Miliband vs McCluskey: 2 points that strike me about the Labour/Unite row over alleged candidate selection rigging

Looking in from the outside, albeit as a former Labour member myself, two points strike me about the Labour/Unite row over the alleged attempt by the union to rig the selection of the party’s general election candidate in Falkirk.

The first is this:

How lucky is Ed Miliband in his opponent, Len McCluskey?

Yes, you read that right. Ed is lucky in Len. The reason why is simple: Len McCluskey has gone about his attempted putsch of Labour in an extraordinarily cack-handed manner.

If you wanted to set up a comedy caricature trade union boss, you’d make sure he had a salary of £122,000, had called for a general strike, have him make threats against prominent Labour ‘Blairites’, and then protest against the lefty New Statesman when it reports accurately what you’ve said.

If you wanted to be a smart trade union leader, however, you’d operate below-the-radar. You’d do things just the same: ensure your chosen candidate was elected Labour leader (however dubiously), line up your mate to head up the party’s election campaigns, and guarantee loyal union members are installed in as many key seats as possible.

But you’d do so sotto voce. Everything would be arranged oh-so-subtly, with the minimum of fuss and bother. Because you know, and they know you know, and you know they know you know etc, that the Labour party is financially dependent on you, that they cannot possibly hope to win the next election without your support.

Unless, that is, you make it absolutely impossible for the Labour party to stay schtum any longer. And that’s what Len has done. With a carelessness bordering on suicidal recklessness he has trampled over the Labour party in such a blatant manner that no-one — and certainly not a union-hating Tory party and media — is going to let allegedly corrupt rule-breaking pass without comment. He has forced Ed Miliband to stand up to him, given him no choice in the matter.

When a leader is forced to write an article saying (in the first person) how strong they’ve been, it’s a sure sign they’ve been compelled into action from a position of weakness. But Len McCluskey has over-played his hand. Ed Miliband now has to stand up to him, he can dodge the inevitability no longer. It may not feel like it right now, Ed, but that’s luck.

Here’s the second point that strikes me:

Why does it take a political scandal to force Labour and the unions to realise they can’t go on like this?

It’s exactly two years since the Observer’s Andrew Rawnsley wrote these words:

The growing bitterness between Labour and the unions … demonstrates that the relationship, as currently configured, is not really serving the best interests of either of them. Even when Labour leaders have considerable sympathy for a union cause, they cannot ally themselves with it for fear of being portrayed as puppets of union paymasters. Even when the unions have been decisive in electing a Labour leader, they do not get the support they feel they deserve. Until the relationship is reformed, Ed Miliband and future Labour leaders will continue to astonish the unions with their ingratitude.

As it happens Andrew Rawnsley was giving Ed Miliband a bit too much credit. The Labour leader hasn’t “astonished the unions with his ingratitude”. Mostly he’s been quite pliant. But, little by little, he has edged towards irking them. Last year, it was his announcement that he backed the Coalition’s pay freeze for public sector workers. More recently, it was his concession that he would stick to the Coalition’s public spending plans if he found himself in Downing Street in 2015.

The more Unite (and other unions) up the ante, the more pressure Ed Miliband will come under to show he’s his own man, that he can’t be pushed around even by his biggest donor. This is the very definition of a dysfunctional relationship. Especially as a majority of Unite’s members don’t even vote for the Labour party.

Gradually, inevitably, the formal Labour/union link will come to an end. Both sides will be happier once it does. The Labour party can reclaim itself for its own genuine supporters. The unions can lobby any and all parties to take up its members’ causes on their own merit. As Kahlil Gibran once said (and I’m sure he was anticipating just this eventuality): “If you love somebody, let them go, for if they return, they were always yours. If they don’t, they never were.”

* Stephen was Editor (and Co-Editor) of Liberal Democrat Voice from 2007 to 2015, and writes at The Collected Stephen Tall.

Read more by or more about , , , , , , or .
This entry was posted in News and Op-eds.


  • Eddie Sammon 7th Jul '13 - 9:30am

    I agree Len McCluskey comes across awfully, but I would prefer my opponents to be as close to me ideologically as possible, to ensure my views always win :).

    I agree Ed should have nipped this behaviour in the bud before it turned into a scandal.

    “If you wanted to be a smart trade union leader, however, you’d operate below-the-radar.”

    I would say that if you wanted to be an even smarter trade union leader you would be completely open and honest with everything you do, and I know you dislike secrecy so I am sure you agree with this!

  • Good heavens, I agree with Eddie.

    If Unite had been wholly open in its dealings with the Labour Party and totally up front about its intention to support Unite members in becoming Labour MPs, then the other parties might have protested but the response would have been ‘what’s to protest about? We’ve been fully transparent and our candidate has been selected fairly and openly.’

    As it is the whole matter is now toxic. Let’s please remember the overriding need for honesty and transparency in our party too.

  • paul barker 7th Jul '13 - 1:25pm

    I think we need to be careful not to fall for Mccluskeys “ordinary bloke” image, he is an experienced & crafty politician. I was surprised by the apparent clumsiness too & I wonder if it doesnt cover some “cunning plan”.
    The 2 possibilities that occur to me are –
    that Mccluskey knows something we dont, like Labour facing immenent bankruptcy, he has longstanding links with The Co-op Bank who are central to Labour finances
    or theres been a complete change of strategy with Mccluskey & his allies setting out to break up The Labour Party & use the fragments to build a “Mass Revolutionary Party”. This is The Trotskyist strategy in its most original form, going back to the 1940s.
    Either way Mccluskey is in an unbeatable position, there is nothing Milliband can do to him.

  • An interesting post, and I agree that Miliband has been lucky with his opponent, but this also cuts over to the Tories being lucky that they can portray Miliband in the pocket of, or at the very least unable to control Len.

    Miliband had a couple of days last week to demonstrate he leads the Labour Party and he fluffed it- Len will therefore be a gift not to Miliband (as he could have been), but to Labour’s opponents at the next election. Reading the Labour blogs there seems to still be a “who cares” attitude, but if you allow mud to stick in politics it never goes away.

    As to what would be best for British politics, it’s not altogether clear why organisations that now only serve as umbrella groups for insurance and legal assistance should have any right to determine candidates of a major political party more than say a banker who gave money and demanded a policy change.

    I suspect the wind is changing, and the one thing Miliband could do to gain the iniatiave would be to refuse further union donations until the likes of Unite are disentangled from the politics of the Labour Party – it will happen sooner or later, so best control it.

  • David Pollard 7th Jul '13 - 11:42pm

    If Len can’t see the point of this sub-Blairite Labour party which dutifully trots along behind the Tories, then he agrees with me (or me with him), but if he also thinks that he can turn Britain into a socialist state then he is wrong. Its about time the unions started looking after their members in the world as it exists instead of trying to bring in the revolution.

  • mark faircough 8th Jul '13 - 9:58pm

    I,m proud to say ive never been a member of the Labour Party

  • If you want a bit more background on what’s happened in Falkirk, read Erik Joyce MP’s blog at

    He’s obviously angry about being kicked out (despite it being largely his own fault), and is saying more than might be wise about what’s happening now.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?


Recent Comments

  • Cassie
    >George Thomas: Seems unfair to criticise/laugh at an individual Truss (with Kwarteng) tanked the economy with their disastrous mini-budget, costing the ...
  • Mick Taylor
    Jenny Barnes. I have no time whatsoever for Nick Clegg and the sheer stupidity he showed in running his side of the coalition and in refusing to listen to the m...
  • Mick Taylor
    Peter Martin. We don't join with Labour because they are centralising statists and are not Liberals. Perfectly happy to work with them on issues we agree on, bu...
  • Jenny Barnes
    "Clegg must have a ‘cunning plan’ " get himself a sinecure outside politics. Job done. Collateral damage - 80% of the LibDem party, NHS "reforms", be...
  • Michael Cole
    Barry Lofty is right to point out that "... the country was facing another economic meltdown at the time and desperately needed a stable government ..." The ...