Union gag legislation thwarted by publicity

Press, 21 November 1987, Page 15

Union gag legislation thwarted by publicity

OLIVER RIDDELL,

By

in Wellington

Thoughts by some members of the Government that they might protect themselves from their trade union critics by passing special legislation have not survived the publicity their intentions have been attracting. A coalition of Labour members of Parliament was coming together to curb the power of the trade unions to force unpalatable policies on the Government and to replace them with parliamentarians more sympathetic to trade union aims. This coalition embraced a number of attitudes:

First, there were those who saw trade unions using Labour’s constitution to impose a manifesto on the Labour Party which would make Labour “unelectable.”

This group pointed to the experience of the British Labour Party’s years in Opposition after it had been captured by its Leftwing.

Second, there were those who considered the trade unions were making a minute financial contribution compared to their voting strength.

Third, there were those who considered continued criticism of the Government by trade unionists a terminal act of disloyalty. Fourth, some considered that to finally establish itself as the “natural party of Government,” Labour had to act to dis-

tance itself from its traditional constituency of the trade unions and the radical Left. But the intention to use legislation to curb the power of the trade unions has been found by most Labour members of Parliament, upon reflection, to be repugnant and to be fraught with unpleasant consequences. A couple of days ago there was considerable support for “doing the trade unions;” now the trade unions are no more favourably regarded but are seen as a fact of life that has to be accepted. Trade union opponents within the Government have also been distracted by the reported comments of the Minister for StateOwned Enterprises, Mr Prebble, while in Australia. His seeming advocacy of greater privatisation of agencies owned by the State has shifted the focus away from what the trade unions might be doing to the Government and on to what the Government is doing. The suggestion of special legislation can now be seen in its longerterm context as yet another episode in the uncomfortable relationship between two key elements of the Labour movement —- the trade unions and the Government executive. There is an irony in this particular episode which has not been lost on the trade unions. For years, Labour

members of Parliament ' have been telling trade unionists not to under- < mine Labour by working < outside the system but to 1 come under the umbrella 1 provided by the consitu- t tion and work from <

within. Now that the new breed of trade union leader is doing that, it has been found to be uncomfortable by some of the parliamentarians who have advocated it for so long.