M.P.s considering gagging laws

Press, 18 November 1987, Page 8

M.P.s considering gagging laws

By

OLIVER RIDDELL

in Wellington

The chance is 50:50 that members of the Government will introduce special legislation to protect themselves from their trade union critics.

Soundings taken round Parliament yesterday indicated that the political anger and contempt such a move would attract might be acceptable for the security it would provide Labour members of Parliament.

Special legislation might include any or all of three changes.—

First, the Government could revert to voluntary trade unionism and free up the highly regulated labour market. Plenty of advisers have been urging the Government to do this anyway, to match the freeing up of the economy and the creation of Stateowned enterprises in the Public Service. The Government has steadfastly refused to so far, partly for fear of trade union reaction but partly as a pay-off for trade union support and loyalty. Some Government members believe the unions acted disloyally at the party’s recent annual conference and so forfeited the protection compulsory unionism provides.

Second, the Government could require all membership of political parties to be on an individual basis. That would end trade

union affiliation to the Labour Party at annual fees often less than a tenth of those of ordinary members. It would also end bloc-voting by trade union leaders representing absent and indifferent memberships. Third, the Government could introduce State funding of political parties.

Neither Labour nor National is deriving anything like enough money from their traditional sources to run national organisations and fight three-year election campaigns.

Anger is evident among some Labour members of Parliament and within the party organisation that financially the Labour dog is being wagged by its tail.

It is estimated that it cost Labour $4.5 million to fight its 1987 General Election campaign. Yet only about $130,000 of this came from Labour’s traditional sources of money, and of that perhaps, only $50,000 via the trade unions.

For this $50,000, through its card vote strength gained by members who may pay as little as 90c a year, trade union representatives have the power at annual confer-

ences to write policy into Labour’s election manifesto. This card vote was used twice at the conference. It was used by the trade unions to get their representatives elected onto the policy council (all five places), to dominate the executive, and to get the presidency and both vicepresidencies. It was also used to make it easier for a card vote to be translated into policy written into the manifesto.

The Deputy Prime Minster and Minister of Justice, Mr Palmer, had a resolution on this card vote defeated by a card vote when seeming to win on both voices and hands before a card vote was called for.

He later said the Government would not be bound by promises such a manifesto contained. Labour won the 1984 election with the active support of the trade unions; it won in 1987 with little support from them.

The former secretary of the Federation of Labour and new president of the Council of Trade Unions, Mr Ken Douglas, told the annual conference he planned to work with the Government and not

against IL The outgoing president of the party, Ms Margaret Wilson told the conference of the state of the party’s finances. Neither Mr Douglas nor Ms Wilson was able to convince the conference that working with the Government or putting the party’s finances on a sounder footing should take priority over imposing policy on a Government which the trade unions and their Left-wing radical allies no longer trust.

Labour members of Parliament fear having policies’ imposed which they believe will prevent them from winning future elections — making them prisoners of the radical Left as happened with the British Labour Party. They also fear trade union muscle being used to replace them as members of Parliament in safe Labour-held seats where it is not necessary to have a broad coalition of voters to hold the seat

Ridding themselves of trade union critics has never looked more attractive to some Labour members. Their August victory without trade union support has made them feel more powerful and able to act than before.