
QUENTIN LETTS: What will become of the builder who sends his labourer for two tins of tartan paint?
After the Bolshevik revolution of 1917, military units had komissars who were enforcers for the regime.
Given their power to denounce soldiers to the Soviet authorities, it wasn't long before they were heartily loathed.
These komissars kept an eye on the ranks. They noted which men had an independent streak and they made sure any scepticism about the new political order did not spread.
Light-hearted banter brightens most places of work. Life would become dull if we could not rib one another, devise nicknames and tease workmates when they goof.
But under Ms Rayner's Bill, 'third-party harassment' will be reportable to and by diversity officers.
The unifying benefits of banter will be lost to suffocating fear of propriety. Morale will be dented.
Work will become more of a drudge. Is this really what Labour MPs want? Quite what constitutes 'harassment' will be for courts to decide.
The lawyers are going to be busy, as will Ms Rayner's union allies.
This law will also give trade union reps leverage over free-spirited souls who crack jokes at work. If those people pay their union dues, their indiscretions will no doubt be overlooked.
But anyone who seems a bit too Right-wing or 'Brexity' will be fed into the procedural mangle.
As for bosses, if they refuse to meet unions' pay demands, you can bet the banter komissars will find more incidents to report.
My wife often works on a building site. She removes paint from doors and windows. 'Here's our stripper,' say her male workmates.
She thinks this is a hoot, but you can see how a grievance-surfing lawyer could turn that into a demand for thousands in compensation.
Construction sites are fruity places. She was once on all fours, helping a contractor fit some under-floor piping, and had to tell him, 'give me another inch'. Cue much ribald laughter.
Under Ms Rayner's proposals it might not even require a complaint by the alleged victim of banter.
Diversity officers could themselves decide to report any incidents, starting a legalistic process that will last months, ruin reputations and create untold stress.
More money will be spent on human resources and training. There will be more rules, more anxiety, more suspicion, less freedom.
I once worked at a warehouse where a forklift accidentally pronged a pallet of Brut 33 aerosols. What a stink.
The forklift driver was the target of plenty of banter. Richly deserved it, too. My son, new to a labouring job, was dangled over a sewage pit by his ankles.
A union rep might call that bullying but from that day my son felt part of the team.
I know of another young lad who was sent off by his foreman to buy 'two tins of tartan paint, and holes for fence-posts'.
He was told 'the holes aren't heavy but there's nothing to hold on to'. It was a while before he realised he was being asked to buy thin air. Likewise, he was told to 'go to the van and bring back a new bubble for the spirit-level'.
The weird thing is that Ms Rayner is supposedly the one normal, working-class person in a Cabinet of wonks.
In pressing for this mad law she is showing herself to be as out of touch as the rest of them. All because she is ambitious for the top job and wants to suck up to her union paymasters. How pathetic.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Independent
27 minutes ago
- The Independent
Will Keir Starmer scrap the two-child benefit cap? What to know
Sir Keir Starmer 's Labour Party has reportedly decided against scrapping the controversial two-child benefit cap. This decision follows a U-turn on welfare cuts, which has left a significant £5bn hole in Labour's spending plans. Senior Labour figures have indicated that potential tax increases may be necessary to offset the financial implications of not approving welfare changes. Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson stated that recent decisions have made future spending choices, particularly those aimed at tackling child poverty, more challenging. The move is expected to cause further discontent among Labour backbenchers, while critics argue the cap contributes to child poverty.


The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Scrapping two-child benefit cap may be harder after welfare U-turn, minister says
Downing Street's U-turn on welfare reforms last week will make it harder to implement other policies such as potentially scrapping the two-child benefit cap, Bridget Phillipson has said. The education minister said Labour was still committed to tackling child poverty but, when asked if the backbench rebellion that resulted in about £5bn of annual savings on welfare being scrapped had diminished the chances of the cap being removed, she said there was an impact. 'The decisions that have been taken in the last week do make future decisions harder,' she told BBC1's Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg. 'But all of that said, we will look at this collectively in terms of all of the ways that we can lift children out of poverty.' She added on: 'The mission that we're driving across government is about making sure that background doesn't determine success, because for far too many children in our country, the family that they're born into, the town that they're born into, will absolutely determine their life chances.' Asked the same question on Sky's Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips, Phillipson said: 'The changes in the last week, of course, have come at a cost, and we have been upfront about that.' She added that a child poverty taskforce she was leading with the work and pensions secretary, Liz Kendall, was 'looking at every way that we can lift more children out of poverty'. Measures already taken included an expansion of the eligibility for free school meals, plus the plan announced on Sunday for one-stop family hubs across England to offer parents advice and support, intended to in part replace the Sure Start system introduced under the previous Labour government and then hugely cut back by the Conservatives. Phillipson said she had heard the views of the many Labour backbenchers and child poverty charities who want the two-child benefit cap removed. The cap, which limits families claiming many means-tested benefits to their first two children, apart from in very limited circumstances, was introduced under the Conservatives. Experts say scrapping it would be the single most effective way of reducing child poverty. They say about 100 children are pulled into poverty every day by the limit. Phillipson said: 'But they will appreciate, as we all do, that any change we set out in this area or in any other area, we've got to be clear about what the cost is and how we make sure that the numbers add up.' The taskforce, she said, was 'considering all of the ways in which we can make sure that we have a fairer and more equal society and a country where children are not scarred by child poverty'. She added: 'My message to my colleagues, to parents, to campaigners and to everybody watching this morning, is that this Labour government is serious about tackling child poverty.'


The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Corbyn and Sultana's new breakaway party will only boost Nigel Farage, Neil Kinnock warns
Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana are working on the creation of a 'Farage assistance party', Neil Kinnock has said. The former Labour leader said left-wingers Mr Corbyn and Ms Sultana would 'only assist the enemies of Labour' by forming a breakaway challenger party. Lord Kinnock said that division on the left 'can only assist the parties of the right', including Kemi Badenoch 's Conservatives and Nigel Farage 's Reform UK. Asked how much of a threat he thought any new party could be, after Corbyn suggested that discussions were under way, Lord Kinnock said: "I understand they are having a bit of difficulty over thinking of a name. "In a comradely way, I'd suggest one. It would be the Farage assistance group." Lord Kinnock added: "The splintering offered by a new party of the left can only be of assistance to the enemies of Labour, of the working-class - the people who have no means of sustaining themselves other than the sale of their labour by hand and by brain - and can only be of benefit to the egos of those who are running such a party." His comments come after Ms Sultana on Thursday night said she would co-lead a new party with Mr Corbyn aimed at tackling poverty and inequality and opposing war. Mr Corbyn, who led Labour in 2019 to its worst general election defeat in decades, appeared to have been wrong-footed by Ms Sultana's announcement, however. In a non-committal statement, the independent Islington MP said: 'The democratic foundations of a new kind of political party will soon take shape. Discussions are ongoing – and I am excited to work alongside all communities to fight for the future people deserve.' It emerged on Sunday that Mr Corbyn's top team had repeatedly urged Ms Sultana to walk back the announcement, and even asked her to delete it once he had seen it. The Sunday Times reported that Mr Corbyn's wife, Laura Alvarez, also urged Ms Sultana to delete social media posts unveiling the new venture, but was ignored. Messages seen by the paper show that Pamela Fitzpatrick, a co-director at Mr Corbyn's Peace and Justice Project, said in a group chat: 'Neither Jeremy nor Laura deserves to be treated with such a lack of respect.' Asked about the challenger party, education secretary Bridget Phillipson said 'some of those involved checked out of the Labour Party quite a long time ago'. She told the BBC's Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg that Labour will be judged on the difference they "make to people's lives" come the next election, when asked whether she was worried about a party to the left of the Government. "I think when it comes to the formation of a new party, some of those involved, I think (...) checked out the Labour Party quite a long time ago. "Now it's for them to forge their way forward.' The warnings come despite polling conducted by More in Common last month – well before Ms Sultana unveiled the plans about how the public would vote if a left-leaning party led by Mr Corbyn emerged. The hypothetical scenario saw 10 per cent of voters say they would back the party, taking three points from Labour, four points from the Greens, one point from the Lib Dems and one point from the SNP. Labour was left with 20 per cent support, neck and neck with the Tories, while Reform UK was on 27 per cent. Unveiling the planned party on Thursday, Ms Sultana confirmed her resignation from Labour and announced plans to co-lead the new party alongside Mr Corbyn and 'other independent MPs, campaigners and activists across the country'. She had been sitting as an independent MP despite being a Labour member after losing the whip for rebelling against the government's King's Speech. 'Westminster is broken but the real crisis is deeper', she said, warning that the 'two-party system offers nothing but managed decline and broken promises'. The MP added: 'A year ago, I was suspended by the Labour Party for voting to abolish the two-child benefit cap and lift 400,000 children out of poverty. 'I'd do it again. I voted against scrapping winter fuel payments for pensioners. I'd do it again. 'Now, the government wants to make disabled people suffer; they just can't decide how much.'