Workers of the World? Unite

Unite. It’s a word that is associated with the biggest division in Britain’s Labour Party since the Blair/Brown infighting of the New Labour era. An issue based on the alleged malpractice by the UK’s largest trade union in the selection of Labour’s candidate in the Scottish constituency of Falkirk has turned into a heated debate about the very purpose of Labour. The Conservative-led Coalition has made no attempt to conceal its delight as the Opposition’s united front fell away within hours, with a corresponding slump in Labour’s poll lead.

It is alleged that Unite the Union block-purchased Labour membership for hundreds of its members living in the Falkirk constituency, where the Constituency Labour Party (CLP) was selecting its candidate for the 2015 general election. All the members of a CLP can vote in the selection process. It is permitted for affiliated trade unions to pay the first year’s membership subscription to the Labour Party on behalf of their own members, but only with the individuals’ knowledge and consent. It is further claimed that Unite signed up their members to Labour without telling them, with the intention of using their votes to guarantee victory for a union-friendly candidate, Karie Murphy.

Unite the Union denies any wrongdoing and accuses senior figures within Labour of conducting a “smear campaign” against it. Len McCluskey, general secretary of the trade union, has argued that Labour should welcome its efforts to bring more members into the Party and to promote the working class that has become such a small minority in the current generation of Labour MPs. “I make no apologies for that. Unite is proud that it is trying to reclaim Labour from the people that bought in to the free-market myth wholesale, who bet the country’s future on the City of London – and who sometimes fiddled their expenses while they were at it.” In the storm of allegations and counter allegations that have been made, Unite did get their wish for an independent inquiry into Falkirk, but perhaps with a little more bite than they were expecting: on 4^th July Ed Miliband referred the case to the police.

That is the controversy that is the root of the damage. One trade union supposedly tried to rig a candidate selection vote. What is just as damaging to Labour is how it has reacted. The Blairite tendency, comprising figures such as Peter Mandelson and Douglas Alexander have furiously fed stories to the media that in essence point to a radical left entryist conspiracy that mirrors the danger posed by Militant in the 1980s. Open calls for Labour to expel the fifteen affiliated trade unions have been made, with the argument that the public will see Labour as being ‘in the pocket of Len McCluskey’ if it fails to break links. However, this has provoked what can only be described as fury from grassroots members, who say that an historic split would make Labour distant from the working people it was created to serve.

For a while, it appeared that Ed Miliband was siding with the right-wingers. Instead of countering Conservative jibes about Labour’s dependence on trade unions, Miliband chose to remain silent. Instead of pointing out that the Tories have taken over £80,000,000 in donations from the City, and Boris Johnson has spent more time as Mayor of London wining and dining bankers than talking to ordinary Londoners, Miliband chose to remain silent. Instead of defending with pride the fact that Labour is funded and accountable to workers rather than big business, Miliband chose to announce a ‘review’ of that link.

It is often said that Miliband owes his position to union bosses. This fallacy is based on a misunderstanding of the electoral college that Labour uses to elect its leader. It was not a secret meeting of trade unionists conspiring over beer and sandwiches in a smoky room that chose the Leader of the Opposition. In a tight leadership election, the trade union members who make up one third of the electoral college delivered a slender majority for Ed Miliband over his brother. Perhaps it is this which has inspired Miliband’s latest change of position.

Instead of throwing away the constructive and mutually beneficial alliance, Miliband wants to give union members more influence within Labour at the expense of general secretaries like Len McCluskey. That is regarded by some as the perfect solution: it prevents a repeat of the Falkirk affair, it demonstrates a tough line, it promotes progressive policies within a more representative Party, and above all prevents the vested interests within the Conservative Party and the City of London succeeding in breaking up the labor movement forever. But it will only work if accompanied by a sea change in the mentality of Labour’s leadership. Labour’s association with members of the workers’ alliances which did- and do- so much to improve the lives of so many people is not something to be ashamed of: it is a badge of honor to be worn with pride. The days in which selling out to the ultra-rich was the only way of securing political credibility are long gone. The people want their politics back. The times are a’ changing and Labour must change with them.