Tories forced to rethink trade union crackdown after Lords defeat

Peers vote overwhelmingly against changes that could have seen Labour’s funding drop by millions

Ministers are facing calls to back down on key elements of their trade union crackdown, after the House of Lords voted against changes that could have reduced Labour’s funding by millions of pounds.

The government was overwhelming defeated by 320-172 after peers voted to back a cross-party committee saying the overhaul to funding should be restricted to new members only.

Ministers had proposed trade unionists would have to agree in writing every five years to pay into their organisation’s political fund, rather than the current system of automatically contributing unless they opted out. The bill gave the unions only three months to get a union member’s signature assenting to the payment of the levy.

Labour estimates the legislation could cost it a loss of income of at least £35m across a five-year parliament and potentially up to £8m a year.

However, peers voted to exempt the 4 million trade unionists who pay into the political fund in a move that would hand a temporary reprieve to Labour if not overturned in the House of Commons.

The lords also voted by 320-181 to commission an independent review and pilots of electronic ballots for strike action before making changes that would require a turnout of 50%.

The defeats came after the government rejected the recommendations of a cross-party committee on the trade union bill, which called for a rethink.

Responding for the opposition, Angela Smith, Labour’s leader in the House of Lords, said the resounding defeat showed the government had made a poor case. “Ministers should rethink their opposition to the recommendations made by Lord Burns’ cross-party committee,” she said.

“Those proposals would certainly not be pain-free for the Labour party but they suggest a proportionate, reasonable and practical compromise. A compromise that would allow the government to fulfil its manifesto commitment without placing unrealistic demands on the trade union movement.

“I also hope Conservative MPs and others take time to read the recommendations of Lord Burns’ committee and the evidence it took, and to then respond in an equally reasonable way when this issue comes to the floor of the House of Commons after Easter.”

Lord Kerslake, the former head of the civil service who is now an independent crossbencher, led the amendment on electronic ballots, saying it was a “tried and tested” way of increasing participation.

The bill aims to impose a minimum 50% turnout in strike ballots, with key public sector strikes requiring the backing of at least 40% of those eligible to vote.

“If we are to apply these high tests before industrial action can be taken, then it is incumbent on us to provide trade unions with the best practical means available to achieve the full participation of their members,” Kerslake said.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/mar/16/trade-union-crackdown-lords-defeat-labour-party-funding


Sometimes The Lords have their uses in stopping the excesses of government.

NOTICE how one sided those Tories were...

Planning to reduce Labour income from unions..


HOWEVER, exactly why don't they ask shareholders to vote on whether companies and corporations should be able to donate their profits to political parties  --  where over 80% pf those donations will end up in conservative coffers ?

AFTER ALL, "what's good for the goose, is good for the gander."

The Tories aren't willing to cut thrir own funding - are they !