Ed Miliband doesn’t take a risk unless he has to. In his first two and a half years in charge of the Labour party, he eschewed a dramatic confrontation with the trade unions. Some in his circle wanted him to take them on, as part of a broader campaign against vested interests, but they were ignored, to the relief of Tory strategists.
That has all changed now. Miliband has been pitched into an argument with the unions that will determine whether he has a chance of reaching No. 10. The Labour leader was slow to react to the controversy about the union Unite allegedly trying to fix the selection of a candidate in the safe Labour seat of Falkirk. The Tories — under Lynton Crosby’s influence, a disciplined attack machine — quickly turned the issue into a test of Miliband’s strength.
On Tuesday, Miliband attempted to turn the tables. He announced that he wanted Labour to have a direct relationship with individual union members. At present, members of affiliated unions have to opt out of paying dues to Labour; in future, Miliband said, they should have to opt in. That change is meant to show he’s putting Labour’s house in order. And if Miliband really follows through, it could be more significant than any of the party reforms that Tony Blair enacted.
But some big questions are still open. If the Labour party is to have a direct relationship with everyone who joins it via a union, why shouldn’t they be treated just like every other member? What is the justification for the unions still having their own section of the Electoral College in leadership contests and a separate voting bloc at conference?
Having resisted acting for so long, Miliband needed to be bold.

Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in