This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/30/labour-unions-battle-falkirk-editorial

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Labour and the unions: battle of Falkirk Labour and the unions: battle of Falkirk
(3 months later)
All political parties get into local difficulties from time to time. None of them has a monopoly of stitched-up candidate selections either. So it is important to try to retain some perspective about the Labour party's current embarrassments in Falkirk – where the choosing of a parliamentary candidate to replace Eric Joyce MP in 2015 has been suspended by national officials and has triggered threats of legal action. The Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats have their own local skeletons in their own local cupboards too, not just Labour.All political parties get into local difficulties from time to time. None of them has a monopoly of stitched-up candidate selections either. So it is important to try to retain some perspective about the Labour party's current embarrassments in Falkirk – where the choosing of a parliamentary candidate to replace Eric Joyce MP in 2015 has been suspended by national officials and has triggered threats of legal action. The Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats have their own local skeletons in their own local cupboards too, not just Labour.
Yet there is no disputing that Labour's problems in Falkirk raise serious issues. At the heart of the argument is the claim that Unite, the union that is Labour's largest single financial backer, recruited and paid for new Labour members in Falkirk in order to secure the selection of the candidate favoured by Unite's Len McCluskey and by Labour's election co-ordinator Tom Watson MP. After an inquiry by the party's national executive, the Falkirk process has now been suspended. All this is clearly bad for the party's reputation, particularly because it plays into a narrative about excessive trade union power that has done efforts to broaden Labour's appeal great damage in the past and which could do so more widely again, even today. It is also easily portrayed as a challenge to the authority of Ed Miliband – because that is in part exactly what it is.Yet there is no disputing that Labour's problems in Falkirk raise serious issues. At the heart of the argument is the claim that Unite, the union that is Labour's largest single financial backer, recruited and paid for new Labour members in Falkirk in order to secure the selection of the candidate favoured by Unite's Len McCluskey and by Labour's election co-ordinator Tom Watson MP. After an inquiry by the party's national executive, the Falkirk process has now been suspended. All this is clearly bad for the party's reputation, particularly because it plays into a narrative about excessive trade union power that has done efforts to broaden Labour's appeal great damage in the past and which could do so more widely again, even today. It is also easily portrayed as a challenge to the authority of Ed Miliband – because that is in part exactly what it is.
Candidate selection can be a fraught business in all parties, even when the process is impeccably democratic and transparent. The decline of large active memberships makes all parties vulnerable to manipulation. But this is especially the case in the Labour party, because it is the only party that concedes such a significant role to relatively well organised and resourced affiliated groups such as the unions. Moreover, Mr McCluskey has made no secret of his wish to exert his power over candidate selections, including in a Guardian article in May. It is therefore inevitable that Falkirk poses wider questions for Labour, and equally inevitable that critics such as Lord Mandelson have raised the prospect of a more general bid for candidate control by the unions. If there is a close outcome to the next election, such things could have big consequences.Candidate selection can be a fraught business in all parties, even when the process is impeccably democratic and transparent. The decline of large active memberships makes all parties vulnerable to manipulation. But this is especially the case in the Labour party, because it is the only party that concedes such a significant role to relatively well organised and resourced affiliated groups such as the unions. Moreover, Mr McCluskey has made no secret of his wish to exert his power over candidate selections, including in a Guardian article in May. It is therefore inevitable that Falkirk poses wider questions for Labour, and equally inevitable that critics such as Lord Mandelson have raised the prospect of a more general bid for candidate control by the unions. If there is a close outcome to the next election, such things could have big consequences.
As a matter of democratic principle it is extremely questionable whether unions (or anyone else) should be allowed to pay for people to join the Labour party at all, especially without their knowledge. If that is what has happened in Falkirk, those who joined in this way cannot in justice be allowed to remain. But the most important thing that Labour can do right now is to publish the findings of its inquiry, along with any evidence of such practices elsewhere. Once the facts are out in the open, the wider party and the public can then debate what should be done about it.As a matter of democratic principle it is extremely questionable whether unions (or anyone else) should be allowed to pay for people to join the Labour party at all, especially without their knowledge. If that is what has happened in Falkirk, those who joined in this way cannot in justice be allowed to remain. But the most important thing that Labour can do right now is to publish the findings of its inquiry, along with any evidence of such practices elsewhere. Once the facts are out in the open, the wider party and the public can then debate what should be done about it.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.