Fire chief calls on unions to oust Blair

Tony Blair's relations with the once loyal Fire Brigades Union were heading towards irretrievable breakdown yesterday as the pay dispute descended into political warfare.

Andy Gilchrist, the firefighters' leader, appeared to be calling on fellow trade unionists to help him to remove Tony Blair to make way for a "real" Labour prime minister.

Ian McCartney, the pensions minister who often acts as a bridge between the Government and the unions, retaliated by accusing Mr Gilchrist of "losing the plot".

Other anonymous government sources darkly accused Mr Gilchrist and union allies such as the railway workers' leader Bob Crow of seeking to "overthrow the Government" – an accusation last levelled at a union leader during the miners' strike in the 1980s.

Mr Gilchrist told a political rally in Manchester: "I'm quite prepared to work to replace New Labour with what I'm prepared to call Real Labour."

He added: "I have no nostalgic romanticism about old Labour but there are real Labour values built on real social progress, on real justice for working-class people and, indeed, for fairness for all."

He also attacked the Chancellor, Gordon Brown, for setting aside £1bn in the event of a war with Iraq while refusing to release money to finance the firefighters' pay demand. He claimed that the Government "ensured and provoked" the fire strike and was "prepared to play with people's lives", and called upon fellow trade union leaders to go on the political offensive through their links with Labour.

He said: "Thank God there might be a time after New Labour." But Mr McCartney countered: "How can the Government have provoked this strike? Andy Gilchrist should be spending his time reaching a pay and modernisation agreement for his members, not dragging brave firefighters into his political attacks on the Government.

"I am saddened that Andy Gilchrist's misjudgements have left his members in this position. He is clearly losing the plot."

Ministers have hardened themselves to the prospect of a series of firefighters' strikes stretching over weeks or even months. Neither side was holding out any real hope yesterday of averting the next eight-day stoppage, scheduled to start on Wednesday.

The employers are under government pressure not even to talk about a detailed pay settlement while the firefighters are striking, and ministers claim that Mr Gilchrist has no strategy other than to keep the dispute going in the hope that the employers will eventually give in. The two sides are due to meet on Tuesday, when the employers will plead with the Fire Brigades Union to call off their next strike, a request which the FBU will certainly reject.

FBU leaders are hoping that their local government employers can be persuaded to meet their pay demand, which would then have to come from council taxes, since the Treasury is refusing to pay any extra money unless it is matched by cost-cutting reforms. This would include the loss of several thousand jobs as firefighters who retire are not replaced.

A more likely outcome of Tuesday's meeting is that the employers will say they cannot discuss the details of a pay deal while firefighters are out on strike. At a private meeting with the employers last week, the fire service minister, Nick Raynsford, urged them not to rush through negotiations. He said there had to be time for any proposed deal to be subjected to cost analysis.

His words were interpreted as a signal that the Government would prefer to let the strike drag on than be seen to capitulate to a trade union.