Jump to content

Protesters camped at St Pauls


Should the protester move away from St Pauls, bearing in mind that the chur  

90 members have voted

  1. 1. Should the protester move away from St Pauls, bearing in mind that the chur

    • Yes
      49
    • No
      41


Recommended Posts

There's a certain irony in anarchists sitting around waiting for someone to tell them what to do, don't you think?

 

not them, us, I assume nothing will happen unless we all get behind it, but so far I've not seen anything constructive sugested that I can do

Link to comment
Share on other sites

not them, us, I assume nothing will happen unless we all get behind it, but so far I've not seen anything constructive sugested that I can do
maybe we could organise a flash mob in meadowhall and take over there stopping the big companies like vodaphone from making a profit. at least we will be dry with a roof over our head :hihi:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Should the protester move away from St Pauls, bearing in mind that the church were happy for them to set up camp but have now changed their minds and want them to move.

 

Occupy' protests: St Paul's invaded but canon asks the police to move on

St Paul's protesters asked to move from entrance area

 

How do serial protesters support themselves financially?

 

They clearly don't work as no company would tolerate that much time off.

They clearly can't be independently wealthy as that would go against their anti-capitalist principles.

Heaven forbid they would be claiming state benefit as that would create a morally ambiguous dilemma.

 

Answers on a postcard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do serial protesters support themselves financially?

 

They clearly don't work as no company would tolerate that much time off.

They clearly can't be independently wealthy as that would go against their anti-capitalist principles.

Heaven forbid they would be claiming state benefit as that would create a morally ambiguous dilemma.

 

Answers on a postcard.

 

I understand that at least some of them have used annual leave to attend the protests. It's possible that others are on shifts and attend some of the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the issues the protesters have helped to highlight is the status of the City of London Corporation. I'm very pleased they've done this, I didn't know about it before.

 

What I have learned is that unlike other local councils in this country, the Corporation is predominantly elected by businesses. There are 25 electoral wards but residents can only vote in 4 of them. In the other 21 only business get a vote, proportionate to the number of employees, but they are not obliged to consult their employees about how they use their votes and most of their employees don't live in the City anyway.

 

So it's a local council with it's own police force, elected by companies rather than people. That's wrong.

 

What's worse is that the Corporation internally elects (no say in it for residents) someone to the office of the Remembrancer. According to the Corporation's own website

 

The Remembrancer is charged with maintaining and enhancing the City’s status and ensuring that its established rights are safeguarded. As long ago as 1685 an order was made for the Remembrancer "to continue to attend Parliament and the offices of the Secretaries of State daily, and acquaint the Lord Mayor with the public affairs and other business transacted there, relating to the City". In the contemporary context, this work encompasses day to day contact with officials in Government departments responsible for developing government policy, the drafting and promotion of legislation and responsibility for relations with both Houses of Parliament and their Committees including briefings for debates in which the City Corporation or its associated bodies have an interest.

 

In other words someone with daily access to parliament (he has a seat behind the Speaker) who acts as an internal lobbyist for the financial companies who put him there. Contrast that to the leaders and elected members of more democratically elected local councils who have no such access and influence. Notice that they talk about their 'rights' and not their interests. There's privilege for you.

 

Vested interests working through an anti-democratic Old Boy's network based on a medieval guild system with daily access to policy makers. It's got to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.