Friday, September 12, 2008

Telegraph Column: Why Dave Is Wooing the Unions


In my Telegraph column today I look at why David Cameron is seeking to woo the trade unions.

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

we need to build on work done by local Conservative MP's with the health unions to save local hospitals

we have a number of PPC's who are trade union members and we should be using them more

equal pay is also a key area of policy were we could I believe work well with unions in future

maybe even re establish the Conservative trade union association at this years conference

I am just not sure Mr balfe is the best envoy

Anonymous said...

Iain how many times do we have to say this now only a small minority of unions are affiliated to the Labour Party even Bob Crow's rail union is not, equally the fireman and the largest (ex NALGO) section of Unison, non of the Teaching unions, non of the specialist health unions

Anonymous said...

Iain please remember that a majority of unions including the Teaching unions and health unions and even Bob Crows rail union are not affiliated to the Labour Party, not even the biggest section (ex town hall union Nalgo) of unison, etc etc

Colin said...

Sorry this is a bit off topic Iain, but I was wondering if you had any thoughts regarding the role of Zac Goldsmith in the trial of the greenpeace activists who vandalised Kingsnorth power station?

Leaving aside the facts that he's my prospective parliamentary candidate and my general distrust of billionaires with green consciences telling normal people to lower their standards of living in the name of climate change, I'm a little concerned at his and Dave's lack of judgement on this. Should "potential" Tory MP's and therefore by implication cabinet ministers be actively involved in subverting and distorting the rule of law?

Newmania said...

I thought this was a really interesting article Ian and perhaps the best of yours I have read so far.
On a related subject ,I have been slightly surprised that you have been silent on the rapprochement between Conservative patricians and the Guardian ( They actually went Pro Tory in a leader).This has started to make me ‘splutter’ a bit . I think in your article it was clear that the direct appeal of Thatcher to aspirational working class people is not mirrored by Cameron what exactly he does have to say is a little opaque in that his concern seems to be chiefly with the non working population so as to attract Liberals in marginals .
Something absent from your piece is that fact that the Unions are now only 18 % of the working population mostly in the public sector . They are a very different animal from the one Thatcher dealt with.. So you start a fascinating subject and I wish you had more space to develop your thoughts on it , as a avid political observer going back to the 80s and before I think this is the sort of thing you can do well and I am pleased to see you getting stuck into weightier matters .

The continued shift left under Cameron is odd don’t you think when actually Conservative fortunes were transformed by Osborne’s almost accidental discovery of the resentment felt against IHT. I believe working families Unionised or not want tax cuts and it is time to stop fawning over the centre ground for all I support One Nation Conservatism . When does judicious inclusiveness become a betrayal of those who brown has milked and want help for the Party they have stuck with ?

I would like to see a Dale article on that

BrianSJ said...

The point was made in the Telegraph comments that this is now largely a public sector employment issue. DC will need to find a way of mitigating the centralising tendencies of the union leaders and restores some local autonomy.

Anonymous said...

Dear Iain,

Unlike Mr. Cameron, Mrs. Thatcher did not speak to trade union leaders in 1979. She spoke over their heads directly to their members. In I979 union membership peaked at 13 million, or around 55% of the UK workforce. Today's TUC is a rump. It claims to represent close to 7 million workers. But its Tribunite trade union leaders are more out of touch than ever with their remaining members (give or take the rail unions), because they are old-fashioned socialists in a world that's moved on. Hence, if the Tories are looking to connect with the aspirational working classes that Thatcher touched in 1979, they won't reach with them through trade union leaders. Essex voters and their northern counterparts might have deserted the Tories. But they never went back to the unions. They remain as aspirational as ever, however. Moreover, there's nothing "people like us" or even "authentic", in the modern sense of the term, about Brendan Barber and co. Surely, Cameron has better things to do? Labour does not because it needs the dosh. That's why it is lost.

Anonymous said...

Nearly all of the top 100 companies in the UK recognise unions

so they are still important element in the economy and the ability of companies to introduce production

Their has been also a shift in union membership from manual to professional

I have no doubt low paid workers want tax cuts

They also want the minimum wage and thats were Boris was clever in supporting the London minimum Wage

unions are not going to go away

Anonymous said...

The public sector ???

private companies build subsidised houses, roads,private companies win contracts to clean 90% of our hospitals, 60% of refuge collection the eu pays for farmers, public money pays for MPs and councillors

the farmer as much as the nurse is a public sector worker, while private companies need public sector contracts

Anonymous said...

I say cut those public sector farming subsadise now

and turn the fields into houses and golf courses

Anonymous said...

Brendan Barber:

"The keys to the boardroom are in our hands" speech 2002.

"..there are new levers unions can pull as well.

Britain has failed to realise the Thatcherite dream of becoming a share-owning democracy...By the end of 2000 individuals directly owned only 16 per cent of UK shares, compared to 54 per cent in 1963.

...the largest domestic owners of UK shares are pension funds and insurance companies who now hold about 18 per cent and 21 per cent of equities respectively - or two out of every five UK shares

But they hold these shares on behalf of workers contributing to pension schemes and insurance policies. Working people are now the ultimate owners of most blue-chip firms in the UK. In formal terms, British capitalism has given workers ownership of the means of production...

But this is a case where ownership does not equal control...

There are now new opportunities for unions to change this. Many pension fund trust boards include member-nominated and union-backed trustees.
...can influence investment decisions - and in particular how the fund's votes are cast at company AGMs. This is why the TUC is building a network of trustees to give the trade union movement collective shareholder power...

The Treasury-sponsored review of institutional investment headed by Paul Myners proposed that there should be a legal duty on funds to intervene in companies where it would be in the interests of pension scheme members.

This would mean working with other shareholders to remove poor management at board level

Separately the Department of Trade and Industry is changing the law to give shareholders an annual vote on directors' pay.

The keys to the boardroom are in our hands - the challenge is to use that power wisely once we get through the door"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2002/dec/22/politics.executivepay?commentpage=1

Have justed posted the above to the Telegraph

Anonymous said...

David Cameron should talk to the unions and their
6-7 million members.

He should, however, give equal weight to the views of the 6-10 million(?)directors/ owners of UK SMEs.