Peers may delay union overhaul that could cost Labour £8m a year
|
Version 0 of 1. New controls on trade unions that could cut Labour’s funding by £8m a year may be delayed, as peers are expected to recommend more progress on changes to party funding before some changes go ahead. A House of Lords committee is set to publish a report on Wednesday morning that is likely to seek a brake on elements of the trade union bill, which would be particularly damaging to Labour’s finances. Westminster sources told the Guardian the peers would suggest the amendments should not be imposed on existing trade union members until progress on cross-party funding changes had been made. Under the current proposals, trade unionists would have to agree in writing every five years to pay into the political fund, rather than the current system of automatically contributing unless they opt out. The bill gives the unions only three months to get a member’s signature assenting to the payment of the levy. The committee is expected to recommend that the 4 million trade unionists who pay into the political fund are exempted for now, handing a temporary reprieve to Labour. Tim Farron, the Liberal Democrat leader, will write to the leaders of the other political parties, including the Conservatives, Labour and the Scottish National party, to ask them to “commit to taking part in renewed cross-party talks as part of our collective response to the select committee’s report”. “I propose that we should aim to have the first discussion as soon as possible and that clause 10 of the trade union bill should be put on hold pending those talks taking place,” he said. As it stands, Labour has estimated that the legislation could cost it at least £35m in income across a five-year parliament, and potentially up to £8m a year. Members of the committee have also been considering whether to recommend a so-called sunrise clause to delay implementing the trade union funding changes until cross-party talks on funding reform have concluded or reached a meaningful point. That option is supported by much of the committee, but Conservative members were taking advice on Tuesday afternoon about whether it is an appropriate procedural option. The committee is expected to present a majority report, so the changes will have to be approved by every member of the group, which is chaired by the crossbencher Lord Burns. The peers are scrutinising the changes because of a rebellion against the party funding changes in the bill by Labour, Lib Dem and crossbench peers. Labour proposed a motion to set up a committee on trade unions and party funding, which attracted 327 peers in favour and 234 against. It will be up to the Lords, where the Tories have no majority, to consider how to take the committee’s recommendations forward. The loss to Labour in annual union affiliation fees and grants would come at a particularly damaging time as there are also planned cuts to state funding of opposition parties, known as Short money, introduced by George Osborne in November. Labour argued that the trade union bill was not being conducted in the spirit of a report by the committee on standards in public life, which urged cross-party talks to get a consensus on overhauling party funding. Paul Bew, the chair of that committee, said it was wrong for the trade union bill to “extract one element” of party funding to change without examining it in the round. |