Alex Snowdon on the war on the poor, Israel and organised labour

Keir Starmer’s partial U-turn on winter fuel payments was, unusually for this government, a popular move. Well, comparatively speaking. It is far from a full reversal of the hated policy. Instead the thresholds for claiming the payments will be altered.

The original decision to means test winter fuel payments, announced soon after Labour took office last summer, was a political disaster. It became something that defined how the new government was perceived by huge numbers of people. It was particularly damaging as it coincided with rising energy costs and the scandal around Keir Starmer claiming expensive gifts from donors, creating the perception of a deeply out-of-touch and uncaring prime minister.

This latest policy swerve is no doubt influenced by Labour’s catastrophic polling, compounded by the recent council elections where Reform gained massively at the expense of both Labour and Tories. Labour canvassers for the local elections reported that it was still getting mentioned – frequently – by disillusioned ex-Labour voters. The new position will do little to counteract the damage done by the original policy.

There were rumours that another U-turn was on its way: lifting the 2-child benefit cap. Gordon Brown, former prime minister, added his voice to the chorus calling for the cap to be scrapped. But it now appears that this is being avoided, with the postponement of a government strategy on tackling child poverty until at least the autumn.

This is another issue that has fuelled discontent. The failure to lift the cap – a move that would immediately reduce child poverty levels – speaks volumes about this government’s commitment to a new round of austerity at the expense of the poor.

Welfare cuts affecting disabled people have proved another area of controversy for the government. It is believed that over 100 Labour MPs have signed a letter to Labour whips saying they are unhappy about the plans. The pressure of poor election results and polling is opening up cracks in the Labour Party, enabling some MPs to start voicing objections. Dozens are likely to rebel when a Commons vote on disability cuts takes place, expected to be in June.

This issue is the cutting edge of the government’s commitment to squeezing public spending. It illustrates how those who can least afford cuts can be the hardest hit. It recalls the cruelty of Tory austerity and the stigmatisation of those claiming social security that accompanied it. 

The pay awards for many public sector workers (announced last week) reflect the tension between austerity and electoral considerations, rooted in awareness of how deeply unpopular the government has become. The pay rises for millions of people working in health and education are not enough to reverse long-term pay erosion or to address the challenges of staff recruitment and retention in those sectors. They are, however, around the same level as inflation and therefore may prove enough to prevent large-scale industrial action and avoid even greater unpopularity for Labour.

However, funding is a major concern in both health and education. When pay rises are not fully funded, it means cuts to services are required. This is against the backdrop of both the NHS and education being underfunded to begin with.

All of the above indicate why the People’s Assembly’s anti-austerity demonstration on 7 June is important. This is a government that is definitely vulnerable to pressure, yet also trying to cling to a ‘fiscal prudence’ agenda that is socially damaging and deeply unpopular. The demonstration is a chance to raise slogans, like ‘Welfare not Warfare’ and ‘Tax the Rich’, that point towards a different set of priorities.

The demonstration is extremely timely. It takes place days before the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, is due to announce long-term public spending plans.

It is also essential as a way to rally our forces as an alternative to the racism and division associated with Nigel Farage’s Reform party. It is currently the main beneficiary in British politics of discontent with a reviled political establishment. That needs to change.

Isolated Israel 

In the last week we have seen some movement on the foreign policy front too. But, as with the domestic front, these are small steps and not nearly good enough.

The joint statement from the governments of Canada, France and the UK went further in condemning Israel than we have seen previously. It strongly opposed the assault on Gaza and called for international aid to be allowed in to Gaza. This reflects the severity of the humanitarian disaster created by Israel. It is also influenced by public pressure, including last Saturday’s massive Palestine solidarity demonstration in London.

Netanyahu lashed out in response. Israel’s prime minister called the condemnations of Israel a ‘huge  prize’ for Hamas. He was particularly stung by snubs from US president Donald Trump and vice president JD Vance. Trump visited the Gulf states but not Israel, while Vance withdrew from a planned visit to Israel.

The US is pivoting towards rehabilitating the ‘normalisation’ process. It is reviving the Abraham Accords that make the Arab states acquiescent with Israel. This is under massive strain, though, as a result of Israel’s genocidal conduct, its growing international isolation, and the impact of the global mass movement for Palestine.

Israel’s isolation means that the apartheid state cannot rely on long-term allies to back it. The UK’s rhetoric has been backed up by the halting of a free trade agreement. At the same time, there is limited change in the UK’s approach to the arms trade with Israel. Demanding a full arms embargo on Israel remains a priority for the Palestine solidarity movement.

All-time low for union density

The annual report on trade union membership figures was released last week. It shows that in 2024 union membership was 6.4 million. 22% of all employees are in a union. 49.9% density in the public sector contrasts to 11.7% density in the much larger private sector.

The year-on-year fall in overall density was 0.4%, which fits into a longer-term pattern of decline. Union membership peaked at 13.2 million people in 1979. It declined sharply between then and the mid-1990s, under the impact of Tory deindustrialisation, waves of high unemployment and major defeats for unions.

Since around 1995, the rate of decline has been much slower. However, the growth of total numbers in employment over the last 30 years means that a small decline in raw numbers is actually a steep decline in union density.

It is the private sector where numbers have collapsed. This is reflected in the fact that mainly or entirely private sector unions like Usdaw, Unite and (most sharply) GMB are those recording declines in the last few years. Future growth in union membership will require unions organising effectively in the private sector, breaking into areas that currently have low membership.

In the public sector there has been some movement between unions in recent years, but not overall growth. The NEU gained at the NASUWT’s expense in schools and the RCN gained at the expense of other health unions, in both cases because – during the 2022/23 strike wave – they passed ballot thresholds and took national strike action. The BMA has also grown on the back of national strikes.

Unions grow when they have a serious organising strategy, geared towards building collective strength in workplaces, and when they take strike action that firmly demonstrates their relevance.