Why should Unite not be trusted over the ballot for an agreement issue?
Walsh wrote that it was a precondition that both branches must endorse the agreement or else he would not recognise the ballot.
First Amicus leaders read parts which they believed undermined the process of unions and individuals rights and therefore felt they could not endorse the agreement.
Bassa then followed and likewise felt unable to endorse the agreement. As a Bassa member I recall they were happy for the ballot to go ahead, or so they wrote, but the leadership would not be endorsing a yes vote.
Thus Walsh's precondition was not met.
With consideration Unite did not waste the time or money on a ballot, which in my opinion would have been rejected with the same fury that industrial action has been voted for. And I write this as a moderate.