WOMEN MUST NOT LOSE OUT

Plaid Cymru leader Leanne Wood has written to the Chancellor calling on him to use next week’s Budget to phase in the equalisation of the state pension age, in order to ensure that no one misses out. Leanne Wood said that changes to pension arrangements have been imposed on women without appropriate notification and that changes should be phased in. 

Writing to the Chancellor on International Women's Day (08.03.2016) ahead of the UK Budget next week, Party of Wales Leader Leanne Wood said:

“I am sure you are already aware that many women have had significant changes to their pension arrangements imposed upon them, without appropriate notification as a result of the Pensions Act 2011.

“In next week’s Budget, you have the opportunity to correct this injustice by phasing the equalisation of state pension age changes in a manner that ensures nobody will lose out. I ask that you do this.

“While Plaid Cymru would welcome the equal treatment of women with regard to the state pension age, this also requires the equal treatment of women in other spheres such as the workplace, earnings and life opportunities – something that the women affected by the Pensions Act 2011 have not received.

“I am also concerned that the raising of the state pension age will disproportionately affect women in Wales. The population here has a lower life expectancy on average. This means that people here are less likely to be able to realise the benefits from the state pension, as well as being less likely to be able to rely upon accrued wealth in retirement.

“I look forward to your response to this issue in next week’s Budget.”

A STORM IN A TEA MUG…

The news that the GMB union is to cut the affiliation funds it gives Labour from £1.2 million pounds to around £150,000 pounds in the wake of a row over reform would once have made eyes water at Transport House.  While the Labour Party may silently weep at the loss of the cash, the row has actually kicked off because of moves within the Labour Party to reform union funding so individual union members have to opt in to support the party, rather than being automatically affiliated.

Basically the GMB has thrown a wobbly because the Labour Party has introduced a measure of democracy and self determination with individual union members being able to choose to or not to donate to the labour party. Currently the GMB affiliates 420,000 of its members to Labour, at £3 per member per year the union has openly admitted that approximately 50,000 of the 650,000 GMB members might actually choose to affiliate with the Labour Party. This storm in tea mug, if it does nothing else, can be said to reveal the true nature of internal democracy in some of our trade union.

Now don’t get me wrong I have nothing against fully democratic and transparent Trade Unions working to protect their member’s interests within a democratic society. Our public sector workers are right to agitate in defence of their Pension rights, and are fully entitled to withdraw their labour in the event of dispute.  I am however entirely disillusioned with the Trade Unions because of their petty minded ‘political’ sectarianism and their pretty much pointless (funding related) relationship with the Labour Party.

I am a firm believer in Trade Union's but I equally firmly believe that the old historic relationship between the Trade Union movement and the Labour Party was always one sided and that it has now become pointless. The relationship has in recent decades always in reality revolved around finance – the Trade Unions had it and the Labour Party lacked it and wanted it.

The relationship between the Trade Unions and the Labour Party was once important and only occasionally frosty at least until Blair (and successors) opened up a whole new relationship between Labour and the City. Despite what the trade Union leaders may think, the Labour Party last seriously (and erroneously) listened to the Trade Unions in the late 1960’s when it bottled it when they watered down the ‘In Place of Strife’ White Paper in the late 1960’s.

In Place of Strife (1968)

The White Paper would have brought in secret ballots before every strike; a cooling off period of 28 days before big strikes; collective bargaining with legally binding results; a new Industrial Relations Court and penal sanctions to force unions to comply. If Barbara Castle and her colleagues pushed their proposed legislation through then a degree of rationality would have been brought to the world of industrial relations. This would have been years before Mr’s Thatcher ever appeared on the scene and the worst undemocratic excesses of the old Trade Union movement would have been curbed.

Ever since then and despite the spin put on it by the Trade Unions, the Labour Leadership has basically walked the walk, talked the talk, taken the money and delivered little if anything to the Trade Union movement and its leaders. The Blair years should have in all seriousness killed off any Trade Union interest or involvement in prolonging a dead relationship with the Labour Party.

The fact that this has not happened, is largely down to the permanent presence of Labour Party members (especially at higher levels) and activists within the Trade Union movement, than any realistic chance of extracting any benefits for their members. Where once the Labour Party was the political wing of the Trade Unions, the relationship has now been reversed and the Trade Unions have pretty much been taken over and are largely run for the benefit of the Labour Party rather than their own members.

Obviously this convenient arrangement works well for the Labour Party who when in government quietly started most of the plans (i.e. The Passport Office and the Forensic Science Service to name but two) to make cost savings (at the expense of jobs) with minimal resistance from their card carrying stooges within the Trade Unions. Yet when the cost saving measures came to fruition under the Con Dems the reaction from the Labour dominated Trade Union leadership was entirely different.

In some parts of our country the Trade Unions are blatantly politically sectarian with leadership positions at certain levels being almost entirely dominated by Labour members. These Union officers are quite happy prevent hard working Plaid AM's from addressing rallies against job and pension cuts in Swansea and elsewhere.

It's time for Trade Unions to wise up and de-Labourise their senior officers, cease any financial contributions to the Labour Party and to concentrate on fighting for the interests of their members. I think that elected and salaried Trade Union officials should not be card carrying members of any political parties. I am still a Trade Unionist and still think that Trade Unions are important in the workplace, but, firmly believe that the links with the Labour Party need to be severed.

A CASE OF UNISON NO MORE...

While I have no problem with the public sector workers recent strike action in defence of their Pension rights, and fully support the right to withdraw ones labour in the event of dispute, I have become entirely disillusioned with Unison. Part of the problems is that Unison is so monolithic that is straddles far too many diverse sections of the world of work, and part of the problem is Unison's pointless relationship with the Labour Party.

Now don’t get me wrong, I firmly believe in Trade Union's but equally firmly believe that the old historic relationship between the Trade Union movement and the Labour Party was always one sided but is now pretty pointless. The relationship always in reality revolved around finance – the Trade Unions had it and the Labour Party lacked it and wanted it.

The relationship between the Trade Unions and the Labour Party was important but occasionally frosty at least until Blair (and successors) opened up a whole new relationship between Labour and the City. The Labour Party last seriously (and erroneously) listened to the Trade Unions in the late 1960’s when it bottled it when they watered down the ‘In Place of Strife’ White Paper in the late 1960’s.

This White Paper would have brought in secret ballots before every strike; a cooling off period of 28 days before big strikes; collective bargaining with legally binding results; a new Industrial Relations Court and penal sanctions to force unions to comply. Had Barbara Castle and her colleagues pushed their proposed legislation through then some rationality would have been brought to the world of industrial relations. And this years before Mr’s Thatcher ever appeared on the scene and the worst undemocratic excesses of the old Trade Union movement would have been curbed.

Ever since then and despite the spin put on it by the Trade Unions, the Labour Leadership has basically walked the walk, talked the talk, taken the money and delivered little if anything to the Trade Union movement and its leaders. The Blair years should have in all seriousness killed off any Trade Union interest or involvement in prolonging a dead relationship with the Labour Party.

The fact that this has not happened, is largely down to the permanent presence of Labour Party members (especially at higher levels) and activists within the Trade Union movement, than any realistic chance of extracting any benefits for their members. Whereas once the Labour Party was the political wing of the Trade Unions, the relationship has now been reversed and the Trade Unions have been taken over and are largely run for the benefit of the Labour Party rather than their own members.

Obviously this convenient arrangement works well for the Labour Party who when in government quietly started most of the plans (i.e. The Passport Office and the Forensic Science Service to name but two) to make cost savings (at the expense of jobs) with minimal resistance from their card carrying stooges within the Trade Unions. Yet when the cost saving measures came to fruition under the Con Dems the reaction from the Labour dominated Trade Union leadership was entirely different.

In some parts of Wales the Trade Unions are blatantly sectarian with leadership positions at certain levels being almost entirely dominated by Labour members. These Union officers are quite happy prevent hard working Plaid AM's from addressing rallies against job and pension cuts in Swansea and elsewhere.

It's time for Trade Unions to wise up and de-Labourise their senior officers, cease any financial contributions to the Labour Party and to concentrate on fighting for the interests of their members. I think that elected and salaried Trade Union officials should not be card carrying members of any political parties.

On personal basis I have reached and passed the point of no return when it comes to Unison. Just before Christmas I finally severed that bond (along with a few work colleagues) once and for all. I am still a Trade Unionist and still think that Trade Unions are important in the workplace, but, firmly believe that the links with the Labour Party need to be severed.

AN ACUTE LACK OF FAIRNESS...

I spent the first half of the week on a very intensive training course (complete with an exam - which thankfully I passed) so I missed the strike day entirely. It's literally taken until today for the deprogramming to kick in and to put thought to blog. Wednesday came and went, the Conservatives are feeling good, having a pop at the Unions over strikes for the Tories is like playing to a familiar audience.

The amply rewarded and well-paid card carrying largely Labour dinosaur Union bosses are happy as they got to have a go at a Conservative led Government. The current (New) Labour leader is quietly hoping that the strikes will go away and no one remembers that this whole economic mess originated when New Labour were running the show.

Now to be fair it's a devilishly awkward situation that the party formerly known as New Labour finds itself in. I mean they are trying to sit on the fence and avoid taking an official position, neither for or against the strikes. Fence sitting aside as the dust settle a lot of people who can least afford it are out of pocket at a time of year when they can least afford it.

The anger of public-sector workers who took part in strike action on Wednesday remains understandably undiminished. They are being asked to make significant financial sacrifices to pay for the mess, those responsible for the mess the private finance sector, are definitely not being asked to make the same level of sacrifice and by and large appear to have got away with it and escaped unpublished for their actions.

Understandably public sector, many of whom are not paid very much, are a tad upset that part of their pension, for which they were entitled to plan for many years, is going to be taken away. I have no doubt that the scale of government borrowing requires emergency action, yet any savings from changes to public-sector pensions won't actually come through until some years after this financial disaster has faded into memory.

Apparently the Government has moved some distance towards meeting the unions' objections, apparently by reducing the cuts for those nearing retirement. If this is the case, then serious efforts should be made to get a deal on the table and to sign it. Both the Unions and the Government should accept it an honour it.

Why do the cuts need to be so apocalyptic? Could not saving be made in other areas? Trident perhaps or a couple of aircraft carriers (one of which there are no plans to even use!). The UK Government can manage to find the money to spend on wars and their aftermath, but, not apparently when matters are deemed less urgent.

I wonder if the (subconscious or not so subconscious) motivation for the attack on the public sector workers is more ideologically driven rather than financially driven. It is worth noting that both Cameron and Osborne were heavily involved if not key players (coat holders) for Michael Howard’s thankfully unsuccessful campaign to be Prime Minister.

That thought aside, one financial cuckoo that's coming home to roost is that of PFI – something that the public sector was forced to use by the last Labour Government (and is still favoured by the current government) and for which we will all be paying for many years to come. We will all be paying for a whole raft of Blair’s legacies, including a couple of wars and the London based and largely London beneficial Olympics.

For the next ten years at least, public spending is going to be under severe pressure. Harsh choices will be made and priorities decided; and some changes may need to be made to relatively generous future pension rights of public-sector staff. I don’t necessarily dispute that, but, I question on whose behalf these decisions are being made and what efforts are being made to ensure that we all pay our fair share?

From where I am sat (in the cheap seats) this Conservative Government is the Trade Union leaders' best mate (if not a convenient ally). This is government for the rich and by the rich (for that's how it appears to me) has stood by while the City fat cats continue to be rewarded for failure and to rake in fat bonuses and done nothing.

The Con Dem's biggest problem is the acute lack of fairness, as boardroom pay has raced ahead, and tax evasion and tax avoidance largely goes unpunished. Excessive profiteering by the energy cartel has gone unpunished and those who can least afford are getting hammered. David Cameron and Mr Osborne remain utterly unconvincing as they continue to fail to convince most people that they (of all people) are genuinely "all in this together".

Last Tuesday George Osborne showed that he failed to even consider any idea for public disclosure of tax returns or a ban on honours to those who have already rewarded themselves pretty handsomely. Nothing was done about tax avoidance; and no consideration was given to a "Robin Hood tax" on financial transactions (something that needs to be done on global basis). Rather than criticising the strikers, Cameron might want to take steps to ensure that the bankers and the rich are in this, too, like the rest of us.

ACT TOGETHER - WIN TOGETHER

ACT TOGETHER - WIN TOGETHER

Rally against the Pension Cuts
 

Lunchtime (12pm - 2pm) 

John Frost Square, Newport 

Thursday 30th June 2011