Unions pull a long face over Blair's plans

By Hasan Suroor

LONDON, JUNE 28. The British Prime Minister, Mr. Tony Blair, resorted to dinner diplomacy on Wednesday to quell a simmering trade union revolt against creeping privatisation of public services but despite the polite post-dinner soundbites it was clear that the trade unions continued to be deeply suspicious of his Government's plans.

The Guardian, which reflects the unions' opinion, said the dinner failed to heal the `divisions' over Mr. Blair's move to give private sector a bigger role in delivering public services such as health and education. It said the Prime Minister had set himself on a ``collision course'' with unions by refusing to back down on his proposed `reforms'. His assurance that there would be no fullscale privatisation did not convince his guests who included some of the biggest beasts in Britain's trade union movement which may have been tamed in recent years but can still flex their muscles on a good day.

The dinner-and-pep-talk at Downing Street was a consequence of the widespread concern, shared by a vast majority of British public, over Mr. Blair's move to collaborate with private sector to improve services most of which are a shambles because of years of underinvestment.

While the public is wary of private sector because of the havoc it played with the railways which, since privatisation, have become Britain's shame, trade unions are worried about its consequences for workers. They have warned they would resist attempts to hand over staff in schools and hospitals to private sector managers. There is also opposition to give private sector a role in policy making because of fears that its decisions would be guided by profit motive, rather than public good.

Even the right-wing Daily Telegraph noted that the Prime Minister had been ``taken aback'' by the unions' hostility and said his plans were ``in disarray''. More detached observers while confirming the strong unions' reaction said there was little likelihood of the Prime Minister watering down his agenda as he believed that ``he had a mandate to deliver''.

Union leaders were cautious as they faced TV cameras after a good dinner - not the ``beer and sandwiches'' variety hosted by some previous residents of No. 10 - and spoke of a ``full and frank'' exchange but made it clear that they were not going home totally satisfied. They would wait, watch and decide their course depending on what the Government did. The threat of unions breaking their traditional ties with Labour in case Mr. Blair went ahead with his plans remained real. At least one union has already decided to stop contributing to the party fund.

One union leader was quoted as saying that there was a ``lack of understanding in Downing Street about the anger, resentment and worry of public sector workers''.

Another said the unions objected to the assumption that public sector was `bad' and private sector was necessarily `good'. The opposition to bringing in private sector into the National Health Service was particularly strong. ``The watchword in the NHS should be patient care, not profit,'' said one leading trade union official pointing out that privatisation would mean ``looking over our shoulders all the time worrying about profits''.

The left-wing of the Labour party has protested what it regards as Mr. Blair's `contempt' for ideology. One of the sharpest attacks has come from the party's former deputy leader, Mr. Roy Hattersley who has called for a ``counter coup'' to save the party's basic principles. ``We could resign or we could sulk in our tents. Or believing that the party does not belong to Tony Blair, we could rise up against the coup d'etat which overthrew the legitimate philosophy,'' he said in a newspaper interview. In coming months, observers expect the party's marginalised left- wing to join hands with unions in what could turn into an ideological battle.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : International
Previous : Tough timeframe to combat AIDS
Next     : Blair, Ahern seek to break deadlock