Paul Kenny says we’d be “lucky” to get 10% of GMB members opting-in to the party – might such low take-up end the union link by default?

July 10, 2013 10:19 am

GMB General Secretary Paul Kenny told the Today Programme this morning that:

“I think, anticipating, that we will now have to ballot our members, so we can comply with what Ed wants, I think we’d be lucky if 10% of our current affiliation levels say yes, they want to be members of the Labour party. Campaigning for the Labour party and being members of the Labour party are two entirely different things.”

That backs up what I suggested on Monday evening, when I wrote:

It’s unclear whether or not the party – or the unions for that matter – are set up politically, organisationally or culturally to conduct what will effectively be a mass membership drive for the party within the Trade Unions. To succeed , it will also need the tacit support of the trade unions themselves in encouraging their members to affiliate to the party. There is no small amount of pessimism amongst many in the unions that this will work. One trade union official last night told me they feared this would be looked back on as the moment where the party ran out of money…

Worse – if only hundreds of thousands (or tens of thousands) of affiliated trade unionists opt-in to being individual party affiliates, it would not only hit the party coffers (and the party’s already constrained ability to run a general election campaign), but could also risk the ending of the union link by default. It would be very hard for any union to justify continued party affiliation if only a small fraction of their membership choose to affiliate. If the party is no longer affiliated to millions of ordinary working people, it could be the end of the party not just in financial terms but also as a party of Labour too.

Is Ed Miliband happy to have only tens of thousands of trade unionists affiliated to the party? And if so, is this really mending the union link? Or might it be ending it by default?

  • rekrab

    What a mess, an absolute spectacular O.G from Ed.

  • John Ruddy

    I think it says more about the GMB if they could only get 10% of their levy-paying members to contribute to the Labour party – ie current union policy.
    Len McClusky at UNITE seems to think he will get most of his levy-payers to do so.
    I suspect the answer will be somewhere in between.

    • http://twitter.com/waterwards dave stone

      “says more about the GMB”

      No, it says most about the Labour Party and its disconnection from the priorities and experiences of ordinary people.

    • Redshift1

      This really depends on the detail of these proposals. If we assume Ed’s position is as straightforward as it looks and it all gets rammed through without any negotiation then Paul Kenny is probably right. If a more sensible and workable method is negotiated then Len McCluskey is probably right.

      I think all it says is that Len thinks of this as a proposal that’s up for negotiation, whilst Kenny is commenting on the proposal as it stands.

  • XerxesVargas

    Why has Ed painted himself into this corner? Falkirk is no reason to challenge the link with the unions. It may be an argument to look at selection procedures. But again that is not an issue just for Labour.

    In two major ways the Labour party has folded in front of the Tories and it’s press – in not vigorously challenging the idea that Labour’s profligate spending got us into the financial mess and now with this issue on party funding. They should meet this head on, its not like the Tories are on a firm footing with their opaque city funding. Instead he rushes into a decision which could see the party weakened, possibly fatally.

  • Mike Homfray

    I really don’t think we can defend a strong union link if so few are unwilling to positively agree to a measly 3 quid a year. I’d suggest the GMB get working on explaining to people why its a good idea. Far more than 10% of their membership vote Labour.

    • rekrab

      Well, Well, that’s a shift from left to right Mike? are you sure Ed is defending the link?

      • Mike Homfray

        Absolutely sure – and I’ve always been consistent. I’m on the left of the party, but I broadly support Ed. That doesn’t mean I agree with everything, and I was concerned by the tone of the initial speech which was, however, badly misreported in the press.
        But the proposals make sense to me. I would like to downsize political spending and that does mean an opt-in. However, unless the Tories are willing to do without their big-money backers, there is nothing in these proposals to prevent money being given to Labour.
        The Unison model works well.

  • Redshift1

    There clearly needs to be a bit of negotiation here. Ed stated what he wants. Len’s more than happy with a review but stated he doesn’t want an end to the opt-out. Paul Kenny is making grave warnings about Ed’s proposals. David Prentice is kind of show-casing the Unison model. We have one former GS saying this hasn’t been thought through. Another one saying he’ll help try and implement Ed’s ideas.

    I think most party activists want to retain the union link, maintain union influence on the party rather than decrease it, and yet find easier and more direct ways of communicating and getting all the trade union levy-payers involved in the party. Ed’s clearly going too far in his initial proposals if you take that view but the idea that we change the system is one that I think members are at least open to persuasion on if it is done properly. Isn’t the solution for say, Iain McNicol to chair a meeting with Ed’s team and all the affiliated union General Secretaries and hammer out something that is workable and has clear detail on how it would change each union’s relationship with the party?

  • Alex Otley

    Miliband was so wrong to make the ‘opt-in’ a line in the sand. He’s basically accepted the right wing narrative that the collective nature of trade unions is wrong. Can only hope that the unions are able to negotiate something with him.

    • reformist lickspittle

      He hasn’t done any such thing, of course.

      Am getting a bit tired of the relentless, nihilistic negativity on here tbh.

  • MonkeyBot5000

    The reason you’d have trouble getting 10% support is that the Labour Party no longer represent us.

Latest

  • Featured The Labour Party is a moral crusade or it is nothing – and now’s the time to fight.

    The Labour Party is a moral crusade or it is nothing – and now’s the time to fight.

    Every day matters. Every single day between now and 7th May, thousands and thousands of Labour activists will be out on the doorsteps fighting this general election one street at a time. But through the cold and the rain and the dark nights, this fight isn’t just about the Labour Party, it’s about the millions of people we got into politics to represent. It’s about the people whose doors we knock on – the young woman worried about whether her […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Future Jobs of Britain: Ensuring everyone has a stake

    Future Jobs of Britain: Ensuring everyone has a stake

    We believe a Britain where everyone can do well for themselves and achieve their aspirations – where the next generation does better than the last – is the right vision for Britain.  We can only realise this goal if we build an economy which raises living standards for all working people, not just a few at the top. We certainly haven’t seen this under a Tory led Government, but we are clear that this is the destination of the next […]

    Read more →
  • News Labour announce they’ll break “the stranglehold” big private bus operators have over services

    Labour announce they’ll break “the stranglehold” big private bus operators have over services

    Labour have announced that they would stop five companies from dominating the bus service market, by making it easier for not-for-profit operators to run services. At the moment, Stagecoach, Arriva, Go-Ahead, First Group and National Express control 72% of local bus services. It’s said, Labour are looking at groups such as Hackney Community Transport – a social enterprise that provides transport to London and certain areas of Yorkshire. Founded in 1982, the company has no shareholders and looks to invest […]

    Read more →
  • Comment ‘I would have been angry too’

    ‘I would have been angry too’

    Labour needs to learn to let go, says Jim McMahon in exclusive interview with Liz Kendall and Steve Reed for their new pamphlet with Progress ‘If we had gone into marriage guidance counselling at that point,’ says Jim McMahon of the relationship between Oldham council and its residents two years ago, ‘the counsellor might have said: “Do you know what, it might just be time to part ways”.’ Oldham was not, says the man who has led it since May […]

    Read more →
  • News Majority of LabourList readers agree with statement from left-wing MPs

    Majority of LabourList readers agree with statement from left-wing MPs

    At the start of this week, 15 MPs issued a statement calling for an alternative to Labour’s current deficit reduction plans, a policy that would see the railways returned to public ownership and a more robust collective bargaining powers for workers, including better employment rights in the workplace. These proposals are not Labour policy and it’s unlikely that they will be before the election (or at least the first two won’t make it into the manifesto). But what do LabourList […]

    Read more →