The recent re-emergence of bygone debates by some about the Labour party and trade union link deems it necessary for me to begin with a short but significant history lesson. Traditionally, trade unions have not only negotiated and campaigned for better workplace rights but also championed a better deal for working people in wider society. Having campaigned to extend the franchise, the trade unions wanted a political party that working people could vote for to represent them. Consequently, just over one hundred years ago the trade unions created the Labour party in order to give a political voice to the values and aspirations of working people.
The Labour party – the clue is in the name – is the party of the unions and the party of the people that unions seek to represent and we should be proud of that historic link. A Labour party without the unions cannot be a Labour party, the best it can be is a social democratic party – and we all know the history lessons from the last such experiment in UK politics.
Some of Labour’s key achievements in government have made a real difference to union members, and the party benefits from having a direct connection to working people through the trade unions – without this link the party would be very much weakened.
The Labour party leader, Ed Miliband recognised the importance of this link in his interview with the Guardian this week, asserting that as a movement we have ‘got these union levy payers who link to working people in this country and we have got to be linked to them’. This link needs to be built on, not dismantled, as it offers a genuine and valuable means of keeping the Labour Party leadership in touch with a diverse and not insignificant swathe of the British public – nurses, teaching assistants, voluntary sector employees, construction workers, manufacturing workers and many more.
The current pressure point from some in the party seems to be the manner in which we presently elect our party leader. It is worth noting however, that the current electoral college system used by the Labour party is the same system that elected Tony Blair in 1994. The disquiet about trade union levy paying members getting an individual vote is bemusing – these people are the very people, along with those in their workplace and community that we want to vote Labour and need to re-engage with the Labour party if we want to win again.
Accusations that the trade union levy-paying members getting a vote is disproportionate and unfair are illogical and have no basis in fact. The current electoral system is broken down into three sections, with each section making up roughly 33 per cent of the vote. One section is made up of hundreds of MPs, another made up of thousands of Labour party members and the final comprised of hundreds of thousands of trade union levy-paying members. This means that one MP’s vote is worth the equivalent of hundreds of trade unionists votes.
Perhaps there are issues surrounding an individual being able to cast multiple votes but to change to a system of ‘one member, one vote’ which just includes Labour party members is both wrong and regressive. You don’t propose to extend democracy by arguing for a radical reduction in the electorate – how is it more democratic to disenfranchise thousands of UK citizens? In addition, how does it benefit the Labour party by disconnecting it from a broad range of sympathetic voters (and potential members)?
As we face the biggest cuts in a generation should we not be looking at ‘party reform’ as a means of addressing how we can better work together as a united movement? This is what we should be addressing, rather than making the wrong argument and giving out the wrong message about breaking the link. Far from being irrelevant, in the face of growing and formidable attacks on pay, pensions, conditions, jobs and services in the public and private sector, unions are becoming – and need to become – increasingly relevant. In light of this, we need to build upon the links between the Labour party and the unions, not dismantle them.
We don’t need to simply stand together as an effective opposition to challenge the ConDem cuts and convince the public of an alternative but to also work together in ensuring the sort of changes to the Labour party that encourages and engages trade union members in becoming more politically active.
It is true to say that together we are stronger as part of a much wider labour movement. A movement that has the same core values at its heart – fairness, equality and justice.
As a long term Conservative voter in fully agree with you Hannah.
Last comment no good, OK try again. Labour are now in deep debt so the Unions are needed but under a Miliband leadership the Union are not that important, he still thinks the levy must be used for labour, while the Unions have stated it can be paid to any party which backs the ethos of the party. Many of our Unions of left labour, the GMB funds the MP who back it’s plans and ideals, but does not back the party it’s self, it was a deal we did not to disaffiliate from the Party. Now of course with labour in so much debt it has to find money to fight the next election, but as Mandy said last night on TV, the Unions will pull new labour into a mire of returning the party to old days, I hope so…
The third paragraph said it all for me, why is social democracy such a tarnished phrase within the British Labour party? Social Democratic parties in western europe may be presently in the doldrums, but they achieved a great deal more for their people than our Labour party has managed over the past century and many of them have held the reigns power for much longer than Labour achieved in Britain. I’d like to make it clear, I write as someone who’s been a shop steward and convenor in the past and has every sympathy with union agendas about improving members lot in the workplace and beyond. However, I’m not a union member now and haven’t been for years as they just don’t have any reach into my present working/self employment arrangements. Yes I could join a Trade Union, but why? they can’t represent me, all I’d be joining one for is for the contribution to socail solidarity my membership would provide for others. Instead I’d rather be a Labour party member and make my contribition to social cohesion through the party itself. However, it does make me feel somewhat resentful that people who are not members of my party and in a large percentage of cases don’t support the Labour Party have a vote in our internal affairs as a party. This just doesn’t make sense! Why do we still have affiliated members; why can’t people just join the party as I have done; what’s the purpose behind some sort of semi-detached membership – are afflilated members ashamed of Labour? I don’t mind if Unions sign up Labour members on our behalf, but they should in my view be full members or not at all. I don’t even mind if Unions can offer their members a cheaper rate to join the party as an introductory offer perhaps, but full party membership is not expensive. The dubious scam of signing up affiliated members on the sly because we all know most members won’t be bothered to actively disengage part of their union dues from the affiliated fund really needs top stop. As for donations from the Union movement to the Labour party – well if Unions had a separate Labour members fund rather than an affiliated membership fund, then it would be clear these monies were for the Labour party and its activities controlled by its members. No voluntary organisation I know of just casually donates money to causes, events or activities without getting broad agreement from their members. It may transpire that some unions may wish to seek funds from their members to donate to other political parties. This would sadden me, but it is their right to do so provided they do it transparently, such a move would be none of my business.
The mistake Blair made in 1997 was to stop reform of the party when in power. He should have sidelined the unions then. It is wrong that they pay the piper and call the tune. They stymied too much of the New Labour project. The electorate will not stand for Union dominated Old Labour again. This coalition will hold its nerve and we will be crushed in 2015. Blair was the man and is still the best poltitcian in Britain by a long way. If Labour realign British politics after 2015 with Lib-Dems, they might see office again in 2020. The outlook for Labour is bleak, the unions and old left are to blame. They say Kinnock has got his party back, well he’s welcome to it. I say this with a very sad heart after 40 years in the party.
The unions will still be here long after this fluffy little Blairite band of hasbeens and neverbeens scuttle off to Mr Pledge or Mr Poshes Parties. To call Progress a right wing “Militant” is a fact. Give some of your millionares money to the official Labour Party. Blair’s not comming back!