The Tories and the Lib Dems: not worth the risk

23.04.10 - John, Unions Together

Given the fluctuation in the polls since the first debate last week, and the new focus on the Liberal Democrats, it seems appropriate to look at what they really stand for when it comes to union members. In an appearance on ‘Any Questions?’ in late March - on the eve of the British Airways industrial action- Vince Cable, the Lib Dem shadow chancellor, had this exchange with host Jonathan Dimbleby:

Dimleby: If you were elected would consider outlawing industrial action in (the railway and airline) industries?

Cable: Well, you could certainly consider curbing them.

Dimbleby: Curbing them? You mean making them more difficult?

Cable: Yes. Indeed, and there are legislative implications, which has to be thought through.

Dimbleby: Is it the policy of the Liberal Democrats, if you were to have a position in government, to say we should toughen industrial relations law in order to make it more difficult for these unions, rail, air, whatever it might be, to take strike actions?

Cable: Well, if we’re talking about essential public services like the railway system then we should be looking at it, certainly.

What Cable means by "curbing" he leaves to our imaginations. This leads to uncomfortable questions for the Lib Dems about just how 'liberal' they are. If employees at private firms can be classified as essential workers, where does this policy stop?

Of course, this doesn't leave the Tories off the hook either. David Cameron was calling on Gordon Brown to intervene in the BA strikes before they even happened. Throughout the dispute, the Tories demanded that the government should take the side of the company over its employees. In this election, can we really risk giving power to parties that don't support (and in fact campaign against) the rights of working people?

Get involved and stop the Lib Dems and the Tories from getting their hands on the country.

blog comments powered by Disqus