'Labour to explore historic break from trade unions'

[Danelectro]

LabourList

If the union link ends, so might the Labour Party

There will have been a collective intake of breath across the Labour Party – and the trade unions – this morning at the Guardian’s headline “Ed Miliband to explore historic break with trade unions”. After the past week, that would have been the latest and most damaging escalation of hostilities between the party and the union and a vast over-reaction to what is still confined to a debate about one party selection (or at most, a handful of selections). The Labour Party and the unions have worked together for over 100 years since the latter created the former. A row over a party selection – however serious, and this is very serious indeed – will not be cause for the end of the Labour-Union link.

Fortunately Ed Miliband agrees. A senior Labour source told us this morning:

“It’s nonsense. Ed will speak about the way he wants to lead party in future but we are proud of the link with 3 million people.”

Now that’s a carefully worded statement, because by referring to “3 million people” rather than “the trade unions”, there’s some credence given to the substance of the Guardian story. Because despite the headline, what the mysterious “former cabinet minister” suggests in the Guardian is that there should be one category of union members. That could just as easily mean bringing affiliated, levy paying trade unionists into the party as full members – which although controversial and radical, would not constitute a break with the unions, far from it. Another alternative would be to reintroduce the affiliated membership status for affiliated trade unionists. That appears to be a position that has support amongst the unions, as TULO (the body that brings together Labour’s affiliated trade unions) recommended in their “Refounding Labur” submission that:

“The time has come to restate the federal structure of the Labour Party within our rules through an explicit definition of affiliated membership as per the original Clause 2 of the rulebook”

So there are options out there if Miliband wants to alter the precise relationship between the party and the unions – although it’s not clear how that wold be a proportionate response to the Falkirk farrago. Rather, it would be seen as a response to the agenda of the right wing press and the Tory Party.

Yet what is becoming clear – and perhaps this is what the Guardian’s headline writer was reflecting this morning – that there are those in the Labour Party – although not Miliband himself – who are agitating for a wholesale end to Labour’s link with the trade unions. To do so would quite possibly be the end of the Labour Party as we know it. From a purely financial point of view, the Labour Party receives a large proportion of its income in affiliation fees from affiliated unions (note – these aren’t donations, they’re not negotiable, if the union is affiliated these fees must be paid). Without money coming in from millions of union members, the already tightly squeezed Labour Party budget becomes unsustainable. The Party couldn’t run an election campaign. Basic administration would prove difficult. The only alternative would be to rely on a small number of wealthy donors, rapidly scale up small donors or revisit public funding of political parties. Neither looks likely in the short term. End result? Bankruptcy and the end of the Labour Party.

But let’s say that – somehow – the party managed to break the link without a complete financial meltdown. Can a party that has broken from organised Labour and removed a direct link between itself and millions of working people really call itself the “Labour” Party? Instead we’d become a European Social Democractic Party – and for some that would be ok. But that kind of rootless, vague, metropolitan type of politics doesn’t really do it for me. The Labour Party’s politics have never been truly socialist or social democractic, but workerist – Labourist – and ending the link would quite probably shatter that forever.

If Ed Miliband wants to make the case for “reforming” the union link, he’ll need to make the case for what justifies such a change – besides right wing rhetoric – and how such reform might benefit the party.

But if he – or anyone else – wants to make the case for ending the union link, they can do it over my dead body. And quite possibly the dead body of the Labour party.

[chrisj]

It is about time too. If people want to support and vote for Labour (or any other party), they should do so off their own back; not as a conglomerate.

It might make a bit of difference to the funding of political parties but if the Lib Dem had been listened to, the cost of politiking should have been reduced or capped and the govt itself should contribute towards the funding rather leave it to rich donors, hedge funds, powerful lobbyist and the Trade Union.

If Labour breaks their close ties with the Union, does it mean they will suddenly become a Tory party or do any worse than New Labour (partial tories)? And will it really affect your voting?

I will never vote for the Tories! So no argument there.

[fishtank]

It is about time too. If people want to support and vote for Labour (or any other party), they should do so off their own back; not as a conglomerate.

Since the Labour Party was founded by the unions to represent the interests of working-class people it kind of makes its continued existence sans union link pretty pointless and very unlikely.
They know that,we know that,nothing will change of significance.

[DirtyHarry]

A sign of these idiotic times, that even something as outrageous as breaking all ties with the working class, could be deemed at all possible.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

There is an argument that the Labour Party is already disenfranchising the Unions anyway with their failed promise to overturn some of the Anti-Union Laws and their attacks on workers when they strike.

My own political belief is that there isn't much difference between the tories and labour, the further the Tories move to the right, the futher to the right they seem to pull Labour. Okay when Kinnock was in charge they were unelectable, but at least they offered a real alternative instead of a semantic alternative.

vote-labour-blue.jpg

But then I am a looney lefty militant according to some.

[pokos27]

labour the party that started dsa at royal mail

[dvbuk55]

But then I am a looney lefty militant according to some.

Only to some?

[Groundpounder]

It is time the labour party was made to see who they are supposed to represent . My humble opinion is they are just watered down tories ,after Mandelson I stopped my Political levy , in the last election they came knocking at my door and believe me when I say he got it well and truly in the neck , they could hear me across the street just a pity it wasn't Mandelson at the door. We don't live in a democracy anymore just a rich boys only club.

[dvbuk55]

It is time the labour party was made to see who they are supposed to represent . My humble opinion is they are just watered down tories ,after Mandelson I stopped my Political levy , in the last election they came knocking at my door and believe me when I say he got it well and truly in the neck , they could hear me across the street just a pity it wasn't Mandelson at the door. We don't live in a democracy anymore just a rich boys only club.

Quite difficult to represent anyone if you're unelectable - remember the wilderness years with Foot and Kinnock?

[Wessex]

Labour do not represent me and haven't for years.In my opinion half of them actually despise British working people.They just need our votes at elections.They won't be getting mine again anytime soon.I
think the CWU should have kicked them into touch some years ago.

[Danelectro]

It is time the labour party was made to see who they are supposed to represent . My humble opinion is they are just watered down tories ,after Mandelson I stopped my Political levy , in the last election they came knocking at my door and believe me when I say he got it well and truly in the neck , they could hear me across the street just a pity it wasn't Mandelson at the door. We don't live in a democracy anymore just a rich boys only club.

Quite difficult to represent anyone if you're unelectable - remember the wilderness years with Foot and Kinnock?

Aye a bit like Labour were at the last election-'totally unelectable' was that because they went on a socialist crusade for 13 years?

..So which of the policies that the likes of unite are trying to put forward would make labour unelectable? all of them?some of them? to believe that anything that comes out of a left leaning think tank is poison is music to whose ears?

So the Blairites and the political realists win again and Miliband has his clause 4 moment by bashing the unions so Labour claim their centre right credentials and we all live happily ever after in a no boom no bust land of milk and honey...and then they lose the next general election...what then? would the case be that their centre right credentials are unelectable,would 2 general elections be wilderness years or would the answer be to suggest a cull of pensioners on state benefits in the next manifesto and wait for the votes to roll in.

[dvbuk55]

It is time the labour party was made to see who they are supposed to represent . My humble opinion is they are just watered down tories ,after Mandelson I stopped my Political levy , in the last election they came knocking at my door and believe me when I say he got it well and truly in the neck , they could hear me across the street just a pity it wasn't Mandelson at the door. We don't live in a democracy anymore just a rich boys only club.

Quite difficult to represent anyone if you're unelectable - remember the wilderness years with Foot and Kinnock?

Aye a bit like Labour were at the last election-'totally unelectable' was that because they went on a socialist crusade for 13 years?

..So which of the policies that the likes of unite are trying to put forward would make labour unelectable? all of them?some of them? to believe that anything that comes out of a left leaning think tank is poison is music to whose ears?

So the Blairites and the political realists win again and Miliband has his clause 4 moment by bashing the unions so Labour claim their centre right credentials and we all live happily ever after in a no boom no bust land of milk and honey...and then they lose the next general election...what then? would the case be that their centre right credentials are unelectable,would 2 general elections be wilderness years or would the answer be to suggest a cull of pensioners on state benefits in the next manifesto and wait for the votes to roll in.

They don't lose government by having a poor manifesto - they lose it for having been poor whilst governing and people become disillusioned with their previous party of choice whichever party it is. If you want leftist policies and militancy then be prepared to stand on the side-lines in eternam.

[Danelectro]

They don't lose government by having a poor manifesto - they lose it for having been poor whilst governing and people become disillusioned with their previous party of choice whichever party it is. If you want leftist policies and militancy then be prepared to stand on the side-lines in eternam.

eternam,thats a long time.Ed balls cant even tell you what the price of cheese will be next week.I just think the unelectable argument is getting as tiring as listening to some trad lefty defending the soviet union.Im more interested in why you think the Labour Party has any idea whats its doing and where its going and where they would be if they lost the next election.

IMichael Foot did warn the credit economy would go tits up so at least he got some of his predictions correct.There are some new ideas kicking around and just as in union agreements there are other alternatives and im not convinced that all are vote losers,so to trot out the militant tag any time anyone dares disagrees with what the 'experts' running the Labour party think does indeed not bode well for the people who are paying Labours election campaign bill.

The Blairites have been parachuting candidates for years and now the people who pay the bills decide to try get their man elected and they phone the bobbies and all so they can get back to 'vote for me- it will be nice'.

[dvbuk55]

eternam,thats a long time.

It certainly is but we'll see at the next election - the Tories will be out and Labour will be in, not on the strength of what they promise, not because of a loony left cabal, not because they are particularly electable............but merely because the Tories have proved to be incapable of governing especially with the Libs on board who will end up with fewer MPs than ever.

What exactly would you like the Labour Party to do? If not Labour then who - I mean can you see a million people in Trafalgar Square decrying the Crown and all authority to demand equality spontaneously.

[Danelectro]

I mean can you see a million people in Trafalgar Square decrying the Crown and all authority to demand equality spontaneously.

I cant see how the trade unions after playing the game through most of the Blair years can fall in behind the Labour party the way they did then .Some of the carrots available then and are not available now.Its a different ball game to 1997 and their very existence may be called into question if a tory/ukip fiasco is the result of the next election.The stakes are a lot higher.We will see how the cookie crumbles.