The link is positive for Labour

To start by saying the Labour Party/Trade Union link is far from perfect might seem like mealy mouthed fence sitting given the current state of the debate on the relationship between Labour and the trade unions. But it would be difficult to be in favour of the link – which I am – and claim everything about it is perfect.

Once past the historical fact that the Labour Party was formed predominantly by the trade unions to forward policies that favoured the working class and TU members (‘the many not the few’ as we would say now) – for social actions which could not be advanced by industrial organisation alone, the reason for the  closeness is as extant today as it was then and certainly legitimate reason for organisations of masses of working people to be affiliated to the only party which is on their  side.

This is not to deny that TU membership is down historically, in particular that the vastly reduced industrial landscape has depleted the numbers of blue collar trade unionists.

My observation – as a Labour Party organiser of 36 years and a Party member for over 50 – and always as a Trade Union member  – is that Labour’s association with the TUs is a positive for  us. Not a negative as is currently apparently being presumed not just by the Tories but by some of our own members. At every turn we should ask ourselves ‘in a democratic society, what could their possibly be to object to in organisations of working people – paying their subscriptions, electing their officials -banding together to mutually protect themselves?’

Are lots ordinary people who unquestionably see the Labour Party and the TUs as being on their side about to see that link damaged?

For my part I have always observed the trade unions as a conduit of working people into Labour where they might hope to see political aims being achieved. A sharing of values!

But understand me: I am not claiming to have witnessed mass participation in the Labour Party in the south of England – although better in London and the industrial towns. What I have seen is an important element of ‘real’ working class people coming in as delegates, councillors and party workers as well as members, encouraged at shop floor and branch level to have their say in the Party – not moaning outside politics.  This participation – by supporting Labour both generally and specifically – represents I believe – in actions, words and deeds – a hinterland of others perhaps less confident, less articulate, and thus less active, who otherwise would see political activity (and often trade union activity for that matter) as being not for them. Remember, every open association with Labour is multiplied by family and friends in effect saying – to coin a phrase – ‘I’m Labour because Labour is the Party of the working man’.

In the current political mood of contempt for politicians and politics that relationship can contribute – in the future as I am sure it has in the past – to showing the relevance of  politics.

And for the Party, to have the regular contact of the union magazine dropping through the letter box reminding members why they joined and of the Labour link. Or the contact – directly or by word of mouth – with the shop steward or full time organiser  (themselves an army of cadres for the left!) is to keep the LP/TU bond working and effective.

For me the Labour Party must not be seen as a mirror opposite of the Tories  and the relationship with trade unions is an important part of what makes that difference. Both major parties are coalitions of course. The Tories held together because they are a respectable party of the establishment – a fact that will probably see off UKIP.

But is Labour, on the other hand, risking giving away the presumption – of which the association with the TUs is a big part – that it is the Party of ‘us’. Even the name ‘Labour’ has been thought unchangeable (unless you count the addition of the prefix ‘New’ under Tony Blair).

What next now that the genie is out of the bottle?

The inevitable new rules and structures must aim to keep us close to these mass organisations of working people whose wishes and aims for their members are so close to our own. (An interesting aspect of this situation is that of the Co-operative Party which is in permanent coalition with the party just because its values and principles   are so close to Labour’s).

There must be real, welcoming, and convenient paths into Party membership.

Future union involvement in leadership ballots – at whatever percentage – must be even handed to all candidates.

With amalgamations and thus numerically fewer unions the block vote becomes an even bigger issue. Participation in our conferences must be seen to be spread more openly amongst union membership.

So is Labour risking giving away is a huge part of its base – one that isn’t written about, understood nor recognised by the British establishment.  A ‘voice’ and a conduit which does not exist in any other form with the British people should not be allowed to be broken off by our political enemies.