Owing his victory in the 2010 leadership election to the Alternative Vote system (no qualms there) and three of the four biggest trade unions (Unite, Unison and the GMB), you would think that Miliband would wish to appease his paymasters. Ending the current ‘opt-out’ method in place for three million trade union members affiliated to the Labour Party is common sense more than anything, as Miliband has noted; “In the 21st century, it just doesn’t make sense for anyone to be affiliated to a political party unless they have chosen to do so”. However, in embracing new reforms, the Labour Party could lose up to £5 million in funding. It will cost the debt-ridden political party financially in the short term, but the implications of these important steps could mean that big money will be finally addressed in politics.
Cross-party talks over reforming donations to political parties have collapsed numerous times, both in this Parliament and in the New Labour era. The Liberal Democrat view on why these talks reached an impasse is a compelling (and probably accurate) one; Labour refused to budge on loosening its financial ties with trade unions, and the Conservatives didn’t want to sacrifice its income from wealthy individuals. With the proposal a £10,000 annual cap on donations, the Tories wanted a ludicrous £50,000 annual cap, which would amount to £250,000 over a Parliament; well over the top rate of tax limit (£150,000). After the Falkirk parliamentary-selection controversy, David Cameron appeared to have backed Miliband into a corner again. However, as with banking regulation, Miliband was able to retaliate. Rather than try to defend his links with trade unions for the umpteenth time, he has taken the initiative. By preparing bold reforms with historical and powerful institutions within his own party, Miliband has Cameron on the back foot. Will the Prime Minister pledge funding reform, and accept a far lower annual cap than initially proposed? Will the Conservatives end their long standing association with the likes of tax-dodging Lord Ashcroft and company?
Miliband faces a battle with his own party, but he has key support from both ends of the spectrum. On the reforms, Tony Blair has said “I should have done it when I was leader...this is big stuff and it takes a real act of leadership to do it”. On the trade union side, Unite general secretary Len McCluskey has said that “there is some moral justification” for the proposals. Had McCluskey derided Miliband’s approach, Cameron would have a ready-made soundbite for Prime Minister’s Questions. However, by supporting the plans in principal, Miliband can seek to emphasise unity within the Labour Party. Blair’s comments will particularly sting for Cameron, the man who referred to the former Prime Minister as “the master” (and is probably not too distant from him ideologically). As noted in my blog entry on engaging people in politics, party funding reform is a crucial step towards building bridges with the electorate, and increasing transparency can only be a good thing in this context.
These reforms are healthy for the political process, but they are positive for Miliband, too. Perceptions of him as being a weak leader could be eradicated significantly if he succeeds, and Cameron’s cry that Miliband is “in hoc to the trade unions” will be silenced, awkwardly turning the tables on the Prime Minister. Miliband needs this boost to his leadership in the wake of a reduced poll lead over the Conservatives, not to mention a desire to promote his policy-thin ‘One-nation Labour’ message. From a pluralist perspective, I very much hope he succeeds with these reforms. That trade unions can wield undemocratic block votes at party conferences is ridiculous, and people who do not wish to support the Labour Party shouldn’t have to opt out of a levy, plain and simple. Furthermore, it is my hope that by pushing ahead with this, the Prime Minister will be forced into accepting cross-party talks for a £10,000 annual cap, severing a link with powerful and wealthy individuals.
I have not been Miliband’s biggest fan since his election in 2010, but as previously stated in my blog, I will give him credit where credit is due. I wish him well with his reforms, and from a Centre-Left perspective, placing unease on an elite Conservative Party whose donors are frequently unrepresentative of the general population is a positive and welcome move.
No comments:
Post a Comment