It's time to stand up to the union bullies
The new Government's decision to simply buy its way out of a political headache set a precedent that was keenly observed by the unions. Junior doctors are once again militating for massive pay rises, with strikes on the way. The Unite union, meanwhile, one of Labour's financial backers, is attempting to put the squeeze on the party over Angela Rayner's stance on the Birmingham bin strikes.
Unite has suspended Ms Rayner's membership and is now reviewing its relationship with the party. Ms Rayner, for her part, is understood to believe she is not currently a member regardless of the union's stance. She should build on this: it is the Government's task to stand up to union bullies attempting to extort the taxpayer at a point when the public finances are already under intolerable strain.
Similarly, Wes Streeting, the Health Secretary, must stand firm in his negotiations with the British Medical Association. His proposal to cut gold-plated pensions to fund current pay rises is a good one, and deserves serious consideration. The BMA's insistence that doctors require large pay rises to make up for price rises since 2008, on the other hand, appears to be rooted in the use of an inflation measure known to significantly overstate the rate of price increases. Given that NHS productivity in hospitals has fallen since 2019, it is difficult to see how such a rise can possibly be viewed as reasonable, even by partisan advocates. Bridget Phillipson, the Education Secretary, for her part, is facing the prospect of further strikes, with the National Education Union rejecting an offer of a 2.8 per cent pay rise.
The overall impression is of a Government that seems to lack any tool for dealing with union pressure other than simply folding and paying up. With the economy now beginning to weaken under the burden of the state, it is surely time for a new strategy.
Yet the current thrust of Government policy is to give the unions more powers and more concessions. The Employment Rights Bill is set to be followed by the repeal of the minimum service laws put in place by the Conservatives in an attempt to 'create a better relationship with unions that will prevent the need for strikes'. This is utterly wrongheaded. The Government should aim to keep public services operating, and to give employers certainty. It is time to weaken the hand of the unions, not strengthen it.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
18 minutes ago
- The Independent
Man United fans say ‘enough is enough' ahead of new protest
A Manchester United supporters' group, The 1958, has announced a new protest against the Glazer family and Sir Jim Ratcliffe. The protest will take place on 17 August, marching to Old Trafford before the Premier League opener against Arsenal, with banners reading 'Jim Can't Fix This'. The group criticises the Glazers' two decades of ownership and their 'debt mountain', stating that 'enough is enough'. They accuse Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who acquired a 28.94 per cent stake and operational control in February, of being 'complicit' in the club's ongoing issues by aligning with the Glazers. Ratcliffe previously indicated in March that he would consider leaving if he faced the same level of abuse directed at the Glazer family.
Telegraph
19 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Labour's decision to close the Fleming Fund is a false economy that puts our national security at risk
Health emergencies rarely respect borders or budgets. As I write, the world is facing an antibiotic emergency, with bacteria rapidly evolving resistance to the treatments we depend on to counter infectious diseases. Without effective antibiotic treatments, global health and the global economy are defenceless against the likes of pneumonia and sepsis. Antibiotics are the infrastructure of modern medicine, making chemotherapy, caesarean sections and hip replacements possible. More than 1.1million people die across the world every year because of antibiotic resistance, including 35,000 in the UK alone. These trends are increasing and inter-generational, with deaths in children tripling in the last three years. For the last decade, the UK has been at the forefront of global efforts to tackle the wider threat posed by antimicrobial resistance (AMR). While antibiotic resistance poses the single biggest threat to modern medicine, AMR points to a serious problem for all types of antimicrobial agents – antifungals, antivirals, and antiparasitics – threatening to reverse all the significant gains we've made against HIV, malaria, and tuberculosis. The UK's Fleming Fund has been a bulwark against such threats: building laboratory capacity in 25 low- and-middle-countries to detect emerging AMR outbreaks, allowing for proactive, data-driven responses before they escalate into global crises. Among many other things, the Fleming Fund has tripled the genomic sequencing capacity across the entire African continent – which even pivoted to detect Covid-19 variants. The UK government's decision to shut down the Fleming Fund is a false economy and directly puts our national security at risk. It will cost lives, as well as precious GDP that could be spent on frontline NHS services. If we are to learn any lessons at all from Covid-19, it should be that we cannot afford to cut corners when it comes to preventing and preparing for inevitable pathogenic threats. Bold investment to protect against AMR Decisions made today will directly impact our ability to counter and contain AMR pandemics in the very near future. When I was Chancellor in 2023, the Treasury recognised the economic health ramifications of AMR, and the UK government commissioned economic studies to better understand the risks and opportunities. The Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation found that if AMR resistance accelerates in line with poorer-performing countries, the world faces an additional seven million deaths globally by 2050. The Center for Global Development then estimated that economically, this would wipe $1.7 trillion annually off global GDP by 2050 and it will cost $175 billion extra a year for health systems to treat people. Country-level estimates released recently estimate that the British economy would be $59 billion smaller in this scenario and the UK would spend an additional $2.8 billion a year treating superbugs. $296 billion and $188 billion would be wiped off the US and EU economies respectively. In contrast, this research shows that there would be large economic benefits to the UK and elsewhere if we invest in improving the treatment of infections. With the UK economy facing significant challenges and the NHS workforce facing rising pressures, now is the time to act boldly and invest proactively to protect against AMR. Whilst the UK alone cannot solve AMR, the UK can and should leverage its world-leading technical expertise and diplomatic leadership through the Fleming Fund, its Special Envoy on AMR, Dame Sally Davies, and other global investments in AMR. Even in a world where only 0.3 per cent of gross national income (GNI) is earmarked for international aid funding, there must be a budget line for AMR. If we are to drive economic growth and build resilience against health threats at home and abroad, we need decisive action with investments that put health security first. With an evolved Fleming Fund, we can mitigate against the worst effects of AMR by supporting research and development of new antibiotics, increasing access to treatments in countries where lack of access accelerates resistance, embedding large-scale education and training programmes to ensure the sustainable and responsible use of existing antibiotics, and harnessing AI for diagnostic tests and surveillance for the UK and the countries most severely impacted by AMR. A world without the Fleming Fund puts even greater pressure on UK government and the life sciences sector to find new ways to prepare for the pandemics we already detect and those we are yet to detect, to safeguard UK health and economic security. Now is the time for the government to step up.
BBC News
19 minutes ago
- BBC News
MPs write to Yorkshire Water over £1.3m payments
A group of Yorkshire Labour MPs have written to the chair of their region's water company to demand answers over "disgraceful" payments made to its chief executive. The MPs, which include Rother Valley's Jake Richards and Bradford West MP Naz Shah, are addressing the £1.3m in previously undisclosed payments paid to Yorkshire Water boss Nicola Shaw. The company has previously defended the payments, saying they were from the firm's parent company Kelda Holdings, which is based offshore. MPs have now written to the company's chair Vanda Murray calling for full transparency over the payments. Richards said: "At a time when constituents are facing a 41% increase in water bills, sewage is polluting our rivers, and pipes are bursting, the CEO is accepting payments that completely contradict her public statements. "Nicola Shaw promised she would decline bonuses out of respect for public anger, while in private she accepts even more money."He said this was the reason why public confidence in water companies was at "rock bottom". Yorkshire Water, which announced a hosepipe ban for millions of users in July, was one of six firms banned from paying "unfair" bonuses to their executives this year.A report in The Guardian said Ms Shaw had received £1.3m in previously undisclosed extra pay since 2023 from Yorkshire Water's parent company, Kelda company said this was for work including "investor engagement, financial oversight, and management of the Kelda Group", and the money came from said the payments were made in addition to her £660,000 salary, and came from Kelda Holdings, which is registered in Jersey. In the letter to Ms Murray, the MPs said: "It is disgraceful that Ms Shaw has publicly refused bonuses and yet discreetly accepted large payments."The also pose a series of detailed questions, including why she was paid £1.3m in addition to her salary, why Yorkshire Water's parent company is based offshore and if Ms Shaw's payments were an indirect substitute for bonuses she had publicly declined? MPs to sign the letter include: Abtisam Mohamed, Sheffield CentralClive Betts, Sheffield South EastRichard Burgon, Leeds EastAnna Dixon, ShipleyJosh Fenton-Glynn, Calder ValleyGill Furniss, Sheffield Brightside and HillsboroughFabian Hamilton, Leeds North EastAlison Hume, Scarborough and WhitbyJake Richards, Rother ValleyNaz Shah, Bradford WestAlex Sobel, Leeds Central and HeadingleyMarie Tidball, Penistone and Stocksbridge Yorkshire Water has been fined several times recently for failures over wastewater and sewage, including in March when it had to pay £40m to the regulator company was ordered to pay more than £900,000 last month after polluting a watercourse with millions of litres of chlorinated water, causing the death of hundreds of in May, the company was ordered to pay £350,000 after a watercourse in North Yorkshire was polluted with hosepipe ban was also introduced on 11 July after a period of very hot and dry weather across the country left reservoir stocks low. Yorkshire Water said it had no additional comment to make regarding the the firm previously said regarding the payments to Ms Shaw from Kelda Holdings, that as part of her role she also does "some work for the benefit of Yorkshire Water's parent company, Kelda Group".This work included "investor engagement, financial oversight, and management of the Kelda Group, which is recognised by a fee of £660k paid by shareholders".It said it did not believe work done on investor-related activities should be paid for by Yorkshire Water company added that the fee "reflects the critical importance of the work during this period that was led by Nicola in securing long-term investment for Yorkshire Water".It said: "We are determined to make improvements to our performance so we can deliver our part in creating a thriving Yorkshire, doing right for our customers and the environment." Listen to highlights from West Yorkshire on BBC Sounds, catch up with the latest episode of Look North.
