Historical parallel

The Prime Minister claims not to be involved, but he is in this dispute up to his neck, urging all public-service and local authority employers to hold down pay increases to around 2 per cent.

And because of centralised restrictions on the amount of income that can be generated at local level by council tax or business rates, this makes local authorities dependent on central government for 61 per cent of their income.

The government is utterly rigid in its determination to achieve an inflation rate of 2 per cent, even though the officially favoured consumer price index is touching 3.3 per cent and the slightly more realistic retail price index has reached 4.3 per cent.

However, even these figures fail to tell the full story, with gas, electricity, food and housing costs shooting through the roof and affecting low-income families much harder than official indices indicate.

Mr Brown would have us believe that he appreciates the dedication and hard work of these workers, but the figures tell a different story.

Boardroom bosses pay themselves six and seven-figure bonuses on top of huge salaries and pension contributions and government ministers smile benignly.

MPs vote to keep each other in the lap of luxury, courtesy of the John Lewis list, second home subsidies and a gold-plated pension scheme, and have no appreciation of the hardships to which they condemn public-sector workers through backing the government's flawed counter-inflation strategy.

One Labour member, who attempted to defend his fellow backbenchers' conditions, bleated that, after deductions, he had disposable income of just £29,000.

For many local authority workers, this would represent over two years gross wages, but many MPs seem incapable of seeing past their own situation to appreciate the plight of those they expect to vote for them.

Chancellor Alistair Darling makes the same tired old call for restraint, seemingly oblivious to the shame of asking the poorest in society to tighten their belts. He must be as much aware as UNISON and Unite union leaders that efficiency savings totalling £3 billion in recent years have been achieved with the co-operation of their members.

Far from it being "crazy economics," as employer representative John Ransford claims, to use these savings to help low-paid workers through these difficult times, it makes basic good sense.

No-one will accept that the money is not there. Nor will workers fall for the three-card trick of restraint.

Workers saw the government response when Northern Rock went belly up as a result of boardroom greed and reckless speculation. The Prime Minister and Chancellor threw money at the problem, putting up £50 billion in loans and guarantees with little chance of ever recovering the donations and interest.

They can also see the bottomless pit of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan into which billions of pounds are poured for no discernible benefit to people in Britain or in the invaded countries.

Labour's last period in office ended in 1979 because it lost the trust of low-paid workers. Unless it changes direction now, it risks repeating both the betrayal and electoral oblivion.