DELEGATES at the Trade Union Congress in Brighton voted unanimously yesterday to defend the right to strike and political protest.
They voted for Composite Motion 18: The Trade Union Bill and Building a Campaign to Stop Government Attacks. They voted overwhelmingly, with just a few against, for Motion 64: Anti-Trade Union Laws. The TUC General Council gave its support to the motion with ‘reservations’.
TUC general secretary Frances O’Grady explained to Conference: ‘The Bill’s aim is to attack the fundamental right to strike. It demands a strong response. The reservation we have is the phrase “generalised strike action” which is open to interpretation. The TUC supports workers taking joint coordinated action.’
Composite Motion 18 is equivocal, it states: ‘Conference resolves to oppose the Bill every inch of the way, building alliances across Parliament, with non-government organisations and with all the employers who have been expressing their unease about this unneeded Bill.’
The clause referred to by O’Grady in the TUC ‘reservations’ on the RMT Motion 64 calls on the TUC General Council to ‘consider the possibility of assisting in organising generalised strike action should legal action be taken against any affiliate in connection with these new laws.’
Moving Composite 18, Unite General Secretary Len McCluskey declared: ‘I hereby give this government due notice of my union’s intent to oppose, defy and, using any means necessary, defend the democratic rights and freedoms of all trade unionists and the working people of our nation.’
He added: ‘We need to respond clearly and intelligently because this threat is also an opportunity. David Davis, a Tory who takes freedom seriously, has described parts of this Bill as more appropriate to a General Franco dictatorship.
‘Amnesty and Liberty have denounced it as a violation of human rights. Even the Financial Times editorial this morning has come out against it. The possibility therefore of a broad and united democratic campaign against this legislation is greater than before.’
He stressed the Bill does not just attack trade unions, but attacks the freedom of the press and freedom of association. He went on to say that the Trade Union Bill ‘raises the thorny question: Must we always obey the law?’
He added: ‘Reluctance to question the law is based on the premise that the law is sacrosanct.’ He went on to give examples of the Suffragettes and those who gave their lives in the US Civil Rights Movement.
Moving Motion 64, Peter Pinkney said: ‘I have had no idea what the problem with the words “Generalised Strike” are. The TUC is never ruthless enough!’
This must be the understatement of the century!
