Michael Kelly: Sheridan will entertain but Labour holds the aces

I WOULDN'T vote for him in a month of Thursdays but I am delighted that tanned Tommy Sheridan has declared himself a candidate for the general election.

It will add a bit of interest, although not uncertainty, to the outcome in Glasgow.

Despite Labour's slogan that this election is a two-horse race between Tories and Labour in which the SNP is a non-starter, the contest in Glasgow already has to me, a Labour activist, all the signs of being a walkover.

Not that the Labour Party will admit it. Confidence is often mistaken for arrogance and voters punish complacency. But confirming the strengthening opinion polls, private canvass returns are now so strong all over the city that a clean sweep is quietly expected. You heard it here first.

There might be a glimmer of excitement out in the east where John Mason tries to hold on to the seat he won for the SNP in the wake of Wendy Alexander's resignation at Holyrood. Mason is hard-working and popular. But so were Jim Sillars and Margo MacDonald when they each won by-elections in Govan. They got chucked out again at the first time of asking. And bingo-promoting Baptist Mason will suffer the same fate at the hands of Margaret Curran.

That leaves Glasgow South West, where Tommy has decided to challenge Ian Davidson. Poor old Ian must be wondering what he has done deserve this. He must be the furthest left of all Glasgow's MPs.

Mind you, the expenses scandal left him scarred. He was accused of paying a friend from Glasgow 5,500 to do work on his London flat. But Tommy can hardly make a fuss about some poor unemployed Glasgow bloke being taken on to the public sector pay roll. The allegation, however, that the MP also took the same "family friend" shooting at events organised by the National Rifle Association with members of the House of Lords might well be jumped on by Sheridan, especially as no Lords were shot.

Because, like Tommy, Davidson is a republican. He's also a member of the left-wing Tribune Group and secretary of the Trade Union Group of MPs.

He will, therefore, find it quite hurtful that Tommy is being backed financially by a new left-wing grouping, the Trade Union and Socialist Coalition. To be launched officially this week by Bob Crow, leader of the RMT union which has called the national rail strike, it claims Labour no longer represents workers' interests. One of the coalition members, the Prison Officers' Association, has had ample opportunity to assess Tommy's suitability as a candidate.

Yet Ian Davidson is a friend in parliament to the trade unions. But Tommy lives in the constituency and he clearly now feels that his political brand – tarnished by his court battles and the break-up of his Scottish Socialist Party – is best marketed domestically. It's just tough that a slightly pinker socialist stands in the way.

In fact, the case highlights the paradoxical and intractable problem that the trade union movement refuses to face up to – how to construct a relationship with the Labour Party that is appropriate in the post-industrial world and globalised economy of the 21st century.

It was simple when it all began. Organised labour needed a political arm to make the fundamental legislative changes necessary to create a fairer society for working people. And the partnership succeeded. Brilliantly.

But for decades now and increasingly, voters think of themselves not as workers, but as consumers or clients or taxpayers – as citizens. So no party that tries to sell itself as representing "workers' interests" has a hope of winning a majority in parliament. The experience of the 1980s and 1990s should have taught the trade unions that. But it didn't. Rather, after each painful Thatcher victory the cry went up from Labour grass-roots that we lost because we weren't left-wing enough. The opposite was true and smart people formed New Labour which went on to win – and still can.

The evidence of Labour government from 1997 is that it has been better for "working people" than the Tories would ever have been. Not perfect. Better. A minimum wage, the introduction of paternity leave, improved maternity leave, flexible working hours, working tax credits, paid job training, improved workplace rights, the signing of the European Working Time directive, which cut the average working week, plus rising expenditure on health and education. It's a list that goes on and on. If the trade unions were looking to government to improve the lives of ordinary people in return for their political contributions, then they have had full value for money.

In a democracy, the deal can't go beyond that. It buys them the right to expect a Labour government to work towards a fairer, more equal society. But the market constraints imposed by the internationalisation of trade, commerce and government economic management have to be recognised, as have the rights of others. Trade unions cannot expect government by or for vested interests. They certainly can't expect "their" government to intervene to settle industrial disputes in their favour. Their ability under the present rules to sponsor, and therefore control individual MPs must be abolished and their power over policy and the manifesto must be greatly diluted – not least because if they ever again insist on writing a workers' manifesto then Labour will revert to being unelectable. Britons don't want a socialist society.

And Scots don't want a government that advocates strike breaking. Both the cabin crew and rail strikes are legal and, as the Tories' old boys' club well knows, you only get anywhere by sticking together. It is irresponsible and anti-democratic for a would-be national leader to urge individuals to cross legally established picket lines.

Cameron thinks he's set a trap forcing Brown to choose between the strikers and the travelling public. But in one bound Bob Crow has set the Prime Minister free. By forming his TUSC, this militant is the one who has made the strike political. And by fighting seats Brown expects to win he has demonstrated that he is as anti-Labour as David Cameron. Brown can now attack him with impunity, emphasising that the rail strike is as much anti-Labour as it is anti-commuter. The TUSC will be trounced. Tommy will fight an entertaining campaign and his red brigade will be overjoyed if a split vote denies Labour even one seat. But if Brown plays this right, Tommy will realise that his lost deposit would have been better spent on sun bed sessions.