When is a financial interest not a financial interest?
Curious news from Labour-run Haringey Council, where Labour’s round of budget cuts has come under fire for the smoke and mirrors behind the headline claims. One of the proposed Liberal Democrat amendments was to cut the amount of financial support the Haringey Council currently gives to trade unions by paying the salaries of union organisers.
By cutting funding for non-teaching trade union officials by £158,000, Haringey Council could instead have dropped the planned cuts to services for vulnerable older people. In a tough financial environment, I think most people would have put protecting services for older people ahead of giving trade unions money to employ staff, particularly as unions have their own direct sources of income which can fund their work.
The proposal would have meant that Haringey Council cut funding for Unite, UNISON and the GMB representatives. Those three unions are also major financial backers of the Labour Party and the first two have also made donations to Hornsey & Wood Green Constituency Labour Party in the last two years.
So you might have expected Labour councillors elected with the help of financial donations from these trade unions to have declared a financial interest in a debate on whether or not the unions should in turn receive financial support from the council. But did they? No.
The tragedy of Labour always lies somewhere in the finances, doesn’t it? When I did some work at a youth centre in Glasgow, the counsellors always had a tale or three about things like councillors and taxis. It’s as if they think the purpose of getting elected is to give yourself as much privilege as you think the rich are born into.
I’m curious, though. Assuming your point boils down to the difference between legality and ethics – is the legal definition of “financial interest” different to what the layman might think is a “financial interest”?
Jon: there are rules about declaring financial interests, so there are technical definitions which do not necessarily have to be the same as plain English understandings of the phrase. In this case, there’s an outstanding complaint that is yet to be ruled on as to whether the rules have been broken.
What about the NUT -or have they amalgamated? Last time I was in touch, there were at least 2 full-time NUT staff employed by Haringey, led by the redoubtable Tony Brockman.