Now is fair to say that I am not a Boris Johnson fan (Mr P is which sums him up really) and I generally do not agree with him or his policies. But I have to say his latest legislation proposal in that there should be a strike vote threshold before industrial action can take place makes absolute sense. This of course centers on the RMT and their threat of a weeklong strike next week which thankfully now has been called off.
Figures were released yesterday that only 11% of the London Underground’s 3429 drivers voted for the strike action. In an additional ballot of Bob Crow’s members only 46% turned out to vote! Of the 46% only 379 voted for strike action. Now you don’t have to be a mathematically genius to work out that this strike action was not agreed upon by the majority of the union members. Therefore, why should a small number of members hold such power over the other union members plus the people of London?
David Cameron does not seem to keen to back Boris up either as he has not given any indication whether he is going to do something about it. Perhaps he is trying to appease the Lib Dems who do not what to see changes made. Surely with all the infighting within the coalition someone can see that Boris has got a good point here. Especially with the London Mayoral elections next year can they not see how advantageous legislation like this would be for their campaign?
It has been estimated that the last tube strike cost London £50 million a day, affecting well over 1 million users, surely in this hard economic times the government should be trying to do what they can to stop militant unionists from holding the city and its people to ransom.
A Tory mayor, a Tory lead government, a chance to begin to break the most militant unions in the country, a chance to back Ed Miliband into an uncomfortable position to support the unions (who got him the leadership) or not… what would Maggie T do?
Disclaimer: I don't vote Tory...