Labour faces an existential crisis. They know it, we know it
and David Cameron’s Government knows it. One item of yesterday’s Queen’s Speech
was particularly interesting and had a distinct whiff of opportunism about.
Could the proposed ‘Trade Unions Bill’ potentially compound any difficulties
the Labour party may have in pulling themselves up out of the dirt?
This newly proposed legislation aims to alter the so called ‘political
levy’ in a similar way to the 1927 Trade Union Act which was later repealed.
Currently trade unionists are offered, as part of their subscription to the
union, an option to ‘opt-out’ of donating to the affiliated party, Labour. The ‘Trade
Union Bill’ offers a move toward an ‘opt-in’ scheme for new subscribers. When
similar changes were made to the levy in 1927 the number of political levy
payers fell from 3.5 million to 2 million. Therefore Labour quite rightly fears
that a change of this sort would be catastrophe, especially during a time when
the party could do with a ‘leg up.’
I have to say however, I wonder whether this prospective
legislative change really needs to worry Labour at all, given the current
makeup of Westminster. Firstly, although ‘the Blues’ may have a slim majority
in the Commons, the House of Lords looks very different. Of a total 787 peers
only 226 are tooting the Tory horn. 179 are non-affiliated crossbenchers, most
of which have past ties with Labour or the Liberals, and any truly non-partisan
member of the second house has proven on prior occasion to fairly liberal
minded. Among such peers Government meddling in trade union business may very
well cause abstention to say the least.
Of course, there is the Salisbury-Addison convention. In
theory the naughty Lords shall not prevent the passage of any legislation, in connection
with a Government’s manifesto commitments. The convention however, only refers
to uninterrupted passage after the second reading stage of a bill. This offers
plenty of time for amendments from the lords contrary to the Government’s manifesto
intentions. Offering amendments of such a nature, contrary to the will of the Government
(so called ‘wrecking’ amendments) would offend the conventions purpose, as laid
out in a parliamentary committee review in 1999. However, that same review noted
that parliamentary conventions (in reference to the Salisbury convention) were,
‘flexible and unenforceable, particularly in the self-regulating atmosphere of
the Lords.’ More recently Liberal Democrat peers, since experiencing troubles
in Government regarding Lords reform, have made it quite clear that they are
not willing to stick to the convention; offering a change in the political
landscape as a reason for their misbehaviour. So, this said David Cameron’s
bill on the Trade Union’s may yet struggle to receive assent and even if it
does, it is unlikely that it will look anything like it did before it entered
the Lords.
As well as the having a powerful veto via those naughty
peers and any cross party alliances, the Labour Party’s worries regarding the
future of their finances are somewhat mitigated by the Tories themselves. Since
Cameron’s appointment in 2005 of ex-Labour MEP Richard Balfe, as envoy to the
Unions, relationships between Tories and Unionists have grown stronger.
Conservative MP Robert Halfon recently published a paper entitled, ‘Stop the
Union Bashing’ throughout which he sets out a conservative (with a small c)
approach to ensure his party embraces the idea of trade unionism. He paints a
vision of modern conservatism stating that, ‘so often unions on the ground
embody the Big Society, are community institutions, and offer invaluable
services to their members.’ I would suggest that he is not alone in his view on
the unions and some of his colleagues also see the Union’s as a force for good.
Colleagues such as Liam Fox, Matthew Hancock and Dominic Raab to name a few.
So, with a slim majority of only 12 in the Commons, a prospectively
unruly Lords, and a reforming Conservative Party perhaps altering It’s own
approach to the trade unions, I am not sure I would be worrying too much about
a future funding gap for Labour if I were in opposition. It only takes a few
dissenting voices in the Commons to undermine the Government and, well, the
Lords is ‘jam packed’ full of them.