Will the Lib Dems back Labour's mansion tax motion?

If Clegg supports the motion, he will enrage the Tories. If he opposes it, he will be accused of another "betrayal".

With exemplary timing, Labour has chosen the opening day of the Lib Dem spring conference to publish the text of its Commons motion in favour of a mansion tax. Nick Clegg can now expect to be challenged over the weekend to say whether his party will vote in favour of it when the debate is held on Tuesday.

The motion reads:

That this House believes that a mansion tax on properties worth over £2million, to fund a tax cut for millions of people on middle and low incomes, should be part of a fair tax system and calls on the Government to bring forward proposals at the earliest opportunity.

The decision to exclude any reference to the reintroduction of the 10p tax rate (which Labour's mansion tax would fund), in favour of a vaguer commitment to "a tax cut for millions of people on middle and low incomes" (which could encompass a rise in the personal allowance), means it will be harder for the Lib Dems not to support it. Vince Cable previously suggested that his party would back the motion provided that Labour did not engage in "party political point scoring" and "drag in other issues like the 10p rate".

It depends entirely how they phrase it. If it is purely a statement of support for the principle of a mansion tax I’m sure my colleagues would want to support it.

But very often in these opposition days they can’t resist the temptation to make party political point scoring and drag in other issues like the 10p rate and if that happens I am sure we will not. It is up to them to be statesmanlike and sensible.

Clegg similarly refused to rule out voting with Labour ("Neither Vince nor I know what will be put before us so we can't of course determine in advance how we would vote"), prompting David Cameron to say that he would be "rather disappointed" if his deputy did so. He told ITV News: "I haven’t asked him the question. But as it’s not in the Coalition Agreement to have a mansion tax, I would be rather disappointed if he did."

For Labour, this is a win-win situation. If the Lib Dems back the motion, Miliband will attack the coalition as divided, while painting the Tories as the party of the rich. If the Lib Dems oppose it or abstain, he will accuse Clegg's party of lacking the gumption to even vote for its own policy. As shadow financial secretary to the Treasury Chris Leslie said today:

If Nick Clegg and Vince Cable really believe in a fairer tax system they should back our motion in support of a mansion tax on pro perties over £2 million to pay for tax cuts for millions on middle and low incomes.

After going along with a Tory tax cut for millionaires, a failing economic plan, a VAT rise and a trebling of tuition fees this is a chance for the Liberal Democrats to finally vote for something that was in their manifesto.

With the Lib Dems already far from short of political anxieties, Labour has just created another dilemma for Clegg's party.

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg and Labour Party leader Ed Miliband attend a ceremony at Buckingham Palace. Photograph: Getty Images.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

The Future of the Left: trade unions are more important than ever

Trade unions are under threat - and without them, the left has no future. 

Not accepting what you're given, when what you're given isn't enough, is the heart of trade unionism.

Workers having the means to change their lot - by standing together and organising is bread and butter for the labour movement - and the most important part? That 'lightbulb moment' when a group of workers realise they don't have to accept the injustice of their situation and that they have the means to change it.

That's what happened when a group of low-paid hospital workers organised a demonstration outside their hospital last week. As more of their colleagues clocked out and joined them on their picket, thart lightbulb went on.

When they stood together, proudly waving their union flags, singing a rhythmic chant and raising their homemade placards demanding a living wage they knew they had organised the collective strength needed to win.

The GMB union members, predominantly BAME women, work for Aramark, an American multinational outsourcing provider. They are hostesses and domestics in the South London and Maudsley NHS Trust, a mental health trust with sites across south London.

Like the nurses and doctors, they work around vulnerable patients and are subject to verbal and in some cases physical abuse. Unlike the nurses and doctors their pay is determined by the private contractor that employs them - for many of these staff that means statutory sick pay, statutory annual leave entitlement and as little as £7.38 per hour.

This is little more than George Osborne's new 'Living Wage' of £7.20 per hour as of April.

But these workers aren't fighting for a living wage set by government or even the Living Wage Foundation - they are fighting for a genuine living wage. The GMB union and Class think tank have calculated that a genuine living wage of £10ph an hour as part of a full time contract removes the need for in work benefits.

As the TUC launches its 'Heart Unions' week of action against the trade union bill today, the Aramark workers will be receiving ballot papers to vote on whether or not they want to strike to win their demands.

These workers are showing exactly why we need to 'Heart Unions' more than ever, because it is the labour movement and workers like these that need to start setting the terms of the real living wage debate. It is campaigns like this, low-paid, in some cases precariously employed and often women workers using their collective strength to make demands on their employer with a strategy for winning those demands that will begin to deliver a genuine living wage.

It is also workers like these that the Trade Union Bill seeks to silence. In many ways it may succeed, but in many other ways workers can still win.

Osborne wants workers to accept what they're given - a living wage on his terms. He wants to stop the women working for Aramark from setting an example to other workers about what can be achieved.

There is no doubting that achieving higher ballot turn outs, restrictions on picket lines and most worryingly the use of agency workers to cover strikers work will make campaigns like these harder. But I refuse to accept they are insurmountable, or that good, solid organisation of working people doesn't have the ability to prevail over even the most authoritarian of legislation.

As the TUC launch their Heart Unions week of action against the bill these women are showing us how the labour movement can reclaim the demands for a genuine living wage. They also send a message to all working people, the message that the Tories fear the most, that collective action can still win and that attempts to silence workers can still be defeated.