THE Tories’ Trade Union Bill has received the thumbs-down from the British public, who deem it a “waste of police time” in a new poll published today.

Over three-quarters of respondents thought the proposed legislation would lead to misuse of the force, which would be obliged to control the use of popular protest aids such as banners and loudspeakers.

A similar number also disapproved of the policing of trade unions’ social media ahead of a strike, according to the YouGov poll.

TUC general secretary Frances O’Grady told the Star that the Bill was widely perceived as “illiberal, unfair and unnecessary.”

Arguing that it was “critically, a waste of police time,” she continued: “The very idea that the police force that is currently struggling to deal with burglaries is going to be asked to devote resources to peaceful pickets in order to check whether we have set up a Facebook page, a Twitter account, written a blog, what’s in it — these are the issues that are being consulted on.

“I suspect the average bobby on the beat feels they have more important things to be doing.”

The Bill, which is about to have its second reading in Parliament, could lead to unions losing up to £20,000 in penalties each time they are held to breach the new rules.

Even the government’s red tape watchdog, the Regulatory Police Committee, condemned the process of consultation over the new legislation, giving it three red lights — “not fit for purpose.”

Nonetheless, the policy is being “rammed through at a rate of knots” according to Ms O’Grady.

Police forces also seem to share her concern over the rapidity of the law’s passage through Parliament.

Police Federation vice-chairman Will Riches said police were “impartial” and wanted to “facilitate the right to strike while ensuring that those participating follow the relevant laws of the land.”

But he warned: “Police forces are stretched to the very limit.

“Police officers join the job to keep the public safe and lock up criminals, but doing that job effectively is getting close to impossible for many officers.”