The Labour leadership is wrong – we should have the courage to support today’s strike

Winston Churchill once offered the world a shrewd analysis of what it is be truly bold when he said: “Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.” Although the former Conservative Prime Minister is an unlikely person to think of when it comes to the British labour movement, today, as more than one million public sector workers go on strike, the Labour leadership should take heed of what he said.

Officially, Labour’s position is that they’re not condemning but they’re also not supporting the strikes. I understand that they’re wary of being attacked over this issue – particularly in an era where it’s commonplace to criticise any form of industrial action. Yet, all too often the line between pragmatism and capitulation is too thin. And when the supposed pragmatic response is a weak one that alienates some of your core supporters and leaves everyone else unconvinced, it doesn’t look all that pragmatic after all. On this one, Labour should have the courage to listen to the people who are on strike and then offer their support.

This is an unpopular view to take, not least in some Labour circles. But before the leadership dismiss it (again), it’s first worth noting that this is going to be the biggest strike over pay since the coalition came to power, and then its worth considering why.

At its core, this strike is a direct result of government policy. In 2010, ministers introduced a public sector pay freeze, and in 2012 they enforced a 1% pay cap, still in place today. Unfortunately, this is one of reason the Labour are struggling to get their line right on the strikes; when it was introduced Ed Balls said Labour wouldn’t reverse the pay freeze. While changing their mind might momentarily make them look weak, this is a policy commitment that Ed Miliband and the shadow cabinet should revoke. Because, this pay freeze, paired with pension cuts, has meant that teachers, fire fighters and other public sector workers have seen losses in their income of 20% in real terms since 2010. It’s no surprise, then, that many struggle to pay basic living expenses.

Despite what the Conservatives suggest, those on strike (which contrary to popular belief includes large numbers of middle class people) don’t take the decision lightly; many see it as last resort. Yet strike action is often denounced because it results in children missing a day of school (in turn making things difficult for parents) and it puts the public at risk.

The truth, ignored by so many tabloid papers, is no one is downplaying the effects of a strike. In fact, it’s the severity of many peoples’ realities – and their worries over the future – that leads them to such drastic action. Negative representations of industrial action are part of a divide and rule strategy; pitting people forced to go on strike against others that the strike will effect, instead of recognising that government policy is to blame.

What’s more, today’s strike is part of a much larger picture. It’s rooted in a problem that political commentators haven’t stopped talking about since the local elections: the democratic deficit. However, what those with an inside take on Westminster haven’t realised is that when it comes to the political process people don’t only show their discontent, frustration, and feelings of impotence by voting UKIP. Aside from voting in a general election every five years, strike action is one of the only ways many people can show that they don’t support the current state of our politics.

And in this climate, where the public are frustrated that politicians are often elected on a small proportion of the vote, the argument that strikes are undemocratic because of low turn outs on strike ballots is flimsy, at best. Such accusations also conveniently ignore the fact that trade unions want to find ways of making strike ballots more democratic, like balloting members through e-mail and phone, but they aren’t allowed.

The real irony here is that that this strike embodies the same message we’ve heard time and again from the Labour front bench: ‘ordinary’ people aren’t feeling the effects of the economic recovery, and it doesn’t look like they will any time soon. So while the Labour leadership is right to say it’s on the side of people, they need to realise they can only make this claim if they pay attention to what the people are saying.

It takes courage to go on strike in a society when you’re told repeatedly you shouldn’t. Although the Labour leadership may like to think they’re listening to the strikers’ concerns, this means little unless they have the courage to prove that they are by making a stand and, once and for all, supporting the strike.