Victor ludorum
POLITICAL COMMENTARY AUBERON WAUGH
From time to time in the past this column has given expression to various rude noises on the subject of trade union leaders. It did not then seem likely that the grisly hierarchy, in travail, could ever produce a man who would be hailed as possessing all the qualities of Niccolo Machiavelli, David Frost, President Kennedy, Simon Dee and Pope John. Yet the TUC'S new general secretary, Mr Victor Feather, seems to have achieved the impossible.
By the combination of a quiet manner with unrelenting firmness, he has brought the Government to its knees on an issue where public opinion is almost consistently opposed to him, without antagonising either the Labour party, which might be threatened with destruction, or the organs of communication, which for some reason attach great importance to the reform of industrial relations. Even if the entire squabble between the Government and the TUC is reduced to considerations of amour pro pre, since neither has the power or the inclination to introduce meaningful re- form, then Mr Feather is still the victor, since he has mysteriously convinced large sections of the Labour party, including those on the right, that the amour propre of the trade union movement takes pre- cedence over that of the Labour govern- ment.
In order to gauge the extent of his achievement, it might be a good idea to imagine how others would have approached the same task. Mr George Woodcock would have retired into almost total in- comprehensibility, weaving a complicated web to mask the immense subtleties of obstructionism which were going on behind the scenes. But he would never have succeeded in convincing the public that he had a reasonable case, and he almost certainly would not have succeeded in carrying the two biggest unions with him in whatever settlement emerged.
Again, if this opposition had been led from the left, by someone like Hugh Scan- lon or Jack Jones, it would never have carried much weight in the parliamentary Labour party, let alone in the country or in the Cabinet. If at any time Mr Feather had allowed himself to appear callous or obdurate, he would immediately have for- feited all public sympathy. As it is, he has defended the indefensible with such masterly grace and skill that there will be very few people indeed who do not raise a cheer when the Government, having been soundly thrashed, starts giving its victory signs and announcing that the contest has ended in a draw.
Perhaps the Government's greatest mis- take in the conduct of the negotiations was to let Mr Wilson associate himself with the Bill. This resulted in a terrible conflict of mind among the country's natural union- bashers, who would rejoice quite as much, if not more, to see Mr Wilsote discomfited as they would to see the unions given a half-hearted and almost painless tap on the head. Perhaps the Prime Minister was frightened to leave Mrs Castle in charge, in case her following in the country grew to unmanageable proportions, and in case he missed an opportunity of ingratiating himself with the electorate. If so, his plan most unfortunately, misfired.
Moreover, his personal initiative pro- duced its usual crop of hyperbolical quot- ations, lovingly recorded, which can only be a source of embarrassment when the Government finally climbs down and accepts the rues proposals. It was Mrs Castle in fact, who said that the Govern- ment would lose all credibility if it climbed down, adding, somewhat mysteriously: 'If I want to commit suicide, that is my affair'. But she is just another minister, whose voice might be balanced against that of Mr Callaghan, prophesying ruin for the Labour party if the measures proceed. It was Mr Wilson who, at a meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party reported on 17 April, solemnly stated that the Bill's pass- age was essential to his government's con- tinuance in office, that its defeat would necessitate a general election. Who could ever believe that it would include penal sanctions after that? Plainly, the TUC had nothing to fear.
The strategy of brinkmanship requires that there should be an abyss from which both parties must similarly recoil. In effect, we have had Mr Wilson threatening to hurl himself into it without inflicting any commensurate damage on his antagonist, Mr Feather. No situation could be less well suited for a policy of brinkmanship, but poor Mr Wilson continues to shake his fist as he totters, alone, on the edge: 'The question at issue really is whether the Labour government can continue in office,' he bleated to the ruc on 21 May. At Barns- ley, after the special meeting of the ruc at Croydon, he stuck his neck out still further. Referring to the TUC'S Programme for Action, which has replaced Mrs Castle's In Place of Strife as the blueprint for legis- lation, the Prime Minister said that there was not, in their proposals 'enough assertion of authority, not enough follow- through, to give reasonable hope that what the TUC propose can alone solve this prob- lem.' Later, he added, even more gratuitous- ly: "This problem must be solved. It will not be solved by abdication by the Govern- ment of its responsibilities.'
On the contrary, as Mr Feather knows only too well, it can only be solved, so far as Mr Wilson is concerned, by the Govern- ment's abdication of its responsibilities. And until the Government actually makes the abdication, we have the sad spectacle of the Prime Minister begging at Mr Feather's feet, like some particularly masochistic dog: 'Please, please Mr Feather, give me an assertion of your authority and what- ever happens don't spare me the follow- through.' We have heard of no ministers threatening to resign if the Government backs down, except for Mrs Castle, who could never be persuaded that She had backed down from anything.
Tories, of course, are licking their lips in readiness for the arrival of a Bill without penal sanctions, so that they can rub the Prime Minister's nose in his own reflections on the subject.
But I suspect they may be over- optimistic in expecting any great popular revulsion from the Government's abdica- tion of responsibility. Their own record in industrial reform, or union-bashing, is not so wonderful, whatever brave noises Mr Heath and Mr Carr may make from the opposition benches, Whatever settlement emerges will be presented as a great vic- tory for Mr Wilson and Mrs Castle, with the trade unions having been talked into reforming themselves, and I should have thought that the public will tend to accept this interpretation, at any rate until time shows that the TUC has no intention of using its powers and that unofficial strikes continue much as before.
So far as the Labour party is concerned, any whittling down of the Bill is bound to be good for ifs internal cohesion and the more the Bill is whittled down, the less aggressive will its supporters be, as well as its opposers. Perhaps, in the long run, relations between the trade union move- ment and the Labour party will never be quite the same, but that may well be a good idea for all concerned, and this is hardly the time to worry about things of that sort. Far more important, where timing is concerned, is the question of how long it will take the public to realise that they have been sold a pup. A Labour cynic—dreadful to admit that such people exist—reckons that as the British economy is due for a period of recession, with correspondingly high unemployment, work- ers will not be too anxious to walk out as the mood takes them, whenever they are feeling a little unofficial or unconstitutional. High unemployment always has this sober- ing effect on the numbers of unofficial strikes. Then the Government will be able to point to these lower figures and claim that Mrs Castle's Industrial Relations Bill is biting, that Labour government really works. But I doubt whether the public is much concerned with official figures for strikes. It only needs the climate of a re- cession, one spectacularly silly unofficial strike next summer, a hostile press, and, Bob's your uncle, the Bill hasn't worked after all, as we never thought it would.
Inevitably, however, the Government is going to look a bit silly. Hawkish speeches, such as we heard from Mr Denis Healey over the weekend, can only make Mr Wilson and Mrs Castle look even sillier when that moment comes. Two Labour backbenchers of my acquaintance think that this was precisely Mr Healey's intention, What a perfectly beastly thing to think!
Meanwhile, the Wilson camp is busy put- ting it around that the Bill will certainly be through the Commons before it rises for the summer recess, that nagging wives and the call of the sun will prove far more effective in expediting its passage than any threats from Mr Mellish. Then the Lords will be summoned back early so that both Houses can have passed it before the opening of Parliament in October. However, since the Bill will almost certainly contain nothing remotely contentious, one can only inter- pret this talk as so much sugar for the birds. It is most unlikely to ruffle Mr Feather as he calmly considers whether or not to renew Mr. Wilson's dog licence for another year.
Previous page
