RKP. 1973 paper	£1.25 now £60p SCHOFIELD, Michael: Report of the Committee on the Operation of the Sexual Containment Act
Davis-Poynter, 1978	£5.00 now £1.00 WARHAM, J.: Social Policy in Context
Batsford, 1970	£8.00 now £1.20
POLITICAL THOUGHT
CARTER, A.: Direct Action & Liberal Democracy
RKP, 1973	now £1.25 KRUKS, S.: The Political Philosophy of Merteau-Ponty
Harvester, 1981 .	£18.95 now £1.50 SNOOK, l,A. (ed): Concepts of Indoctrination: philosophical essays
RKP, 1972	£10.95 now £2,00
GOVERNMENT & POLITICS
BALL. A.R.. Modern Politics & Government {2nd edition)
Macmillan, 1979 BUTLER, David (ed); Coalitions in British Politics
Macmillan, 1978 paper HEY, John 0.; Britain in Context
Blackwell. 1979 SMITH. Brian C. & STANYER, Jeffrey; Administering Britain
Martin Robertson, 1976 TIMES:mTimes Guide to the House of Commons October 1974
Times Books, 1974 WISIEMAN, H.V.; Political Systems RKP. 1966 paper
INTERNATIONAL POLITICS
CHEN. K.C.(ed): China & the Three Worlds; a Foreign Policy Reader
Macmillan, 1979 ELMANDJRA, Mahdi; The United Nations System: an Analysis
Faber. 1973 FINER, S.E.(ed): Five Constitutions Harvester, 1979
HALPER, Stefan A. & STERLING, J.R.: Latin America; the Dynamics of Social Change
Allison & Busby. 1972	£3.50 now 95p
HUNT, David (ed); The Times Yearbook of World Affairs 1979-1980
Times Books, 1980	now £1.00
PAXTON, John (ed): The Statesman's Yearbook 1982-3 119th ed.
Macmillan. 1982	£16.95 now £2.25
WINDRICH, Elaine; The Rhodesian Problem; a Documentary Record 1923-1973
RKP. 1975	£5.95 now £1.00
HISTORY
JOLL, James; The Second International 1889-1914
RKP, 1974 revised edition)	£10.95 now £3.95
RADDATZ, Fritz J.; The Marx-Engels Correspondence; the Personal Letters 1844-1877
Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1980	£9.95 now £2.00
ROBBINS. Keith; John Bright
RKP. 1979	£11.95 now £3.95
EDUCATION
LEViTAS, Maurice: Marxist Perspectives in the Sociology of Education
RKP. 1974	£8.95 now £2.00
ROBINSON, Keith & WILSON. R. (eds); Extending Economics Within the Curriculum
RKP, 1977	£9.50 now £1.00
PIAGET, Jean; Success & Understanding
RKP. 1978 PIAGET, Jean; Behaviour & Evolution RKP, 1979
SZASZ. Thomas S.; Law, Liberty & Psychiatry RKP, 1974
£9.75 now £2,00 £7.95 now £1.50 £11.95 now £2.50
3rd edition £4.95 this £2.50 now £1.25 £5.95 now 95p now 95p £7.000 now 80p now 80p
£6.95 now 95p £6.95 now £1.20 £2.95
ECONOMIC THEORY
BROWN, C.V. & JACKSON, P.M.; Public Sector Economics (1st edition)
Martin Robertson, 1978	new edition £9.95 this £1.50
COLLARD, David: Prices, Marl(ets & Welfare
FaberSi Faber. 1972	£3.95 now £1.00
CUTLER, A.. HINDESS, B., HIRST, P. & HUSSAIN, A.: Marx's Capital & Capitalism Today vol 2
RKP, 1978	£9.75 now £2.50
JOHNSON, Harry G.: The Two Sector Model of General Equilibrium
Allen & Unwin, 1971	£6.50	now £1.70
NATH, S.K.: A Reappraisal of Welfare Economics
RKP, 1969	£9.50	now £1.20
ROWLEY, C.K.: & PEACOCK, A.T.: Welfare Economics
Martin Robertson. 1975 paper	now £1.00
INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS 9 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
GEORGE, V. & LAWSON. R. (eds.); Poverty & Inequality in Common Market Countries
RKP, 1980	£9.50 now £1.20
LITTLE. Kenneth; Urbanisation as a Social Process; an Essay	on Movement & Change in Contemporary Africa
RKP, 1974	£3.20 now £1.00 SYLVESTER. A.; Arabs & Africans; Cooperation for Development
Bodley Head. 1981	£7.50 now £1.95 VERNON, Raymond; Storm Over the Multinationals; the Real Issues
Macmillan. 1975	£15.00 now £1,50 WILES. P.J.D,; Economic Institutions Compared
Blackwell. 1977	£7.50 now £2.00
ECONOMIC HISTORY
DAY. R.B,; The 'Crisis' & the 'Crash'; Soviet Studies of the West (1917-1939)
NLB. 1981	£9,50 now £3.75
DIGBY, A.; Pauper Palaces
RKP, 1978	£6.95 now £1.95
HODGKINSON, R.G.; The Origins of the National Health Service
Wellcome Institute, 1967	now £2.20
HOWELL, D.W.; Land & People in Nineteenth Century Wales
RKP. 1977	.	£6.95 now £1.80
MANN. A,:mComeback: Germany 1945-52
Macmillan, 1980	£9.95 now £1.95
PEDEN. G.C,; British Rearmament & the Treasury 1932-1939
Scottish Academic Press, 1979	£6.00 now £2.25
PERREN. R.; The Meat Trade in Britain 1840-1914
RKP, 1978	£7.50 now £1.50
WHITE, J.; Rothschild Buildings: life in an East End Tenement Block 1887-1920
RKP, 1980	£12,95 now £4.95
WILSON, C. & PARKER, G.; An Introduction to the sources of European Economic History 1500-1800
Weidenfeld	&	Nicolson.	1977
YOGER. Gedalia; Diamonds & Coal; Anglo-Dutch Jewry & Eighteenth Century Trade
Leicester U P , 1978	£8,50 now £1.95
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
BALFOUR, Campbell; Industrial Relations in the Common Market
RKP, 1972	£3.00 now 75p
DANIEL, W.W, & STILGOE. E,; Where Are They Now? A Follow-up Study of the Unemployed
P.E.P., Octobver 1977 pamphlet	£4,00 now 50p
HU. Yao-Su: National Attitudes & the Financing of Industry
P,E.P.. December 1975 pamphlet	£2.80 now 50p
MANLEY, M.; A Voice at the Work Place
Deutsch, 1975	£3.50 now £1.50
MUKHERJEE. Santosh; Unemployment Costs
P.E.P., February 1976 pamphlet	now 50p
PHILIP, A.E.; Creating New Jobs: a Report on Long Term Job Creation in Britain & Sweden
Policy Studies Institute, 1978 pamphlet	now 50p
SOCIAL WORK 9 SOCIAL POLICY
AYERS. G.m.; England's First State Hospitals 1867-1930
Wellcome Institute. 1971	now£1.80
BALDOCK. P.; Community Work & Social Work
RKP.1974
£3.00 now £1,00
TRY THE SECONDHAND DEPARTMENT OF THE ECONOMISTS BOOKSHOP, CLARE MARKET, PORTUGAL STREET, LONDON WC2 TEL 405 8643
Page TwIve
BEAVKR Thursiiai/ 77 May 1984
NORTHERN IRELAND: A Left-Wing Perspective
In 1921, James Joyce, in a letter to his brother Stanislaus, made a criticism of Sinn Fein that is still levelled at that party today but, more importantly, he drew attention to an aspect of the Irish problem that rarely grabs headlines. Joyce wrote, "(Sinn Fein) is educating the people of Ireland on the old pap of racial hatred whereas anyone can see that if the Irish question exists, it exists for the Irish proletariat chiefly."
COMPLETELY OVERLOOKED
What Joyce highlighted ws the condition of the Irish working classes, something that, in his time and ours, has been almost completely overlooked by current affairs commentators. The gap between rich and poor in Ireland is large, and shows few signs of closing. Dublin experiences some of the worst inner city blight in Europe. Rural poverty is still a major problem, especially in the Republic. In the six counties of Northern Ireland, towns such as Strabane, Dungannon, Cookstown and Newry are forced to cope with the highest unemployment rates in Western Europe; and those in work receive Europe's lowest average wage rates.
In the midst of such extensive depravation only two parties in the curretn Irish political spectrum consistently highlight social issues. Those two parties are the only two which operate on a thirty-two county basis and both claim socialist objectives: they are the Workers Party and Provisional Sinn Fein. Both organisations have their roots in the old Sinn Fein that Joyce criticised for its racism and ignorance of pressing social issues.
WORKERS PARTY
The Workers Party (formerly known as Official Sinn Fein) and the Republican Club, place great strength on their non-sectarian approach. They now condemn violence by both sides in the North and emphasise the need for constructive policies to combat social and economic problems. The Workers Party appeals to the divided working class of Northern Ireland, calling upon Protestant and Catholic workers to revoke sectarianism and unite to further their aims as a class. From the Workers Party viewpoint, the violence and sectarian politics in the North are a hindrance to the achievement of sociahsm; Adams and Paisley can be sen as strange bedfellows in a system that oppresses the working class and perpetuates middle class dominance. For the
Workers Party, the issues of the border is a secondary one, their first priority is to advance the working class position in Northern Ireland, to create sociahsm in the six counties. Simultaneously they contest elections in the Republic and seek to replace the Labour Party as the Republic's leading partliamentary "socialist" party.
REUNIFICATION FIRST
However, in relegating the issue ofthe border and the British occupation of the six counties, the Workers Party displays a naive conception of what is required before sociahsm can be established in Ireland. Northern Ireland is a gerrymandered and wholly artificial state created by the British in order to preserve the interests, not of the Protestant loyalist population, but of a few capitalists. Ireland was partitioned for strong economic, as well as political, reasons. It was important that the Unionist capitalist interest retain its grasp of the six North Eastern counties of Ulster, once an economically profitable region, but now an economic wilderness and an increasing burden on the British exchequer. The object of partition was the creation of a near-perfect capitalist state; the working class was divided and unable to act as a class, "democracy" was used as a force, and civil rights were denied to one-third of the population. Where the Workers Party are naive, is in their belief that socialist progress can be made within the structure of a partitioned Ireland. The conflict in Northern Ireland is a direct consequence of capitalism and therefore must be sen in terms of class struggle. However, the working class in the North are too weak and divided to fight this struggle on anything like equal terms. Easily distracted by nationalism (one variety or another) and religion, the Protestant and Catholic working classes have become the strongest supporters of the sectarian divide that oppresses them. While Northern Ireland exists, that sectarianism will exist; what the Workers Party fails to realise is that a socialist Ireland requires the reuniting of Ireland.
PROVISIONAL SINN FEIN
Provisional Sinn Fein recognise the task of achieving a united Ireland as a necessary pre-requisite to establishing socialism in Ireland. The current trend within Sinn Fein is the rise of a young, dynamic leadership (eg. Adams, Morrison) whose inspiration is socialist; the old guard of traditional anti-British nationalists is disappearing. Certainly the struggle is maintained at present by appeals to nationalist sentiment, the character of a centuries-old fight cannot be changed overnight, but changes are being made and greater emphasis is being placed on aspects of the struggle that are not nationalist. Indeed the strength of nationalist feeling is a product of exploitation and oppression which has created terrible conditions for the Irish people throughout centuries of British occupation. The struggle Sinn Fein supports is an anti-imperialist one, not a sectarian one. Sinn Fein condemned the indiscriminate sectarian murders at Darkley in December 1983; the Republican socialist movement is aware that killing people because of their beliefs serves no purpose, 'the struggle Sinn Fein supports is a conflict with British colonialism, which always has been a force for capitalist exploitation. Sinn Fein, contrary to media sensationalism, are not anti-British, however, they are opposed to the presence of British armed forces in Ireland.
Perhaps Sinn Fein's most important work at present is their operation in practical community politics -work that is ignored by the press, but has been recognised recently by Cardinal Thomas O'Fiach, of all people. In constituencies all over Northern Ireland Sinn Fein operate twenty-four-hour advice centres manned by elected representatives and volunteers. Sinn Fein works hard on the ground dealing with housing, agricultural and social security problems, as well as dealing with frequent cases of harrassment of young people by the "security forces". Sinn Fein are working amongst the community that supports it and by doing so are practically spreading socialist principles. The growth of their appeal and numbers indicates a significant degree of success and the welcoming of socialist politics.
A STEP TOWARDS A SOCIALIST REPUBLIC
Yet Sinn Fein must recognise and combat the weaknesses of their position. A large element of their support is still based on conservative, traditional nationalism. Their community politics and work with the young and unemployed (the oppressed and the next generation) is helping to change attitudes and spread ther belief that a united Ireland is not the ultimate objective, but rather a step towards that objective which is a sociahst republic. Sinn Fein must also increase their activities in the Republic and try and overcome the suppression of their rights by the Conservative governments in the South. A strong socialist movement rooted in the working class areas of the cities is necessary to oppose the conservativism of Fianna Fail, Fine Gael and the Catholic Church.
It is also vital that in a new Ireland Sinn Fein make accommodation for the Protestant population of the North. Certainly they come from a different tradition, and it is difficult for any section of the Irish population to forsake old traditions, but the Protestants of the North are Irish too. The Unionist population has also something to do, it must come to terms with the reality that its political philosophy is negative, outdated and unjustifiable. Northern Ireland is not longer feasible as a separate entity.
Sinn Fein has much to offer, it has an ideology, a vision of a new Ireland: and it is approaching the Irish question in an increasingly practical manner, which by its very nature condemns the careerist politicians of the SDLP and other Irish parties. The armed struggle is unfortunate, Ireland has seen enough bloodshed, but it is a product of British misgovernment and oppression; and it must be noted that Irish rebels have achieved most when they have taken up the gun. Sinn Fein seeks a sociahst Republic of Ireland, th^ first step towards that objective is a united Ireland. All socialists should support the reuniting to Ireland as the only justifiable solution to the border question and a vital precondition to any kind of socialism in the suffering country. Sean O'Neill
WHO OWNS KASHMIR?
When people in India today want to talk about the recent past, they say, 'Since independence'. Referring to the same period, Pakistanis invariably say, 'Since partition . . . ' In vast areas of the Indian Union, the people were quite unaffected by the division of the sub-continent; but scarcely a district, or even a family of Pakistan was left untouched or unmarked by this upheaval.
The state of Pakistan came into existence as a dominion within the commonwealth in August 1947 with Quaid-i-Azam, Mohammed Ali Jin-nah as its first governor-general. The aims of the Pakistan movement were primarily to create a state for the Muslims of India in the area where they were in a mapority to serve as a vehicle for Islamic unity. Of all the well-organized provinces of British India, only the comparatively backward areas of Sind, Baluchistan and the NW frontier were divided; Kashmir became disputed territory. This dispute over Kashmir brought the two countries on the verge of war in Oct 1947. Kashmir's ruling family was Hindu, but 80% of the population was Muslim. Partition of the sub-continent led to both sides man-oevering to ensure the accession of Kashmir to their respective states. The Hindu ruler signed accession papers and declared union with India and soon a fully fledged war broke out in Kashmir.
On Jan 6 1948, India brought the case before the UN security council on the grounds that Pakistan was assisting invaders advancing onto
Kashmir. It was then agreed that the future of Kashmir should be settied by a Plebicite and a tense cease-fire line came into force in January 1949, which was closely monitered by the United National Security Council.
India and Pakistan have fought wars in Kashmir three times in 1948-49, in 1965, and in 1971, since Independence. The 1965 Indo-Pakistan war dealt a severe blow to the accession logic. The division of the state became tacitly accepted by both parties when at Tashkent both governments agreed to return to the ceasefire line as if it was an international border - which it is ot. This state of affairs remains to this day. The division of Kashmir may be indicative of the comparative military strength of India and Pakistan but it is not supported by the will of the Kashmiri people.
For long, the majority of the population which is 80% Muslim, have been demanding that the UN implement the Resolutions passed by the security Council to decide that future of Kashmir by a plebiscite which would be supervised by the Un and in which the people of the
state are asked if they want to join India or Pakistan or even indeed seek independence. It is worth remembering that simply on the basis that the Muslim majority areas were declared for Pakistan and vice versa, at the time of Partition; then by this logic Kashmir belonged to Pakistan. A parallel situation can be seen in the case of Hyderabad, the state of Andhra Pradesh. Here the population majority was Hindu but the ruler was a Muslim. In spite of this, the area was declared for India on the basis of a Hindu Majority. Mrs Ghandi insists that Kashmir is an integral part of India. However, this assertion is in violation of the committment of the Indian Government to the UN and also of all the moral and legal norms observed in liberation struggles. The Indian state has discarded all notions fo the Kashmiri people exercising their right to choose, simply because, it is obvious that in any referendum Kashmir would not opt for Pakistan or for indpendence.
The increasing intransigence of the Indian government and its total refusal to concede. The people of Kashmir their basic right of self-detriment; and the apathy of the United Nations has disillusioned Kashmiris over the past years. However the formation of the Plebiscite Front in Indian-held Kashmir
raised the hopes of Kashmiris. It questioned the logic of status quo and revived the idea of self determination. The Plebiscite Front had been organised to press India (because Pakistan has not resiled from its acceptance of the result of a plebiscite) to honour its committment to the UN in 1949 to hold a plebiscite.
More recently, in Feb 1984, the Congress party of Mrs Indira Ghandi led an orchestrated campaign of violence all over Kashmir against National Conference Premier of Kashmir, Mr Farooq Abdullah. Kashmiris in Britain, India and Pakistan were disturbed by the turn of events in Kashmir because it was felt that Delhi was trying to find an excuse to remove Farooq Abdullah and enforce direct administration by the Central Government under 'President Rule'. Surely, this oppression on Farooq Abdullah and the Kashmiri people on the pretext of violence is not the honourable act which would pave the way for change. On the contrary such an act greatly diminishes the already few chances for an early solution over Kashmir.
Over the years enough blood has been shed; thousands of Kashmiris, Pakistanis and Indians have died for the Kashmir struggle. It is now time that a solution is reached, based directly on the wishes of the people, not the rules. This undeclared war must come to an end.
Muddassar Malik.
Photocopying for Disabled Students
Students who are permanently or temporarily disabled, and have difficulty writing because of this, may use the Student Union photocopier free of charge to copy lecture notes, text books etc. Information sheets on this are available from the Welfare Office, E294.
The Literary Society is advertising for the post of Chairperson to take over next term. Any nominations should be handed in to Simon Busuttil either via the societies pigeonhole next door to Florries or through the auspices of the Beaver office.
<3B
NI6>EL o-nA. Sfe6N/€is/
PART-TIME WORD PROCESSING
Royal Anthropological Institute has opportunities for one or more part-time word processing operators (Word Star) to do in-house typesetting. Irregular hours, payment by hour. Anyone interested apply Jonathan Benthall, Director RAI, 56 Queen Anne Street, W.l with brief personal details.
Special Discount for Students
All students can take advantage of a superb offer from Tentrek this summer. A 10% discount will be given to students making a direct booking with Tentrek for any holiday in their current brochures, although proof of eligibility will be required at the time of booking. Students may enclose a copy of their current ISlC or NUS membership card with their booking form, and a note of the discount will be made on confirmation of the holiday booking.
The discount applies to Tentrek's overland adventure holidays to Europe, Africa, America and Russia, as well as the Beach N'Sun camping holidays in the South of France, Spain and Corfu.
To claim this discount, students should first of all contact Tentrek for their latest brochures, at 152 Maidstone Road, Ruxley Corner, Maidstone, Kent. Tel: 01-302 6426.
^ ; .t.
The solution to the anagram on page 3 is:
THE ANTICHRIST
rage I nine
Liberals at LSE - Unite!
Cold attitudes.
Two weeks ago the NUS Lesbian and Gay Liberation Conference was banned. Due to be held at Strath-clyde University in Glasgow, the Strathdyde Student Union Executive banned it at a week's notice because paedophilia was on the agenda (despite having had the agenda for a month). Last year in Belfast the NUS executive dictated what could be discussed at the Lesbian and Gay Conference, threatening to close the conference especially if the gay angle of the Irish political question, or paedophilia, were discussed.
If anyone tried to censor the main NUS conference in this way, 1 imagine the subsequent uproar would be far greater than at any of Thatcher's attacks on education. If black people wanted to discuss the press and police attempts to portray them as violent muggers, who would try to stop them? Gay people (especially gay men) have been portrayed often enough as dangerous child molesters, despite all the evidence to the contrary, yet the NUS and Strathclyde feel quite justified in suppressing any mention of the topic. The very prejudices we wish to discuss are used to prevent any discussion taking place.
Presumably these people think paedophilia simply means buying sweets to lure children into bed with. Such gross prejudice and ignorance is nothing new. It's less than two years since Coventry Council banned a gay conference, presumably on the grounds that it was just an excuse for an orgy. But this only demonstrated precisely why gay conferences need to be held - to discuss ways of dealing with other people's prejudices. Being gay is not a problem - it's other people's attitudes that are the problem, and without
those attitudes we wouldn't need any conferences.
This is why paedophilia appears on the agenda of a gay conference in the first place. On the crudest manifestation of paedophilia, namely child molesting, police records clearly show that 97% of all cases are committed by heterosexual men. So it's clearly a heterosexual problem, and the best way to prevent children being molested would be to keep heterosexual men away from children, in schools, in scout packs, in the home, etc. But try telling that to heterosexual society, and you'll soon discover why it's left to gay people to be the only small voice prepared (when permitted) to discuss the subject.
Love in a warm climate.
An interesting new angle on child/ adult relationships was provided recently by someone 1 met who'd just been to Morrocco. He had constant offers of sex from boys of all ages. Eventually he took up an offer from a young adolescent boy. The first thing the boy did was take him home to his family. They were pleased to see him, invited him to join their meal, and extended him all their hospitality. That night he and the boy slept together in the boy's bedroom. The family were relatively middle-class, and the boy did not want money. They were simply pleased to offer their hospitatlity, for several days, in what to them were perfectly normal circumstances. The boy had been having similar sexual experiences for several years, and he did it because he enjoyed it, and because he had his parents' approval and protection.
I wonder what the NUS would say?
Richard Snell
Liberals at LSE have shattered the hegemony of state socialist politics in the LSE Student Union.
This is an impressive but limited achievement. The next stage must be a more concentrated intellectual assault on the political consensus in the student union, and throughout LSE. There are two problems.
First, Liberalism lacks intellectual credibility. Many academics profess Tory, Socialist, or even SDP convictions; few 'come out' as Liberals. This is a vicious circle: few academics - less credibility; less credibility - fewer academics.
Liberalism should be the natural political philosophy for those acedemics sympathetic, for example, to cooperatives, European Union, or decentralisation; further, it should be seriously considered by those working in the fields of poverty or international development who have become distrustful of traditional state socialist panaceas.
It is sad, therefore, that after ten years during which the LSE has had as its Director the most eminent
Liberal academic in Europe, that so few other academics have dared to express their political sympathy to the Liberal cause.
Timidity in academic circles has had its effect among LSE students. LSE Liberals are strong on organisation and personalities, but weak on political ideas. This is not a result of consumer pressure, as the immensely popular debate between Michael Meadowcroft MP and Ken Livingstone demonstated.
Next year, therefore, LSE Liberals must concentrate on further breaking the political hold of state socialist ideas upon the student union. There is really very little reason other than historical accident (they were there first), that state socialist thinking should dominate causes such as Womens' Liberation, Saving the GLC, or Nicaraguan Solidarity (to name but three), particularly in view of the loathing with which a future state socialist or Labour government would view a Nicaraguan-type economy, autonomous local government, or a challenge to make domi-
nance in society.
In addition to asserting the relevance of Liberalism to existing radical and libertarian causes at LSE, Liberals here should develop some neglected ones. Why is there no Green campaign at LSE? Why is no one clamouring for European unity? Where are encounter sessions, T-groups, or indeed any attempts to forge links between the personal and the political? Who is campaigning for civil liberties? - or Freedom of Information? Why, in short, is student politics so limited, sectarian, and boring.
In the past, LSE Liberals have ducked this challenge, preferring the headier and more immediately gratifying challenge of parliamentary by-elections. Now, however, is the time for student and academic Liberals together to develop Liberal ideas at LSE, to articulate them clearly and forcefully in debate, both to our opponents, and those as yet undecided, and to win the arguments for Liberalism at LSE.
Ed Lucas
WELFARE
HALF-TERM PLAYGROUP - Business as usual for kids of staff and students! From Tuesday May 29th to Friday June 1st (Monday is a bank holiday, folks!) the half-term playgroup will be in the T.V. Room above Florries, as usual. Parents should sign their children in beforehand on the Students' Union Welfare Notice Board outside the Welfare Office. Times will be as normal, i.e. 10-1 and 2-5, but there will be an additional period of supervision only from 9.15-10 for parents in examinations. Every effort will be made to avoid interference to those students undertaking exams in close proximity to the TV room.
Helpers, helpers, helpers. . . . half-term playgroup help needed from 10-1 and 2-5, May 29th to June 1st. If you would like some light relief (!) from pre-exam panic, please sign the volunteers' form on the Notice Board outside the Welfare Office. Thank you.
Are you: a) a parent living with your
children?
b)	living in overcrowded
conditions?
c)	living in Lewisham
Borough?
d)	in need of changed
accommodation?
If so, contact the S.U. Welfare Office (E294) for further information. . , . FREE ACCOMMODATIONS.'. - A small private language school in Central London is offering free accommodation to a postgraduate student willing to work 15 hours per week. Further details are available from the S.U. Welfare Office, E294. TUTORS WANTED. ... A 16-year-old needs tuition in Maths, Physics, Biology and/or English up to A Level standard for a few hours per week until end of June, possibly longer. Fees negotiable. Contact Noah and Suzannah Matalon on 373-1943.
BEAVER Thursday 17 May 19S4
Socialism in _One Union.
Recent articles in 'Beaver' have highlighted the extent of the crisis in the running of the Students' Union, initiating a debate which is long overdue. The continuing saga of the Three Tuns, now increasingly resemblant to the accession dramas of 'Dallas', provides further evidence of the new depths of incompetence and insensitivity which are plummed daily by the SU bureaucracy. But it would be a great mistake to view the present mess as a consequence of certain individuals and their alleged misdeeds. The basic problems are structural rather than personal - let's deal with them.
The sheer diversity of services that
the LSESU provides - from tea to sympathy with beer and books between - makes the organisation difficult to co-ordinate and administer, particularly by sabbaticals without training in management skills. In view, furthermore, of the importance of sabbaticals' pohtical roles, many people have suggested that a new post of General Manager is required to mediate between staff and students. On this topic at least, there is a remarkable consensus between certain figures right across the SU political spectrum.
But will taking on yet another manager on a salary of £14,000 pa really get the SU out of the rut? And even if it did, is this the best way to solve our administrative problems?
One of the most dispiriting aspects of the present management debate - from the proposal to engage another student sabbatical to the running of the bar - has been its bureaucratic technicism and allegedly apolitical stance. This ideology masks the distinct politics of administration within which LSESU is involved. This politics is about power, pay, and participation. Let's look at the status quo from an egalitarian and democratic perspective.
Do we really need three (and possibly four) tiers of management in the bar, the shop and Florries? Do these enterprises have to be organised hierarchically with such large wage differentials? Some Union workers earn less than £6,000 -others are getting more than £12,000. Isn't a forty-hour week out-
moded and oppressive? What about the rights of part-time staff? How do LSESU employment policies reproduce a sexual division of labour -with men on top and women at the bottom? What's the role of students in running the facilities the SU provides? Above all, where's the socialism in the Labour Club administration?
Instead of employing more bureaucrats or bringing in divisive bonus schemes - what about considering the following:
*Make the bar, Florries and the shop into autonomous co-operatives. *PIace all Union employees on an equal wage — say £7,000? — (with the possible exception of sabbaticals) -abolishing division and low morale at a stroke.
^Reduce the working week to 30 hours, boosting leisure and employment and giving parents more time for their children.
*Abolish the plethora of paper-and-time-wasting Union management committees and replace them with a single joint staff and student management board - leaving, as now, wider political questions to be determined by students alone at UGMs, open committees, etc.
This wouldn't be cheap - but neither would a general manager. And it may be the case that such a radical solution might scare off a few in the SU hsirarchy. If so, good riddance! Let's have committed staff and sabbaticals with the best possible pay and conditions, rather than the present system of exploited skivvies and empire builders. Socialism in one Union?	John Munford
PAEDOPHILIA: Two Stories_
FARES PLEAZZZZ
On the evening oif April 13th London Transport re-launched their night bus services with a fanfare, marching bands seeing the first buses out of Trafalgar Square. There was also a show-biz style press launch.
There have been night buses in London for years of course, but this marks phase II of the changeover from irregular services from the city and Fleet Street areas for night workers (they did not run Saturday nights!) to regular - most services are hourly through the night - buses centred on Trafalgar Square, to cater for the revel-fer, socialite and insomniac.
The re-launch also saw the network extended to 30 routes, now running deep into the suburbs, which have never had night services before. Services in Central London have also been improved, buses to North and East starting at Victoria, to the West and Southwest at Liverpool St., passing through Trafalgar Square. 21 of the routes pass the L.S.E., though what you would be doing nere 3 hours after the library has closed I don't know, the m^ shows the stops. U.L.U. and Car Saunders are served by N29 (same as the day route) and N90 (Finsbury Park, Tottenham and Waltham Cross) along Tottenham Court Road, Passfield by N90 and N93 (Hampstead) at Euston and Rosebery by N79 and N92 (Islington, Highgate and Mus-well Hill to the North, Victoria, Camberwell and Catford to the South). N93 and N96 (Islington, Hackney, Leyton) also pass near. Of these, N's 79, 92, 93
and 96 also pass the L.S.E.
Fares are at the same rate as day-time, and free to travel-card holders. Probably the most useful buses, apart from those going nearest your flat, are the N97 (Hammersmith, Heathrow) and N's 2, 73, 79, 90 and 98, the most regular buses to Victoria -for all-night trains to Gatwick). Timetables are displayed on stops, and a comprehensive booklet listing routes and times, including last trains and day buses from Central London, is free from L.T. enquiry offices.
This expansion of the service is as mucn a political as a commercial venture, being an extension of the G.L.C.'s transport policies, on the service improvement rather than fares reduction side. Should the London Transport Bill go through parliament m its anticipated form you can expect to see these new services last about as long as the current fares structure unless they become heavily used.
To keep operating costs low most of the buses are one-man operated, which could prove a false economy since most of the new custom being sought will be less than sober. I hope the new services do well enough to survive their customers and political masters, but I can't help feehng the launch date was not auspicious - Friday 13th.
Alan Peakall
STOP D, M To Liverpool St (11, 14, 18, 27, 68, 88, 94, 97)
To Stoke Newington, Tottenham (83)
To Euston, Hampstead (93)
STOP D, L To Elephant, New Cross South East (74, 77, 82, 85, 86) STOP M To Hackney Leyton (96)
STOP D, S To Elephant, Streatham, Croydon (78)
STOP D, R To Victoria, Camberwell, Catford (79, 92)
STOP K To Shepherds Bush, Southall, Uxbridge (89)
STOP P To West London (11, 14, 18, 27, 91, 94, 97) To Vauxhall, Wandsworth (68, 88)

C£>t>tiTs
S K
/)L«k/ycH Tt/SE
Page Fourteen
BEAVER Thursday 27 May 1984
The London Arts
BIG MEAT BATES "MEAT TO PLEASE YOU"
FILMS
LA BALANCE/ THE DRESSER
A torrent of films of varying lengths and tastes was unleashed upon the public during the Easter vacation. Two of the better films were La Balance and The Dresser. Iia Balance, as the title implies, is a French film and, predictably, a frog-style cops and robbers thriller. It appears to lack direction, flitting like a wounded butterfly from one scene to another; but there is a plot of sorts. The flics (trendy word for the police) set up a pimp (Phillipe Leotard) to be an informer, or balance, on his former employer by putting pressure on a prostitute with whom he is desperately in love (Nathalie Baye). And, yes, loyalties arise and become increasingly complicated, if not confused until, it seems, betrayal - not of the basic sort - is the only way to redeem oneself.
Despite flaws in the plot, the overall sickness of the prodution results in some veiy pacey action. All the standard bits are there -love, money, death, robbery, and the now obligatory car chase through the mean looking streets of the backwater of Paris, BeUeville. The locations smell of trouble. In addition to Leotard and Baye, Richard Berry plays the part of the ultra-cool cop who appears, by observing his clothes, to spend more time in selecting his wardrobe than with his fellow flics. But then sartorial elegance is part of the French film tradition.
Invariably France produces superb thrillers, and this is no exception. One may be sui^jrised to
hear that the director is Bob Swaim, a self-exiled American. But don't let that distract you, it is a thriller of high quality.
The Dresser could not be further removed from La Balance. A British produced and directed fihn. The Dresser focusses, in the best theatrical tradition, on the interplay of character between Sir (Albert Finney) and his effeminate dresser Norman (Tom Courtenay). The film is set in the second world war as a pathetic and oddly cast group of actors wander up and down the country in the guise of a second rate travelling theatre company. The final inevitable and tragic act takes place, rather unromantically, in Bradford.
The film mirrors Shakespearean grandness and Sir reflects the character of King Lear, slowly decomposing into a mire of madness. He is proud and magniloquent. He is finely contrasted by the pantomine poof, Norman, whose effete mannerisms are both touching and humourous. Edward Fox makes a thankfully brief appearance as the eponymously objectionable actor, and' Eilleen Atkins has to suffer for two hours as the love-struck stage manageress.
The plot here, as opposed to La Balance, is tight, and is consequently tiring for the audience. But there is no doubt that this is a very fine film; it creates a tulmult of emotion. And, of course, Courtenay and Finney know how to act - both show great feeling for their roles. It seems the constant excellence of British acting arises from the repertory tradition, and it is probably just as well that none of the two were awarded Oscars which was, conversely, an award for mediocrity this year.
Hi^at KohU
THEATRE
GLENGARRY GLEN ROSS
NATIONAL THEATRE (COTTESLOE) By David Mamet
This play is about selling. It is set in the office of a firm in the American mid west which hires salesmen to persuade gullible people to part with large amounts of cash for virtually worthless tracts of undeveloped land in Florida.
David Mamet has always had an ambigious relationship with the -ideals behind the Great American Dream which he also explored in the play 'American Buffalo'. "American capitalism comes down to one thing - Hurray for me and fuck you. Anything else is a lie."
Mamet's characters speak with
an authentic crudeness. In the flyleaf of the script, there is a dedication to Harold Pinter which is an admission of a debt which is immediately obvious. The dialogue of both writers closely imitates real speech and in this production the cast are strong enough to make every incoherence, every repetition and every incomplete sentence help us to understand the motivations and fears of the characters.
The quality of the acting is outstanding, especially that of Jack Shepherd as a salesman, and Tony Hagarth as a punter who is having second thoughts about the deal.
However, the script is flawed as
it is necessary to have seen the second act to fully understand the first. Luckily this is unimportant as the heart of the play is a portrayal through snatches of dialogue of the insecurities and comic bluster of men who have to sell to survive; survival in terms of keeping their own self-respect as well as in terms of the sheer necessity of earning a living.
Bill Bryden's production of this play is the best production of any play that I have seen for a long time. Go to see 'Glengarry Glen Boss* even if you see nothing else this year.
Charles Walker
EXHIBITION
PRE-RAPHAELITES AT THE TATE
It has, first of all, to be said that this is perhaps one of the most popular exhibitions of British art ever to be mounted in this country - the Tate is well packed from ten in the morning to past five in the afternoon. However what I find more fascinating is how so many people are prepared to tarry and gawk over what, in my opinion, is, with a few exceptions, pure gush.
For whilst being pressed around the 250 paintings for an hour and a half on a hot Sunday afternoon,
BIG MEAT EATER
Summer seems awfully grey what with exams approaching and all that - I would recommend putting away your books for the afternoon and meeting the Big Meat Eater and his pals; the distinctly corrupt mayor and a Moldavian family which includes college boy inventor Jan, his chanteuse sister, sinister gran and sewage engineer father. But what's in the meat store downstairs? Will the wholesome butcher and model citizen Bob Sanderson realise what apprentice Abdullah is doing before the most gonzoid aliens since Smash-ads retrieve his waste disposal unit? Is there really a plot in this film? With "musical" sequences that make the Rocky Horror Show look like the Sound of Music this film is defmitely not for the sensitive and veggies should be warned - there are several ways of making beefljurgers and Big Meat Eater homes in one the messiest. Add rock 'n' roll and a jet-powered Cadillac; Yes, there's excessive and then there's Big Meat Eater -definitely "Meat to please you", as butcher Bob said shortly before he mutated.
Cindy Snide
what struck me more than anything else was their collective mun-daneness and their immense sopping and sapping sentimentality. The entire exhibition represents a documentary of the Sigh-no-more, no less where maybe only a handful display the beginnings of a spark of vital force.
Many of the artists seem to have laboured vainly under the misapprehension that the amount of passion one can instill into a canvass is directly proportional to the amount of paint and the number of colours one puts thereon.
The paintings succeed, and I'm talking here of scattered later works by Millais and Rossetti, when the artists have sought to entirely abandon all preconceptions of their rules on subject matter and form.
hence jettisoning most of their contrivance and pretence. As for the rest, they seem to fall between the neutral and the neutered - was there ever a greater criticism of art?
I'm sorry to have to sound off into such a ridiculously post-Levin way; it was something to do with the way I left the gallery numbed and unmoved, whereas before I have gone away refreshed arid invigorated.
To all those who intend to go to this exhibition (and I strongly recommend you do so that you understand me) I say: beware bf charm, for as sure as the day is long it sucks the fire out of all inspiration. There is no life here.
James Bail^
SWANN IN LOVE
Derived from a novel by Marcel Proust, Swann in Love is about the hopeless infatuation of Charles Swann (Jeremy Irons) for a professional mistress, Odette (Ornelle Muti). It is set in turn-of-the-century Paris and concerns itself with people rich enough to dabble in the fine arts as a hobby. The film follows Swann, a socialite Jew in a prejudiced society, as he spends a day in the pursuit of his love through the dravring rooms, salons and cafes of Parisian high society.
Many of the strengths of the film are visual. Some of the action takes place in baroque interiors which are beautiful and the standard of the photography is excellent throughout.
Jeremy Irons puts in a competent performance as the reserved, aesthetic gentleman familiar from 'Brideshead Revisited', and Ornelle Muti is deliciously convincing as the femme fatale. The film is
directed by Volker Schlondorff, who was also responsible for the much-praised 'Circle of Deceit'.
Sadly the various goodies in the film fail to gel and the film tends to drag, especially towards the end. This is a pity as there are some fine opportunities for humour which are not sufficiently exploited. Nor does the film succeed in generating sympathy for Swann, which should not have been difficult. He was after all a sick and dying man, humiliated by his love for a woman unable to commit herself to any lasting relationship. The blame for these shortcomings must rest with the director.
The fact that the comments of the people in the audience after the fihn seemed to be restricted to the visual aspect alone, surely indicates weaknesses in other areas. Swann in Love may well turn out to be a fihn best like by the critics. Charles Walker
BEAVER Thursday 17 May 1984
Fifteen
MUSIC
RIGHT TO READ Z
On Wednesday May Snd L.S.E. Ents in conjunction with ex-L.S.E. Social Secretary and tireless campaigner Andy Cornwall organised a benefit for the 'Right To Read Campaign'.
First on stage was Little Brother, whose appearance of a well scrubbed Police Cadet was quickly contradicted by a quick-fire alternative comic repartee and some excellent 'poems', the most memorable on H.M.S. Sheffield, 'Sam, Sam, pick up that Exocet'. Next came Hank Wangford, one of the great British eccentrics who makes a living parodying country music and has a sideline as a gynaecologist. It took a little while for the audience to realise where he was coming from, but they were inevitably won over by his subtle humour, the soaring vocals of 'Irma Cetas' and the fine fiddle playing of Bob Valentino (late of the odd-baJl punk band called the Fabulous Poodles). They were joined for a number by none other than Billy Bragg himself and left to warm applause. Next came Pauline Melville, who really did not seem to hit her stride and rise to the excellent heights she achieved when I last saw her. Her performance if patchy, was scattered with enough gems to carry the audience with her though.
After the interval Mark Miwurtz exploded on to the stage like a jumping jack, for sheer energy and enthusiasm he makes Alexi Sayle look like he's on valium. Again there were some uneven patches, probably while he fought for breath or to conquer concussion after continually flinging himself to the floor, but again the assembled throng were suitably impressed.
Then came the man most likely to. Straight in to 'Busy Girl Buys Beauty' and straight to the jugular with the multitude assembled at his feet. It really is quite amazing what Billy Bragg can do with a modest handfuU of chords and an overactive adrenal gland. There was a danger of everything sounding a bit samey after three numbers at full throttle with the voice and guitar locked in ferocious combat, but our
Bill has stage-craft as well, throwing in the beautifully stark 'Man In The Iron Mask' at just the right moment. Back to the South Altantic then with 'Island Of No Return' reminding us that Maggie's finest hour was no laughing matter for the poor bastards who did her election campaigning in the Falk-lands. All the favourites followed in short order moving to a close with 'Milkman Of Human Kindness' and 'New England' and the hilarious 'Route 66' parody 'A.13'.
An encore was of course inevitable, much to the chagrin of a long suffering Evening Dean and we were treated to Jackson Brown's 'You've Got The Power' and finally another from his own fair hand 'To Have And Have Not'.
Why you may enquire were all these fine people doing all this for no remuneration? Good question. In July 1982, 'Knockout Comics' and 'Airlift Books' were raided and such subversive articles as 'Fabulous Furiy Freak Brothers' and 'Fat Freddy's Cat' comics were confiscated, along with novels by William Burroughs Et AI which have been on public sale almost since the Judge trying the case was an adolescent.These along with manuals on how to grow your own cannabis or psiloybin mushrooms were deemed to be obscene under the Obscene Publications Act 1964. This is an unprecedented extension of an act which appears to condone the massive Pornography business you may have noticed a stone's throw from Bow St. Police Station, which it was originally designed to counter. Over the intervening two years the above mentioned companies and others throughout the country have been continually harassed by raids and confiscations and are now charged also with conspiracy to contravene the Misuse Of Drugs Act. So, added to loss of livelihood they now stand to loose their liberty and pay vast fines and costs.
When Cindy Snide, in her review of the previous Right To Read Benefit dismisses the horrendous
BILLY BBAG6 "STRAIGHT TO THE JUGULAR"
implications of this by saying "Its just a pity that they can't find a better issue to oppose the Government on than drugs...." it makes you realise why the L.S.E. Left are so often outwitted in debate. When you discover however that the Arts page editor had demanded a bad review in advance (Not True-Arts Ed.) because they don't like hippies
(True-Arts Ed.) - or what they, along with the 'News Of The World' assume to be hippies - it makes you wonder if we really need a reprer-sive government deciding what we can and cannot read. (Cont'd P.94) The 'Knockout Comics' trial began last week, reporting restrictions were not lifted!
Dave Bull
Bia MBAT EATER "MAKES ROCKY HORROR LOOK LIKE THE SOUUD OF MUSIC"
TOMMY CHASE QUARTET
Tommy Chase Quartet 3 Tuns
Where are you? I mean the Tuns was quite busy but not as packed as this great group deserved. They are definitely one of the hardest, hottest combos in the country at the moment. The phenomenal Alto player Alan Barnes played brU-.liantly and drummer Chase, pianist Nick Weldon and bass player Amy Kleyndert laid down wonderful solid jazz rhythm (Yeah man-Ed). Barnes' alto is rythmic and melodic, yet cuts through chche with a wild obsessive freedom as well. This man is destined for greater things than the Three Tuns Bar. A great night indeed, why weren't YOU there? P.S. Saw them again at the ICQ Club with James Moody on Monday and they were even hotter! I advise anyone with any interest in jazz to go and see this group.
Chunky
THE RAG BALL
Indians in Moscow Monochrome Set - LSE
I have to say Indians in Moscow weren't so hot; cracked actors pretending that they're NOT ALL THERE never really appealed to me. They stumbled, tripped on their own heels and finally fell flat on their faces. Too silly for words. WeU back to the bar then, boys and then "Help!" - so crowded - though not many from LSE, of course.
An^-way to the Monochrome Set and the Monochrome Set are wacky with a capital W. Which they duly-proved themselves to be, zooming off with "Jet Set Junta", forcing even the most reluctant foot into tapping mode. Bid crooned away; so cool, so lean, so sharp, a model of misplaced elegance. The rest of the band just sort of bounced around spiritedly, letting the flavour of their acid wit flood everywhere. Being realistic though, one has to say that they gave one of those tack performances that leave us hacks bleating that the good bits were pretty good and the rest was a bit samey. Such is life. After they had played out, they gave a balcony appearance to greet the assembled throng and all was roses. Then back to the Tuns for a video feast of Sixties kitsch.
All in all the Rag BaU had been, in Chairman Tony Smith's own words "Nie on fuckin' incredible". This was the night LSE ents got its ass in gear and the result was success unqualified.
James Bailey
Page Su.
BEAVER Thursday 17 May 1984
HALCYON DAYS FOR
MORRISS AND THE LSE
-BEAVER--
SPORT
CRICKET
Whilst the LSE football sides were busy in their pursuit of greater sporting and alcoholic fame, and the two rugby teams were happily frolicking amongst a scrummage of muddy bodies, a band of hopeful cricketers spent the winter at the Lord's indoor cricket nets, practising assiduously (oh?) for the coming season's fixtures.
No one is certain of LSE's prospects this season, although there have been encouraging signs in the opening three matches. It will be a considerable achievement if the 1st XI were to attain last year's feats when they reached the semifinals of the UAU Championships, and contained two very fine players in Stuart Waterton (now on the Kent staff) and Ahmed Sukhera of Pakistan. However, the Ist's invariably get through to the quarter-final stage of the UAU Championships.
The Jst XI is captained this season by Dave Castle, a batsman, who was a member of last year's exceptional side. Other stalwarts of the XI include Howard Shane (pace-bowler), Andrew Harvey (batsman), and John Sadler (wkt.-keeper/batsman). In addition, there are several 1st year cricketers: the most promising of which is Simon Hall, who scored a brilliant 64 against Essex University whilst carrying a crippling knee injury. The others include Tom Troy (bowler). Raj Tandon (batsman), and Robin Bull (spin). A potential match-winner was found in Tim Dawson, a 2nd year spin bowler, who took 6 loickets against Sussex University at Brighton and looks certain to stay in the 1st XI for the rest of the season.
iMst year, the 2nd XI did well in the UAU Championships getting through the round robin stage before being knocked out. This year, they are captained by Chris West, a man of considerable experience. The side includes sez'eral other veterans including Shoo Kabir and Martin Foley.
Cricket is the main sport played by the LSE in the summer, thus the fixture list is quite full. There are normally three games per week. The aim is for every member to play in at least one game although for the UAU matches, the best available sides are selected. In addition, there is a 'cricket week' after the examinations which includes the annual dinner. All the home matches are played on the grounds at Neiv Maiden where the groundsman, Brian, has done an excellent job in regularly preparing two fine wickets.
Following last year's successful tour of Bangladesh, the cricket club this year plan to go to India in September, where they will play a number of games. The touring team unll be joined by N. Brown
of Australia, who was captain of the 1st XI three seasons ago and will probably skipper the side. If the enthusiasm and spirit shown so far this season is an indicator at all, then the tour to India should be a highly enjoyable affair. Rajat Kohli
LSE 1st II V CITY UNIV Wednesday 2 May
In the first U. A.U game, LSE lost to a mediocre City side.
LSE batted first, but were soon in trouble on a cabbage patch with City called a wicket. After losing three quick wickets. Castle and Harvey played with
freat aplomb, mastering a good owling attack and a bad patch. After putting on nearly 50, both batsmen departed quickly: Castle for 20 and Harvey for a superb 29. The rest of the batting collapsed miserably with Newell as the only other batsman to make double figures. LSE were all out for 99.
When City replied they were quickly in trouble, losing a cricket second ball! Dawson and Bull bowled well and took five more wickets but it was too little too late to save the match. Tipper
LSE 1st II v SUSSEX Saturday 5 May
After Wednesday's debacle, LSE bounced back with a crushing one wicket win over a strong Sussex side.
Sussex batted first and were bowled out for 3, with Dawson taking six wickets and Bull three.
When LSE replied. Hall hit a very quick 31 against the faster bowlers. At 55 for 2 the win looked easy but the Sussex spin-nery started to take control, and it was left to Harvey, with a masterful 8 to show the rest of the team how to play an off-spinner well.
With one wicket left, Dawson hit Taved, the off-spinner, for five quick runs to make sure of victory.
Tipper
LSE RALLIED
BY MORRISS;
It was the type of victory of which the poets used to write. On Monday night in Whitechapel, Michael Mor-riss scored 24 points and Webb added 16 as the London School of Economics Basketball Team achieved an inspiring 86-75 comeback win over the London Hamlet Royals and advanced to the semifinals of the 1984 Capital League Championships.
With co-captain Tony Morrison out of action with a fractured hand and facing a loud and hostile crown, the LSE started out slowly and trailed 38-36 at halftime. Misfortune again struck the LSE in the first half as the other LSE co-captain and starting forward Steve Errico - who scored 16 points in the first half -sustained a knee injury and was taken to North London Hospital.
Faced with elimination, the LSE fought back. Morriss came alive at point guard to direct the LSE offence and score 24 points. Webb hit several key baskets inside as did LSE forward Perry Cameron, who scored 10 points. Forward Rick Barson and guard Bill Koenig each contributed 8 points.
The win was the 18th of the season for the LSE. The come-from-behind victory on Monday night put the LSE basketball team in the remaining elite - the final four teams in the Capital Championships. J.Lower
The L.S.E. ' netball season ended with two tournaments. We went to Canterbury to play in the Southern Universities. Tournament where we faced a very difficult task: most of the teams being of county standard. However, we made a good account of ourselves even though we were set back by the injury of Judith Burke during the first game. We started
He cradles the basketball with his right hand and faces the orange-shirted defender. With arms waving in his face, Michael Morriss dribbles the ball twice, then behind his back, switches the basketball from left hand to right and rifles a pass through a crowd of white and orange shirts. LSE forward Perry Cameron has cut to the basket from the far right corner and in a split-second the ball arrives with a smack into his outstretched hands. Cameron rises above two defenders, lays the ball in the basket, and is fouled. The LSE bench erupts. Amidst the shouts and yelling, Cameron sinks the foul shot and on his way down court claps Morriss' hand.
The next time down the court, Morriss receives the basketball on the other side. He fakes a pass underneath and with a hand thrust in his face, jumps above the defender and connects on a 20-foot jump shot. Two plays later, LSE guard Mike Lewis races down the court of a fast break and is quickly met by a back-peddling defender. Lewis veers left and tosses a pass to his right side. Morriss has run down the court and is not ready for the pass. When Lewis has released the pass, Morriss leaps in the air - and in one motion catches the ball, switches it from right hand to left, and then banks it into the basket. The LSE bench claps amidst the laughter. The opposing coach signals for a time out.
The 1983-84 basketball season has become one long highlight film for the LSE and Michael Morriss. As the London School of Economics Basketball team heads toward the 1984 London Capital League Championship, Morriss continues a 10-game stretch during which, according to one player, "Michael has put on a show." The show has become a command performance: in the last 10 LSE games, Morriss has averaged 24.3 points per game, scored more than 30 points on 6 occasions, and in his last 27 attempts from the free-throw line Morriss has not missed a single foul shot. Morriss has been, according to London referee David Lilley, "one of the smoothest players 1 have seen in a very long time."
well by beating U.C.L. but when lost narrowly to Kent, Warwick and Southampton. Warwick went on to win. The next week saw the London Tournament. Here we felt that we should have won and so broken U.C.L.'s monopoly of this event in recent years. The L.S.E. played both U.C.L. first and second teams, Bedford College, Goldsmith and Queen
The performance by Morriss comes at a particularly crucial time for the LSE. Though it carries a record of 17 wins and only 8 defeats and is considered to be one of the best teams throughout Great Britain, the LSE has been hit hard by injuries to team starting forwards and co-captains Steve Errico and Tony Morrison. Errico is out for the season with a knee injury; Morrison may play with a heavily-taped hand in the Capital Championships. Errico's absence will be a major factor as he has averaged 21.7 points on the season and has rebounded strongly. Several players point to the loss of his court leadership and the chemistry between Errico and Morriss. "With the two of them on the court together," remarked one player, "no team can stop us."
No one has stopped Morriss all season long. Remaining healthy, Morriss has started every LSE game and with a scoring average of 22.7 points per game, he is the leading scorer in London. In our brief interview with him, Morriss him.self shunned any discussion of individual averages and seemed more interested in discussing films and a book he was reading on Keynes. He did talk about the Capital League Championships which he believes the LSE can win. He also had praise _ for the LSE coaching staff of Errico, Morrison, and Dave Grimes.
Teammates and opposing players exhibit no reticence in discussing Morriss' performance. One has referred to it simply as "showtime." Another mentioned the University-Athletics Championships at Sussex University in which Morriss averaged nearly 30 points per game and in the quarterfinals scored a tourna-ment-record 44. "1 have never seen someone score that many points," one player said, "not even on the television."
The enclosed story is one which 1 was asked about all year and was advised to follow up.
The story may be a feature or straight sports. None the less, as 1 have learned throughout my reporting of sports this year, it has been a remarkable season for both Morriss and the LSE basketball team.
J. Lower
Elizabeth College, beating them all quite convincingly. Yet, in the final, we face U.C.L. again and lost by one goal. The team played with a great deal of spirit and should be proud of their performance, not only in this tournament but for the whole of the season.
Helen Fogg
NETBALL TOURNAMENT


44- W ' 91
IS A M«J£>R IMt-riAT\f£
" THe (VHObL.*
-rxMT I4IHIN6 -rue PoKrs
iiM
f-on PKACS
"As T>1£ PRFS'DENTS BOJ>y I -nrrAtLY
Wi-rn THE	.....



... Oil^AKDIKC, HIM F-^oH
AssMfrrts' BULLSTS.—
S eth/6, tMf PRffs

..k£ef»NC THC





Bo>tee>.
T/Mff STOAlfS. "
Prophetic Poem		
	THE KETTLE r A11 lyi^ Tuc	
	vALLIiiU IriC POT BLACK?	
	Since the American, Seeing Afghanistan, Did not go To Moscow To run. Will the Russian ignore L.A. in eighty-four To protest "How The West Was Won"? N. Racine-Jaques, 1980	
Publisheii in the Cnimleii atui St Paiicrns Chronicle 5, J9S0.