Cable’s fait accompli

By Darrell Goodliffe

Nobody should be surprised at the comments made by Vince Cable this morning for two reasons: a) he is only repeating what several senior coalition politicians have already said, he is far from the first to rattle the bars of the trade unions and b) the Liberal Democrats don’t, in general, like trade unions and see them as just another ‘vested interest’.

His position is a fait accompli. Its reported as being basically ‘play nice, or else’:

I know that strike levels remain historically low, especially in the private sector. On that basis, and assuming this pattern continues, the case for changing strike law is not compelling.

But he added: “Should the position change, and should strikes impose serious damage to our economic and social fabric, the pressure on us to act would ratchet up. That is something which both you, and certainly I, would wish to avoid.”

No sensible or indeed reasonably fair negotiations can take place with one side holding a gun to the others head so right from the off. Cable’s position is totally unreasonable. What is the point of having the right to strike but being told if you exercise it then it will be taken away? In that instance, you’re effectively removing the right in the first place in all but words. So, in saying he doesn’t want to do this – oh please don’t make me – he is doing what all Lib Dems have become experts in, lying through his teeth.

The right to strike is a fundamental and democratic one. It’s the right to withdraw your labour and a recognition that the employment relationship is mutually consensual, not forced. Let’s turn the tables, imagine the furore if Labour proposed that employers lose the right to dismiss employees? It’s argued that strikes impact people who have no say and that’s true but if it’s a private enterprise then they are choosing to consume in the affected area, so I have little sympathy. In the case of public and essential services then I agree, those striking have a wider responsibility and part of any strike action must be ensuring that no harm is done through that action.

Rather than leave it to management though I think those on strike should attend to this themselves and in doing so show to the public that they have legitimate concerns that need to be addressed but that they wont endanger them. Having said all that, we have to be totally clear that nobody takes striking lightly, that the reams of restrictions, the loss of earnings, especially in the current climate, make it the last resort of the desperate not the first resort of a gang of ‘red-eyed militants’.

It would be nice to see Labour respond to this latest episode with a clear and unequivocal defence of the right to strike. A clear statement that it’s a democratic right and that we, as a party, will not tolerate further restriction of it. Having said that I am not holding my breath waiting for this to happen lest I turn blue. If we can’t bring ourselves to utter those words I think we need to have a long, hard think about how far we have fallen as a party, not just in our commitment to represent the movement we were created to represent but in terms also of our commitment to basic democratic freedoms and defending them.