United Front

The Times of Malta

United Front

What on earth is strange or scandalous about the GWU taking part in Labour Party May Day celebrations today`

Why is it that those who never find any objection to the unrelenting support which the Nationalist Party, in and out of government, receives from the various` cells in the` network of powers, immediately cry foul when the Labour Party receives even mere symbolic` support from its sole traditional ally, the GWU`

The network of power supporting the Nationalist Party is found in the civil service, the courts, the media, the intelligentsia, the business organisations, the Church and wherever decisions are being taken which effect the balance of power of our society.` In recent times these have been joined by the UHM movement which finds no difficulty in using two weights two measures against government`s budgetary measures but are never subjected to the same criticism as the GWU.

Until our society continues to be dominated by this network it is in the interest of democracy not only to tolerate but to nurture a `contro-punto` by having the Labour Party openly supported by the GWU. Those who expect otherwise or who expect an apology for this had better conduct an independent test of their democratic credentials. I suspect that those who argue otherwise would merely tolerate` Labour`s existence as a` permanent opposition merely to justify their democratic rights to govern.

Which brings me to the current hot point in the industrial relations debate.` Do Unions have a right to order industrial action against government in protest against macro-economic budgetary measures`

For some budgetary measures cannot be the source of an industrial dispute and therefore can never lead to industrial action. If such action is taken then it is outside the net of protection afforded to unions and striking workers by the Industrial Relations Act.

The other point of view is that these measure act directly on the standard of living of the workers and therefore the Unions have a right to protect this standard of living through the ultimate means at their disposal when all negotiations fail, i.e industrial action.

A democracy is built on checks and balances. There exist no absolute right which is uncontestable. So the argument that the Government has an automatic right to take budgetary measures which cannot be contested by unions is just a non-starter. On the other hand the government has a right to govern and budgetary measures are one of the main tools through which the government can exercise such right. It is the balancing of these positions which bring about the true workings of a democracy.`

To what extent is the government right to govern within the terms of the mandate given to it by the electorate subject to the checks and balances of union power to use industrial action in an attempt to block government budgetary measures`

Anybody who attempts a simple yes or no answer to this hypothesis is over-simplifying things.` While government`s right to govern is the essence of democracy, where the rule of the majority has to prevail in full respect of the opinion of the minority and in full freedom for such minority to try to persuade the majority of its stands and opinions, this right cannot be unlimited or unchecked.

To my mind there are two main conditions which have to co-exist which would give unions moral right to use industrial action against government budgetary measures. Firstly the government has to be acting in clear breach of the mandate given to it by the electorate as contained in its electoral manifesto.` Secondly there has to be clear popular resentment against these measures giving a sense of betrayal of the power which the electorate can only exercise once every so many years.

International case history abounds. The most notable is probably the British unions widespread action against Labour government in the winter of discontent on 1978/79 which straight-jacketed the government forcing it to early elections in May 1979.` No one there doubted the unions right to take such actions when the living standards of their members was being eroded in conflict with anything that the government had in its electoral mandate.` The popular resentment against the government was clearly brought out by the result of the election which followed.

On the other hand when the elected Thatcher government found similar opposition from the unions she stood them up and won fortified by the strength of her electoral mandate and the popular support which was evidenced in its subsequent re-elections with fortified majority.

Applying these principles to the current local situation I have no doubt that the Government is acting way out of line of its electoral mandate promising heaven on earth without any pain or efforts as typified by its battlecry call of GID FIDUCJA DIREZZJONI. There is also ample proof building up that Government has lost its majority support and has no authority to demand a national broad support for the re-structuring which we can no longer avoid.

In the circumstances rather than condemn the GWU for conforming with the tradition of taking part with Labour in the May Day celebrations,` the Government would do better to re-check whether it has the democratic credentials to enforce budgetary measures in direct conflict with its electoral manifesto and if not whether the national interest would not be better served by obtaining a re-confirmation of the electoral mandate. Otherwise this seems to me as a playback of the third 1982-87 Labour defective legislature so much berated by those in power whose memories appear to be shortening by the day.