Casino Politics – An unprecedented political gamble

On the day of the Big Meeting, with events having unfolded the way they have this week, it is only right that we fully address them today. The leader of the Labour Party, Ed Miliband has announced measures which could be set to fundamentally change the way the Labour Party and the Trade Unions interact and it is my worry that rather than it be a huge challenge it is an unprecedented political gamble.

At a time when the economy is stagnating and this government of the rich continues to slash public sector jobs and to attack the least well off in society, we have more need for cooperation than ever before. Is this really the time to risk the Labour movement as we know it; is it the time for casino politics?

Millions of people, up and down the country, are greatly suffering as a result of decisions made in Westminster by this Tory led coalition. A government with a steadfast determination to decimate all of the achievements a united Labour movement have won over the last hundred years. The daily attacks of this government on those who should be receiving the support and help of those in power shows us their true agenda. Only through cooperation can we stop them.

The goal of the party, as always must be to win the general election. Only by removing this government can we resoundingly put a stop to their monstrous actions. Only by working together as a unified body, Labour and Unions together, do we have any hope of achieving our goals. We have to get them out in 2015, we simply cannot afford, as a country, to leave the Tories with their hands on the levers of power. Does this week’s announcement leave this goal as uncertain?

One thing is for certain, the current relationship between the Trade Unions and the Labour Party is not what it seems. Had the Len McCluskey’s, Paul Kenny’s and Billy Hayes’s of this world held anywhere near as much sway with the Labour leadership as the Tories and the right wing press would have us believe, then the fundamental changes being explored would not have been thought of, never mind considered.

The Labour Party was founded by the Trade Unions as a voice for ordinary people to improve the lives of the majority in this country. Ordinary people needed a voice in Westminster to go hand in hand with their Union’s voice in the mines, shipyards and factories that they worked in. Though the workplaces have changed, this remains true today and we need to re build and re-strengthen that bond.

The Collins review could be just what we need to build a stronger Labour movement and to establish a new relationship between the party and the trade unions. We need to clearly define the roles of both the party and the unions, understanding each other’s role in the industrial and the political spheres in which they naturally operate and importantly where their roles converge and interact.

We need to work together, to leave no stone unturned in order to build a functioning modern link for the 21^st century. A link in which each partner understands their role and the role of their counterpart. A link where, through cooperation, we defend what the Labour movement has built during the 20^th century, the NHS, universal education, the welfare state. A link where, through cooperation, we build the national institutions of the 21^st century, meeting the aspirations of millions of ordinary people.

The link between the Trade Unions and Labour is the link which connects the party, with a membership of 200,000, to millions of ordinary working people across Britain. Millions of people, paying literally pennies a week to the political fund which in turn funds the party.

If we are going to examine the cleanest money in politics, surely it’s time some of the murkiest came under scrutiny too?

As a party we are indebted and should be immensely proud that the contributions of ordinary men and women fund us.  It is the donations of doctors, nurses, cleaners, crossing guards, teachers and others that are the lifeblood of our party. With funding from ordinary working people, who pay pennies a week to the Labour Party and who already have the opportunity to “opt out”, if they wish, it seems ironic that we are the target of attacks on funding.

Surely it’s time we looked into the Conservative Treasury. What lurks within will undoubtedly be the scandal at the heart of politics. How many Conservative donors have been given a tax cut by the government of the rich? How many Conservative donors have business interests which have benefitted by the backdoor privitisation of the NHS? How many Conservative donors have benefited by the squeeze on wages and benefits, driving the poorest into the arms of legal loansharks?

These are the kinds of questions that should be asked, are these not the national outrages? Not the fact that Ed Miliband and Len McCluskey might agree that the NHS should not be privatised or that Ed Miliband and Paul Kenny might agree that zero-hours contracts are an abuse of workers’ rights.

Surely too, its time, if we are to ask union members whether they will “opt in” to the political fund, we look at the businesses who donate to parties. Perhaps it’s time shareholders were consulted before their potential dividends are diverted to the Tory party coffers?

If we are tackling the cleanest money in politics, it’s surely time to shine a light into the murkier corners of the political funding and to hold to account those financiers who are enriched by decisions made in government.

The scandal at the heart of British politics is not in the trade union and Labour Party relationship. The real scandal is hidden away from public view, in the corners of Tory HQ, where donations lead to their benefactors becoming enriched at the expense of the very people who pay pennies a week to fund the Labour Party.

Ian Lavery is the Labour MP for Wansbeck, chair of the Parliamentary Trade Union group and former President of the NUM