Elephant on the Doorstep
Labour leader - Ed Miliband - is calling for Rupert Murdoch's media empire to be cut down to size.
Speaking yesterday, the Labour leader said that it is "unhealthy" for one group to control so much - of the newspaper and television market - arguing that large concentrations of power lead to abuses and a neglect of responsibility.
"I do not agree that is healthy for our country. It is not healthy for our democracy where we see too much power in one set of hands. It is not healthy for a country that believes in responsibility all the way to the top of society," added Ed.
Now I agree with this argument - because I believe, broadly speaking, that 'small is beautiful' rather than 'big is best' - when it comes to media groups, banks, trade unions and most other things really.
In which case where does Ed Miliband stand on the big three public sector unions - GMB, Unite and Unison - which claim around 2 million members - yet in practice act like a monopoly or an organised 'cartel'.
We are now down to only three super unions - and the much talked about merger between GMB and Unison would leave just two - and potential union members even less choice.
But twenty years ago there was much more of a mixed economy and lots more unions to choose from - COHSE, NALGO, NUPE, ASTMS, TGWU, APEX, AEU, AEUW (TASS) and so on.
The existing 'big three' public sector unions all support the Labour party of course - they don't affiliate to any other political party - even though it's clear that most union members don't support Labour - in Scotland, for example, the SNP has overtaken Labour in the popular vote.
The 'big three' unions provide around 90% of Labour funding - and the affiliated unions still control 50% of the votes at Labour party conference - as well as having a huge influence over the selection of candidates.
The political fund ballots which allow unions to affiliate to a political party - have a turnout of much less than 10% - yet the result of the ballot is treated as a block vote which covers all union members.
So union members have to 'opt-out' of the political fund - rather than making a clear decision to positively 'opt-in' - which happens in Northern Ireland, for example.
Which begs the question:
'What does Ed Miliband intend to do about this unhealthy concentration of union power - which amounts to an elephant sitting on his doorstep?
Speaking yesterday, the Labour leader said that it is "unhealthy" for one group to control so much - of the newspaper and television market - arguing that large concentrations of power lead to abuses and a neglect of responsibility.
"I do not agree that is healthy for our country. It is not healthy for our democracy where we see too much power in one set of hands. It is not healthy for a country that believes in responsibility all the way to the top of society," added Ed.
Now I agree with this argument - because I believe, broadly speaking, that 'small is beautiful' rather than 'big is best' - when it comes to media groups, banks, trade unions and most other things really.
In which case where does Ed Miliband stand on the big three public sector unions - GMB, Unite and Unison - which claim around 2 million members - yet in practice act like a monopoly or an organised 'cartel'.
We are now down to only three super unions - and the much talked about merger between GMB and Unison would leave just two - and potential union members even less choice.
But twenty years ago there was much more of a mixed economy and lots more unions to choose from - COHSE, NALGO, NUPE, ASTMS, TGWU, APEX, AEU, AEUW (TASS) and so on.
The existing 'big three' public sector unions all support the Labour party of course - they don't affiliate to any other political party - even though it's clear that most union members don't support Labour - in Scotland, for example, the SNP has overtaken Labour in the popular vote.
The 'big three' unions provide around 90% of Labour funding - and the affiliated unions still control 50% of the votes at Labour party conference - as well as having a huge influence over the selection of candidates.
The political fund ballots which allow unions to affiliate to a political party - have a turnout of much less than 10% - yet the result of the ballot is treated as a block vote which covers all union members.
So union members have to 'opt-out' of the political fund - rather than making a clear decision to positively 'opt-in' - which happens in Northern Ireland, for example.
Which begs the question:
'What does Ed Miliband intend to do about this unhealthy concentration of union power - which amounts to an elephant sitting on his doorstep?
