INEOS set to close Grangemouth Refinery in Scotland

For my five penny worth, most of our problems stem from the end of WW2. Suddenly our company order books were over flowing. We were rebuilding the flattened European factories. The money was rolling in, so workers, shareholders all wanted more. Bosses were so week minded they paid it, government didn't help as they needed more money for Nationalization of various Companies, and to rebuild our wrecked Towns and Cities. they also wasted money trying to keep an Empire we could no longer afford, so they upped taxes. Then when the new and up to date European factory's came back on line, we were in no state to compete with them, as no real modernisation had taken place, and the monies to do so was all gone. So now we don't have any real manufacturing jobs left. Who is to blame? the whole British people has to take there share of it, all the way down from the top.
George
in Sothampton

Brian,you have mentioned Harold Wilson and the Lima Agreement on here many times and put that down to the demise of this country.Some time ago someone on here said that they had searched for the information that you give out and could find no reference to Harold Wilson and his hand in the Lima Agreement.I searched yesterday after you having brought up the subject again and I too was unable to access any information on what you say.What I did find out was that it appeared Australia came off worse that anyone.Where can I access the info on Wilson and the Lima Agreement.
Regards.
Jim.B.

I see on the news that Mr McCluskey is now claiming to be the saviour of all the jobs in Grangemouth! this man certainly has a brass neck, I do hope his members can see through him, he was saying, 'WE will not ALLOW the company to close' WE will not ALLOW thousands of jobs to disappear' and there were many other instances of 'WE will not ALLOW' the best one of all 'WE will not ALLOW this company to destroy Scottish aspirations'. I think he his coming dangerously close to the owner (a multi millionaire) saying 'up yours McCluskey, you had your chance'

Hi Jim
here is part of the United Nations , Lima Agreement, Britain was one of the signatories of it, which was signed up to by Harold Wilson, or his Representative in the UN when he was PM in 1975, regarding the transfer of technology, Industry and so on from the major Industrial nations to less well off developing nations.
You are right that Australia was also one of the nations to sign up to it and suffered as we did. The USA did not sign up to it. See Number 35 to 37 below.
and then we were flooded with goods from Hong Kong, Taiwan and others.
Cheers
Brian.



LIMA DECLARATION AND PLAN OF ACTION ON INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND CO-OPERATION, 1975.

Adopted by Second General Conference of UN Industrial Development Organisation, Lima, 26th March 1975. (pp631-649)


Selected extracts from the text of the Lima Declaration and Plan of Action on Industrial Development and Co-operation.

(pp 631)

A Declaration:

1 The Second General Conference of the United Nations Industrial Development Organisation, convened by General Assembly resolution 3087 (XXVIII) of 6 December 1973, entrusted with establishing the main principles of industrialisation and defining the means by which the international community as a whole might take action on a broad nature in the field of industrial development within the framework of new forms of international co-operation, with a view to the establishment of a new economic order.

adopts

the LIMA DECLARATION ON INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND CO-OPERATION.

(pp 633)

SOLEMNLY DECLARE

23. Their firm conviction of the role of industry as a dynamic instrument of growth essential to the rapid economic and social development of the developing countries, in particular of the least developed countries;

(pp 635)

32. That every state has the inalienable right to exercise freely its sovereignty and permanent control over its natural resources, both terrestrial and marine, and over all economic activity for the exploitation of these resources in the manner appropriate to its circumstances, including nationalisation in accordance with its laws as an expression of this right, and that no state shall be subjected to any forms of economic, political or other coercion which impedes the full and free exercise of that inalienable right;

33. That the principles set out in the Charter of the Economic Rights and Duties of States must be fully implemented. Consequently, it is the right and duty of all states, individually and collectively, to eliminate colonialism, apartheid, racial discrimination, neo-colonialism, occupation and all forms of foreign aggression, and domination and the economic and social consequences thereof, as a prerequisite for development. States which practise such policies are responsible to the countries territories and peoples affected for restitution for full compensation for the exploitation and depletion of, and damage to, the natural and other resources of these countries, territories and peoples. It is, in addition, the duty of all states to extend assistance to theses countries, territories and peoples;

35. That special attention should be given to the least developed countries, which should enjoy a net transfer of resources from the developed countries in the form of technical and financial resources as well as capital goods, to enable the least developed countries in conformity with the policies and plans for development, to accelerate their industrialisation;

36. That developing countries with sufficient means at their disposal should give careful consideration to the possibility of ensuring a net transfer for financial and technical resources to the least developed countries;

37. That special emphasis should be laid on the need of the least developed countries for the establishment of production facilities involving a maximum utilisation of local human resources, the output of which meets identified material and social requirements, thus assuring a convergence between local resource use and needs as well as offering adequate employment opportunities;

A U turn in the offing........ by the union. Let's hope it's excepted

In reply to George #31 yes the west became complacent after the war, so much work about and a shortage of workers. It was the same here in Oz, migrants stepped off the ship and straight into a job such was the demand for workers. Then the unions began to get a bit greedy and demanded outrageous wage rises which at the tiem employers were willing to pay. The concept of long service leave began in an effort by companies to keep good staff. For a while it worked, then slowly by the late 70's early 80's it began to fall apart. A recession saw many companies cut wages back to award levels which in some cases was up to 15% below the level some employees were recieving. Then we had the ALP/Union accord which resulted in a general wage rise twice a year for three years. That was the nail in the coffin for many companies and the drift to off shore began. Now ew have three motor manufacturing companies all looking for hand outs from the gov, they cannot compete with overseas car manufacturers who often produce a better quality car at a lower price. Where will it all end, at the end of a very long dole queue I fear.

Its just been announced Grangemouth is to remain open, with huge investment by the owner, good news for a lot of people, and hope lessons learned KT

Yes good news indeed that the plant is staying open common sense has prevailed.I'm glad that Len McCluskey threw in the towel and did a U-turn he realised he was in a no win situation and there was nothing else he could do but advise the members to accept what the company put on the table.
Regards.
Jim.B.

Does he think like that Jim , or does he believe he has negotiated a reasonable settlement

Len McCluskie is as daft as his dad, Sam.
Brian.