WeX Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Now, in Australia, some 45% of seats always return a "conservative"-type MP, and 45% a Labor Party MP, leaving 10% of seats potentially "swinging". In that 10%, the voters uasuall divide into 3 groups, 45% for each party, 10% swinging. The swinging voters in the swinging seats decide the election result, and thereby "dictate to the rest"; that is, 10% of 10% of the electorate, which I make 1%! that's neither here not there. Every voter has the option to vote for who they want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Well the OP did link to a story about a Tory goverment minister. Maybe vague_boy is just addressing the balance. Perhaps, but as said, people from all sides of the political divide do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 very true, but then again a shareholder has the option to take their money elsewhere, unlike union members in the majority of cases. Its either be represented or not. plus there may be conspiracy theories out there over this, but I don't know of any leader of any other party being installed in such the same way as Miliband was at the head of Labour. Labour has some of the least democratic rules when it comes to their leadership battles and this is why you don't see challenges for the position. I think that there was a leadership contest to lead the Labour Party, last time there were 5 candidates - each had to secure at least 33 MPs to be nominated. All Labour Party members were allowed to vote. More information here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11412031 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 I think that there was a leadership contest to lead the Labour Party, last time there were 5 candidates - each had to secure at least 33 MPs to be nominated. All Labour Party members were allowed to vote. More information here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11412031 That only came after Brown stood down. It is almost impossible to remove a sitting Labour leader due to the complex system they use to elect them. Labour may have won if they had ditched Brown and put someone like David Miliband at the helm prior to the General Election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uptowngirl Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Me careless and bad. You should have used this one instead. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/1813620.stm Prime Minister Tony Blair is facing a new row over Labour's business links after a £125,000 donation to party funds from a steel tycoon. Plaid Cymru MP Adam Price has obtained a copy of a letter written by Tony Blair to Romania's prime minister, promoting the sale of the eastern European country's state steel company to an Indian billionaire a month after Labour accepted the donation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 very true, but then again a shareholder has the option to take their money elsewhere, unlike union members in the majority of cases. Its either be represented or not. plus there may be conspiracy theories out there over this, but I don't know of any leader of any other party being installed in such the same way as Miliband was at the head of Labour. Labour has some of the least democratic rules when it comes to their leadership battles and this is why you don't see challenges for the position. ............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fivetide Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 yes it is. ... No, it isn't. A relatively small number of people? ... Relative to the tiny few who control Conservative Party policy, as well as the instruments of political debate, the number of people who are union members is relatively massive. And comparing the 10% who voted UKIP with the 10% who are members of unions (I'm using your figures) ... is statistical deceit. What percentage of the population voted Labour at the last election, and what percentage voted UKIP? (And what percentage voted Conservative?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 No, it isn't. A relatively small number of people? ... Relative to the tiny few who control Conservative Party policy, as well as the instruments of political debate, the number of people who are union members is relatively massive. And comparing the 10% who voted UKIP with the 10% who are members of unions (I'm using your figures) ... is statistical deceit. What percentage of the population voted Labour at the last election, and what percentage voted UKIP? (And what percentage voted Conservative?) no, a union is only elected by its members, and then they can dictate who leads a national political party, while there is no such process for any other party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saunaman Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Do bears relieve themselves in the woods ? Just look at "Theyworkforyou" and "Social investigations" for a start ... and don't forget that Co-Op donated £50k to the "Office of Ed Balls" 31/3/12 , just to give you an example . Also let's not forget that the Office of Gordon and Sarah Brown has now exceeded the £1 million mark ( was only £750k last time I checked ). Is "moonlighting" legal if you're an MP ? Why not check out your own MP for a laugh ? Let's see if we can identify the most prolific moonlighter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fivetide Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 no, a union is only elected by its members, and then they can dictate who leads a national political party, while there is no such process for any other party. A union is composed of its members. The union leadership is elected by its members. The leadership then represents the views of the members to the Labour Party. Apparently there's just too much democracy at work for you. As for the Conservative Party. The members are told their views will be represented in Government - such as the popular support within the party membership for a referendum on Europe. Then the corporate donors decide the actual policy in government. But - before you say the last Labour lot were also controlled by the corporations - I agree. That's why I despise the whole lot of them. We need a new politics, where the people reclaim the power. Personally it'd make no odds to me if that was done through a new union membership drive, some sort of 'independent workers' union' or by the formation of new parties and models of activity, such as UK Uncut and Hacked Off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.