Wildcat Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 That's great but signing up to a paper campaign is completely pretty pointless when Unite has given £11m to Labour since 2007 when only 30% of its members agree with doing that or would even vote for labour (March 2010). I thought that unions were about matching belief with action? Rather it seems that they are either a. Labour Party lapdogs b. Labour Party stooges ... and go hang what the members think. Then to bang on about Thatcher and Scargill. It looks like certain unions don't know what they think so long as they can play with the big boys using members money. Not sure whether people opt out of or in to a political funds under the rules now but the Unite membership can do that if they want. I suspect the donations are made to "buy influence" I am sceptical that they managed to buy any influence at all. The Warwick agreement is perhaps the most notable example of the unions getting labour to sign up their agenda. But after signing up to it the Labour party largely ignored it anyway. Regardless Unites membership get a choice, so to say 30% of their members donated to Labour against their will is a bit bizarre and an allegation of illegality.... that I assume you or whoever wrote the article you are quoting can back up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 They are as much elected as any government ever has been. When the Labour party were last in power did they have to form a coalition to form government? No they didn't, they won with a majority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 When the Labour party were last in power did they have to form a coalition to form government? No they didn't, they won with a majority. Neither did it stop well known lefties like the Countryside Alliance rioting.... But then they probably are lefties compared with Dogs of War or Ron Jeremy. Straightforward pitchfork vigilantism is more their preferred form of protest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 We will we agree there. I wasn't aware of the opt out so thanks for pointing that out. The point in general does stand though. If unions wanted to be governments they should declare themselves a political party rather than buying influence through donations. When the Labour party were last in power did they have to form a coalition to form government? No they didn't, they won with a majority. In 2005 Labour won with less than 90% of the votes that the Conservatives received in 2010. That's not right is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rioja Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 I never had Ron down for a troll, I'm very disappointed. If you were in the Madrid region Ron you may have paid this place a visit. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valle_de_los_Ca%C3%ADdos It's dedicated to the right wingers who disliked a democratically elected government so much that they started a civil war that claimed 300,000 lives. I always had him down for a troll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 We will we agree there. I wasn't aware of the opt out so thanks for pointing that out. The point in general does stand though. If unions wanted to be governments they should declare themselves a political party rather than buying influence through donations. In 2005 Labour won with less than 90% of the votes that the Conservatives received in 2010. That's not right is it? Did labour win with a Majority? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 We will we agree there. I wasn't aware of the opt out so thanks for pointing that out. The point in general does stand though. If unions wanted to be governments they should declare themselves a political party rather than buying influence through donations. Well since unions have shared interests it makes more sense for them to get together to sponsor candidates in elections.... Which is in fact what they did and how the Labour party was formed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Did labour win with a Majority? That rather depends on whether you think that people matter less than MP's. Since you capitalised 'Majority' I would guess that you do while it suits your narrow point of view. Interestingly you didn't capitalise Labour which leads me to suspect that you have a latent issue with the Conservatives rather than anything more constructive. (How Freudian) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Did labour win with a Majority? It doesn't matter whether it was a majority or not, people still have a right to freedom of protest that they should exercise when any Govt democratically elected or not abuses its power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Well since unions have shared interests it makes more sense for them to get together to sponsor candidates in elections.... Which is in fact what they did and how the Labour party was formed. Hmm, there is a moot point since sponsoring each and every Labour candidate to the max' in the general election would only cost £19m. What does Unite get for it's £11m and would Labour get £11m if Charlie Wheelan wasn't in control of the union? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.