• Debate here.
Workers' Liberty supported Sharon Graham in last year's Unite the Union general secretary election. At the time, however, we sharply criticised her approach to labour movement political struggle and political representation (and this was among the reasons why a significant minority of our Unite group argued against backing her). Unfortunately those criticisms are being borne out and reinforced by current events.
Ann Field argues that Graham is engaged in anti-political demagogy and posturing that will not strengthen but undermine the fight against the Labour right and for a working-class political voice.
For another view, see Mark Simon's article. We welcome other contributions: awl@workersliberty.org
Running true to form, Unite General Secretary Sharon Graham responded to Keir Starmer’s ban on Labour Party front benchers attending RMT picket lines by threatening to cut Unite funding for the Labour Party.
In an interview with the Observer she said: “There’s no point giving money to a party that is basically sticking two fingers up to workers. It’s almost like an abusive relationship.”
Graham went on to raise the possibility of Unite disaffiliation from the Labour Party at its 2023 Rules Revision conference:
“I have no doubt it will come up with the Unite rules conference, I’ve got absolutely no doubt. The last time it was debated, it was only narrowly won. I think it’s harder and harder to defend.”
This is an echo – or a repeat – of statements made in February of this year during the Coventry bin workers strike:
“Let me be very clear – the remaining financial support of the Labour Party is now under review. Your behaviour and mistreatment of our members will not be accepted. … No longer will my union accept being treated like dirt by those who have their hands in our wallets at election time.”
Which was likewise an echo – or a repeat – of a threat/promise by Graham in December of last year that Unite would cut funding to the Labour Party and divert it unto union campaigning:
“There’s a lot of other money that we use from our political funds where, actually, I’m not sure we’re getting the best value for it.”
That, in turn, was a continuation – no-one can deny that Graham is consistent – of the anti-political demagogy of her General Secretary election campaign last August.
Graham promised that she would “take Unite out of Westminster and back to the workplace.” The “bright lights of Westminster” had “too often left what really matters to members in the shade.” A win for Graham in the election would mean that “there will be no more blank cheques for the Labour Party.”
A casual reader of Graham’s comments would assume that the relationship between Unite the Labour Party is some kind of commercial transaction.
Unite gives lots of money to the Labour Party (or allows the Labour Party to steal it: “those who have their hands in our wallets”). But the union is not getting value for money from the Labour Party CEO. So, it’s time for the union to think about taking its custom elsewhere.
But the financial support given by Unite to the Labour Party is not the only relationship – nor, for socialists, the most important relationship – between the union and the Party.
Like all affiliated unions, Unite sends delegates to local Constituency Labour Parties (CLPs), city-wide Local Government Committees, Labour Party Regional and National Committees, Labour Party equalities conferences, and Labour Party national conferences.
In fact, 50% of the votes cast at Labour Party national conferences are held by trade unions. (The Labour Party has a federal structure.) 40% of votes at conference are held by just three unions. One of them is Unite.
As an affiliated union, Unite also has the right to submit motions to the multiple layers of the Labour Party to which it sends delegates. That is to say, Unite could seek to make its policies Labour Party policies and for them to be carried out.
But Graham is not using those links between Unite and the Labour Party to promote left-wing and socialist policies and campaigns.
Instead, like a rookie member of the Socialist Workers Party, she equates the Labour Party with its leader, and complains about how bad the party/Starmer is, instead of pursuing a strategy for fighting Starmer and changing Labour for the better.
For all the many criticisms to be made of Len McCluskey’s stint as Unite General Secretary, this is straightforward regression.
Unite used to encourage members to join the Labour Party (and not just when Corbyn was leader). It advocated and fought for a three-pronged strategy: winning working people for Labour, winning Labour for working people, and winning a Labour government that governs in the interests of working people.
All that has disappeared with Graham.
Graham’s indifference – in fact aversion – to intervening in the political arena has been described as a form of ‘syndicalism from above’. In fact, Graham’s record over the past twelve months, after her election last August, is far worse than that.
She consistently lets Starmer and the Labour right off the hook.
There has been a massive backlash, for example, against Starmer’s ban on front benchers attending picket lines. Graham herself acknowledged that in her interview with the Observer: “I don’t know anyone who thinks that what happened to Sam Tarry is correct.”
But instead of being part of that backlash and seeking to shape its direction, using the influence which Unite could wield in the Labour Party if it wished to do so, Graham engages in empty demagogic denunciations.
Graham is dishonest. She stresses that Unite members will decide for themselves on affiliation or disaffiliation at the 2023 conference (“I think it’s a very difficult conversation and I think that members will decide.”) But her every statement on the Labour Party is mood music for disaffiliation.
It is the equivalent of a union leader denouncing the EU for being out of touch with ordinary people and claiming that the UK does not get value for money – and then finishing off by saying: But it’s not for me to say ‘in’ or ‘out’ – it’s up to the members to decide.
Graham’s lack of any political strategy – just what is Graham’s alternative to a Tory government after the next general election? – is covered up by increasingly outlandish demagogy.
While rightly criticising David Lammy MP in June for his refusal to support Unite and GMB members employed by British Airways in the event of a strike, Graham said:
“Supporting bad bosses is a new low for Labour and once again shows that politicians have failed. It is now down to the trade unions to defend working people. We are their only voice.”
All politicians – every last one of them – have failed? No politicians – without a single exception – provide a voice for working people? The Labour Party is dead and buried? And the “only voice” workers have left are their trade unions?
This is the kind of vacuous anti-political demagogy which was the hallmark of Graham’s election campaign, summed up by her statement: “When workers first stood on the picket lines, we didn’t have Westminster on our side. We just had each other.”
She omitted to add: And that is why unions created the Labour Party.
Graham’s demagogy also covers up her failure to implement Unite policy.
In response to plans announced by the Tories in May to introduce minimum-service agreements in the event of transport strikes, Graham promised:
“Unite will confront head-on and by whatever means necessary any further attacks on the right to strike. If you force our legitimate activities outside of the law, don’t expect us to play by the rules.”
And in response to Tory leadership candidate Liz Truss’s promise in July of a raft of new anti-union laws, Graham responded:
“The madcap proposals are an attempt to outlaw strike action and effective trade unions. This so-called manifesto is a declaration of war on the trade union movement and working people. In effect, it is a charter for massive social discontent.”
But the existing Tory anti-union laws already outlaw effective strike action and trade unionism, and place legitimate trade union activities outside of the law. Unite already has policy to oppose those laws head-on and by whatever means necessary.
The problem is that that policy, adopted and reaffirmed by successive conferences, has remained a dead letter. There is no need to wait for another raft of anti-union laws before implementing it – if the will was there to implement it.
Ironically, in denouncing the Tory anti-strike proposals in May, Graham said, striking a familiar theme: “And Labour now needs to stand up and be counted. It’s time for the political wing that was founded by and continues to be funded by our members to step up to the plate.”
One could equally well say, on the occasion of the end of her first year in office: Isn’t it time that Graham ditched the soundbites and apolitical demagogy, and instead stepped up to the plate herself?
And if Graham is wanting to stop Unite’s money being spent on a sham ‘workers voice’, then why not pull the plug on the Putin-apologist, left-antisemitic and pro-Brexit Morning Star? But of that there is not a murmur from Graham.
