Cameron ignoring smarter Tories and writing off six million trades unionists will play well among some PB Tories, but just makes him look more elitist and removed.
You are making the rather stupid assumption that the only issue of concern for trade union members is trade unions.
We could easily put it the other way: the unions are writing off the 25+ million other working people in this country who want Labour to represent them, not just the six million.
Some unions may well be doing that. Labour clearly isn't. Which is why people such as McCluskey are so cross.
McCluskey has made a career out of being very angry. But his anger is irrelevant to the fact that a trade union has been caught with its pants down, rogering an oddly quiescent Labour Party. And part of the Labour Party secretly appears to have liked the debasement, especially due to the dough it brings in.
All of which explains why the Falkirk CLP has been suspended, I suppose.
Looking at 2010 leadership election turnout ...10 of the CLPs under special measures were among the top 30 lowest turnouts
5 Ealing, Southall CLP 6 Warley CLP 8 Feltham and Heston CLP 9 Slough CLP 10 Birmingham, Perry Barr CLP ... 16 Bethnal Green and Bow CLP 23 Birmingham, Hodge Hill CLP 24 Oldham West and Royton CLP 27 Poplar and Limehouse CLP 30 Birmingham, Ladywood CLP
5 out of 10 lowest turnout CLPs are under special measuers. The other 5 include Bradford West CLP, Middlesbrough CLP (where 2011 local selection had to be halted to investigate membership behaviour in some wards) + Luton North (given the demographics, I can guess), Hayes and Harlington (even Abbott wasn't left wing enough for the McDonnellites? Or Indians busy with local selections too?) and Ayrshire North (?).
An obvious one is that if Unite members wish to pay money to the Labour party they should be allowed to do so.
And they could do so by joining the Labour Party as individual members. That doesn't make the union levy democratic.
If the unions had any sense then they would poll their members every year about which party they want the political fund donation to go to, and split the donation up accordingly. Let's say Labour get 60%, the Lib Dems 20%, and the Conservatives 15%, others 5% (although I doubt it would be quite that partisan).
That way, they represent their members' views, and it would also get them a hearing from all the parties. It would also encourage people who don't necessarily like the Labour party to join.
It is an old truism that attack is the best means of defence. In two out of the last three PMQs Cameron has had a definite and clear line of attack. First the "tax efficient" donation of shares to Labour then Unite. In between he didn't have one and was very definitely on the back foot, losing quite badly.
Will Labour keep giving him such gifts? That is really the question. The answer should be obvious but Ed seems to be caught out each time and does not react well. Does he really want a repeat of this next week? That is his timetable, whatever he might wish.
Cameron ignoring smarter Tories and writing off six million trades unionists will play well among some PB Tories, but just makes him look more elitist and removed.
You are making the rather stupid assumption that the only issue of concern for trade union members is trade unions.
We could easily put it the other way: the unions are writing off the 25+ million other working people in this country who want Labour to represent them, not just the six million.
Some unions may well be doing that. Labour clearly isn't. Which is why people such as McCluskey are so cross.
McCluskey has made a career out of being very angry. But his anger is irrelevant to the fact that a trade union has been caught with its pants down, rogering an oddly quiescent Labour Party. And part of the Labour Party secretly appears to have liked the debasement, especially due to the dough it brings in.
All of which explains why the Falkirk CLP has been suspended, I suppose.
Eventually suspended. And as I said, part of the Labour Party likes it. Other parts do not.
Trade unions play a vital role in modern Britain. It is a shame that small parts of seem to think they are still in the nineteenth century.
they revealed something important, which is that Labour is opposed to any new school in an area where there are a surplus of places—regardless of the quality of them. Miliband simply wants to fill up existing schools regardless of whether they are any good at getting the best out of children. It was proof that he doesn’t believe in choice or competition driving up standards. It also places Lord Adonis in a difficult position; he has been reassuring people that this policy only applied to areas with a surplus of good school places.
PMQ's - Cameron totally wiped the floor, not just with Ed Miliband but with the Labour Party as well.
Not much else to say other than Ed and Labour are in big trouble. The media narrative is changing and it's mainly being driven by Labour's deflating opinion poll position, IMO.
Dave certainly made clear just how seriously he takes Gove's failure to do anything about the looming crisis over primary school places.
The PB Tory demographic won't get why that's important, they believe the population is too busy despising trade unions the NHS and the BBC to care about a shortage of school places or increasing class sizes.
I suspect very few PB Tories do think that in reality. I'm sure that much of the public is far more concerned about issues like the economy. A subject you and your party appear to want to totally ignore.
Still if it helps you think that today was a good day for Ed Milliband fair enough.
Max, you still struggling to find your evidence on SNP blockading the North Sea or are you just ignoring the question.
Talking of union influence on the Labour Party, when should we expect the next screeching Miliband U-turn on Royal Mail privatisation? They've already reversed their position twice in the last few years, so I guess we're about due for the third U-turn, and this would be a good one to show how they're really not in the pocket of the unions, not at all, honest, guv.
Not sure the PB lefty tendency is really listening to what Dave / Gove are saying.
If there's a crap school with big class sizes then, yes, money needs to be spent. The clear direction and preference is to spend on a free school nearby and create some competition and to reduce the influence of the cold hand of the Blob. Labour / Unite obviously hate this and want money spent feeding the useless Blob school and expanding the Blob.
(BTW Ian Paisley and much of the Unionist lot in NI ALWAYS refer to 'Sinn Fein IRA' never just Sinn Fein, recognising that they are Siamese twins. Maybe Dave and the righty lot should refer to 'Labour Unite' in a similarly relentless fashion.)
"The impact was enormous. Members of unions other than the big three split their votes almost evenly between DavidM and EdM. The GMB, UNISON and UNITE members, those who got their ballots papers inside these packs, voted for EdM by such a margin that it was enough for Ed to win overall"
Andrea may have already provided the figures but the above analysis is misleading. The figures broken down by trade union show that all the candidates nominated by a trade union did particularly well with that trade union. That is why EdM did best with Unite, Unison and GMB. The other unions nominated a mixture of candidates and that is why there doesnt appear to be a pattern but look at DavidM's result amongst USDAW members or EdB's amongst CWU members.
It is an old truism that attack is the best means of defence. In two out of the last three PMQs Cameron has had a definite and clear line of attack. First the "tax efficient" donation of shares to Labour then Unite. In between he didn't have one and was very definitely on the back foot, losing quite badly.
Will Labour keep giving him such gifts? That is really the question. The answer should be obvious but Ed seems to be caught out each time and does not react well. Does he really want a repeat of this next week? That is his timetable, whatever he might wish.
PMQ's - Cameron totally wiped the floor, not just with Ed Miliband but with the Labour Party as well.
Not much else to say other than Ed and Labour are in big trouble. The media narrative is changing and it's mainly being driven by Labour's deflating opinion poll position, IMO.
Dave certainly made clear just how seriously he takes Gove's failure to do anything about the looming crisis over primary school places.
The PB Tory demographic won't get why that's important, they believe the population is too busy despising trade unions the NHS and the BBC to care about a shortage of school places or increasing class sizes.
I suspect very few PB Tories do think that in reality. I'm sure that much of the public is far more concerned about issues like the economy. A subject you and your party appear to want to totally ignore.
Still if it helps you think that today was a good day for Ed Milliband fair enough.
Max, you still struggling to find your evidence on SNP blockading the North Sea or are you just ignoring the question.
Talking of union influence on the Labour Party, when should we expect the next screeching Miliband U-turn on Royal Mail privatisation? They've already reversed their position twice in the last few years, so I guess we're about due for the third U-turn, and this would be a good one to show how they're really not in the pocket of the unions, not at all, honest, guv.
Cameron ignoring smarter Tories and writing off six million trades unionists will play well among some PB Tories, but just makes him look more elitist and removed.
You are making the rather stupid assumption that the only issue of concern for trade union members is trade unions.
We could easily put it the other way: the unions are writing off the 25+ million other working people in this country who want Labour to represent them, not just the six million.
Some unions may well be doing that. Labour clearly isn't. Which is why people such as McCluskey are so cross.
McCluskey has made a career out of being very angry. But his anger is irrelevant to the fact that a trade union has been caught with its pants down, rogering an oddly quiescent Labour Party. And part of the Labour Party secretly appears to have liked the debasement, especially due to the dough it brings in.
All of which explains why the Falkirk CLP has been suspended, I suppose.
Eventually suspended. And as I said, part of the Labour Party likes it. Other parts do not.
Trade unions play a vital role in modern Britain. It is a shame that small parts of seem to think they are still in the nineteenth century.
I agree. Though to be fair to Unite it has played a key role in the revival of auto manufacturing in the UK. But I guess that for negotiations to work all sides must enter them in a spirit of goodwill. When it comes to the public sector both sides have an agenda which seems to prioritise confrontation over solution.
PMQ's - Cameron totally wiped the floor, not just with Ed Miliband but with the Labour Party as well.
Not much else to say other than Ed and Labour are in big trouble. The media narrative is changing and it's mainly being driven by Labour's deflating opinion poll position, IMO.
Dave certainly made clear just how seriously he takes Gove's failure to do anything about the looming crisis over primary school places.
The PB Tory demographic won't get why that's important, they believe the population is too busy despising trade unions the NHS and the BBC to care about a shortage of school places or increasing class sizes.
I suspect very few PB Tories do think that in reality. I'm sure that much of the public is far more concerned about issues like the economy. A subject you and your party appear to want to totally ignore.
Still if it helps you think that today was a good day for Ed Milliband fair enough.
Max, you still struggling to find your evidence on SNP blockading the North Sea or are you just ignoring the question.
I'd have thought the best thing would be to block the North Sea and put a bit of life back into Scottish fishing communities. There's probably more money in that than subsidising large landholders.
But Cameron showed real weakness when he tried to use McCluskey in answer to a serious and worrying intervention on food banks by Stephen Timms, an MP respected on both sides of the House. Cameron’s inability to judge when to stop and his smallness in seeking to play politics with an issue as serious as hunger was un-Prime Ministerial. The ugly Flashman who just can’t stop punching.
I am given to understand that McCluskey would like to divert away some of the attention of his own problems in Unite.
His own recent election may be considered interesting enough for closer inspection, as well as some of his decisions and behaviour. I have spoken to some members of Unite, they are not happy bunnies about the union's leadership.
Then there is the tiny problem of how Unite and GMB managed to get hold of the names and addresses of Labour's party members. Data protection anyone?
I'm just wondering if the boys in blue are going to take some interest? Not that the direction would come from Downing Street as it suits DC to be able to continue the propaganda.
Perhaps Ed might be considering the possibility to fire a few cannons across the union's bows.
As Mike says it could contrast rather badly with Cameron's craven weakness towards his lunatic right wing.
Yes, just look at the list of demands from the right he's cravenly given in on: gay marriage, withdrawal from the ECHR, slashing the overseas aid budget, an end to climate-change policy, campaigning to leave the EU, restoration of capital punishment, and many more.
Helpfully, Peter Bone and the other right-wing loons who control Cameron have provided us with a full list of their 40 famous victories over cowering Cammo:
Cameron and the Tories building this confrontation up may not turn out to be the best idea they have ever had.
As Mike says it could contrast rather badly with Cameron's craven weakness towards his lunatic right wing. Still, I'm sure he enjoys it more than talking about why there are food banks and classrooms overflowing on his watch.
Labours voted against nearly every cut and now they be going in the next GE backing the cuts,if that isn't weak,it must be stupid.
Cameron and the Tories building this confrontation up may not turn out to be the best idea they have ever had.
As Mike says it could contrast rather badly with Cameron's craven weakness towards his lunatic right wing. Still, I'm sure he enjoys it more than talking about why there are food banks and classrooms overflowing on his watch.
We all know what Dave's priorities are. If it comes to dealing with overcrowded classrooms or the increasing use of food banks in one of the world's richest countries, he is always going to choose the quip about the Labour party.
Tim and SO are right: voters will care far more about schools/shortages of places etc than the latest internal Labour rift. What the Unite/Labour squabble may do is affect internal Labour party morale and give the Tories a stick to beat them up with but I'd have thought that most voters (insofar as they care) already assume that the unions play a big role in running/funding Labour. It will reinforce existing perceptions rather than change anything much or at all.
Tories should not get over-excited by such stories - come September they will be hit hard if there are lots of stories of children being made to learn in playgrounds/parks etc because there are no school places.
Cameron and the Tories building this confrontation up may not turn out to be the best idea they have ever had.
So Dan's word is now gospel? Good to know
Don't forget the smart Tories Scott.
Now, I realise that trade union members are, almost by definition, less inclined to vote Conservative than the average voter. But does that mean that no one who's a union member can ever be persuaded to vote Tory? Some clever Tories think they can; people like Rob Halfon and David Skelton. As David says: Tories aren't going to win the votes of trade unionists by suggesting, as they sometimes do, that they represent a "reds under the bed" threat. Instead, they have to make clear that they value the role unions play and understand the need for workers to have security in the workplace while disagreeing with the overblown rhetoric of union bosses. Senior Tories could be speaking to the annual Trades Union Congress. Margaret Thatcher led a drive to build up Conservative Trade Unionists, which once had some 250 branches, and it seems perverse that such an organisation isn't given proper support today.
If PMQs is anything to go by, Mr Cameron is intent on ignoring such sensible advice and effectively writing off several million of the votes that might give him a majority at the next election. A curious choice.
Indeed - and the Tory party has been pretty good in the past at getting votes from union members hence the fury of Labour when they realised what Thatcher had done. Tories should be looking to disengage union members from the political views of trade union leaders by appealing to them directly but they don't - on the whole - see the need to do so, which is a big failing on their part.
Any body can open a charity shop and advertise free food, they will always get a queue and the schools are not back until September, difficult to see how they are overflowing now,why not wait and see..it would strengthen your argument.
But one that only UKIP and the Green party are ahead of.
there was an article in the graun, i think, suggesting the cost (50 bn) would be enough to get (maybe) fusion power or (probably) thorium power up and running instead. might be more of a booost to t"econonmy
My point was that Labour supports it. And a u-turn from them will be more difficult given Mandy's admission today that their initial support for it was "politically driven".
He's been sceptical about HS2 for some time so it's not exactly news to those of us in the industry. I still think it's unlikley that any government will cancel an infrastructure project of this size at this time.
Yes, just think, loony right-wing MPs like Jon Cruddas, John Cryer, Jim Dowd, Keith Vaz and Kate Hoey have really forced his hand on this with their extreme pro-referendum views:
I think he is wrong. But it is interesting to see someone who was shouting 'infrastructure' just a year ago at every available opportunity, now turn to 'housing', and be against infrastructure.
"The BBC has been too slow to reflect public concerns about immigration and may still be failing to do so, according to a report for the BBC Trust. Helen Boaden, the BBC’s former director of news, said there had been a “deep liberal bias” in the way the corporation approached the topic of immigration when she began overseeing its news output in 2004.
The report also found that the corporation, which supplies about half of the news consumed by the average person, had been slow to reflect increasing public opposition to UK membership of the EU. Stuart Prebble, former chief executive of ITV, was commissioned by the trust to consider whether the BBC was fulfilling its obligation to be impartial by reflecting a “breadth and diversity of opinion” on immigration, religion, and the EU. He found that it had been too reliant on the views of politicians, who tended to be uncomfortable voicing strong concerns about the impact of immigration on wider society.
Mr Prebble concluded: “The BBC was slow to reflect the weight of concern in the wider community about issues arising from immigration. It remains the case that the agenda of debate is probably too driven by the views of politicians..." http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/medianews/article3807129.ece
PMQ's - Cameron totally wiped the floor, not just with Ed Miliband but with the Labour Party as well.
Not much else to say other than Ed and Labour are in big trouble. The media narrative is changing and it's mainly being driven by Labour's deflating opinion poll position, IMO.
Dave certainly made clear just how seriously he takes Gove's failure to do anything about the looming crisis over primary school places.
The PB Tory demographic won't get why that's important, they believe the population is too busy despising trade unions the NHS and the BBC to care about a shortage of school places or increasing class sizes.
I suspect very few PB Tories do think that in reality. I'm sure that much of the public is far more concerned about issues like the economy. A subject you and your party appear to want to totally ignore.
Still if it helps you think that today was a good day for Ed Milliband fair enough.
Max, you still struggling to find your evidence on SNP blockading the North Sea or are you just ignoring the question.
So you misconstrued what was written. He in fact indicated that if we were not in the EU then the waters would be for Scottish fisherman only and the EU boats would be blocked from fishing there. Completely different to the way you put it and not in any way crazy , just international law.
PMQ's - Cameron totally wiped the floor, not just with Ed Miliband but with the Labour Party as well.
Not much else to say other than Ed and Labour are in big trouble. The media narrative is changing and it's mainly being driven by Labour's deflating opinion poll position, IMO.
Dave certainly made clear just how seriously he takes Gove's failure to do anything about the looming crisis over primary school places.
The PB Tory demographic won't get why that's important, they believe the population is too busy despising trade unions the NHS and the BBC to care about a shortage of school places or increasing class sizes.
I suspect very few PB Tories do think that in reality. I'm sure that much of the public is far more concerned about issues like the economy. A subject you and your party appear to want to totally ignore.
Still if it helps you think that today was a good day for Ed Milliband fair enough.
Max, you still struggling to find your evidence on SNP blockading the North Sea or are you just ignoring the question.
I'd have thought the best thing would be to block the North Sea and put a bit of life back into Scottish fishing communities. There's probably more money in that than subsidising large landholders.
Comments
5 Ealing, Southall CLP
6 Warley CLP
8 Feltham and Heston CLP
9 Slough CLP
10 Birmingham, Perry Barr CLP
...
16 Bethnal Green and Bow CLP
23 Birmingham, Hodge Hill CLP
24 Oldham West and Royton CLP
27 Poplar and Limehouse CLP
30 Birmingham, Ladywood CLP
5 out of 10 lowest turnout CLPs are under special measuers. The other 5 include Bradford West CLP, Middlesbrough CLP (where 2011 local selection had to be halted to investigate membership behaviour in some wards) + Luton North (given the demographics, I can guess), Hayes and Harlington (even Abbott wasn't left wing enough for the McDonnellites? Or Indians busy with local selections too?) and Ayrshire North (?).
That way, they represent their members' views, and it would also get them a hearing from all the parties. It would also encourage people who don't necessarily like the Labour party to join.
But they don't have any sense.
When did this new confidence for the tories appear,when ed balls gave up labour plans for the economy and at most would match Osborne plans.
Where's labours 5 point plan gone,does labour now or in the coming years still want to cut VAT ? or as all that been thrown out the window ?
@harryph
.@angelaeagle wants political parties nationalised - funded by the state rather than independently. She calls this "investing in democracy."
Will Labour keep giving him such gifts? That is really the question. The answer should be obvious but Ed seems to be caught out each time and does not react well. Does he really want a repeat of this next week? That is his timetable, whatever he might wish.
Trade unions play a vital role in modern Britain. It is a shame that small parts of seem to think they are still in the nineteenth century.
http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/news/content/view/full/134921
If there's a crap school with big class sizes then, yes, money needs to be spent. The clear direction and preference is to spend on a free school nearby and create some competition and to reduce the influence of the cold hand of the Blob. Labour / Unite obviously hate this and want money spent feeding the useless Blob school and expanding the Blob.
(BTW Ian Paisley and much of the Unionist lot in NI ALWAYS refer to 'Sinn Fein IRA' never just Sinn Fein, recognising that they are Siamese twins. Maybe Dave and the righty lot should refer to 'Labour Unite' in a similarly relentless fashion.)
Andrea may have already provided the figures but the above analysis is misleading. The figures broken down by trade union show that all the candidates nominated by a trade union did particularly well with that trade union. That is why EdM did best with Unite, Unison and GMB. The other unions nominated a mixture of candidates and that is why there doesnt appear to be a pattern but look at DavidM's result amongst USDAW members or EdB's amongst CWU members.
There you go.
In the meantime, to take this line DaveC must be supremely confident that all his Conservative Associations and donors are behaving themselves.
His own recent election may be considered interesting enough for closer inspection, as well as some of his decisions and behaviour. I have spoken to some members of Unite, they are not happy bunnies about the union's leadership.
Then there is the tiny problem of how Unite and GMB managed to get hold of the names and addresses of Labour's party members. Data protection anyone?
I'm just wondering if the boys in blue are going to take some interest? Not that the direction would come from Downing Street as it suits DC to be able to continue the propaganda.
Perhaps Ed might be considering the possibility to fire a few cannons across the union's bows.
Helpfully, Peter Bone and the other right-wing loons who control Cameron have provided us with a full list of their 40 famous victories over cowering Cammo:
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/thetorydiary/2013/06/the-alternative-queens-speech-the-full-list-of-40-rebel-bills.html
Tories should not get over-excited by such stories - come September they will be hit hard if there are lots of stories of children being made to learn in playgrounds/parks etc because there are no school places.
Is that labours new line for the next GE,good luck with that one.
Dave was doing OK at PMQs but he raised Unite just too many times
How many people know who McCluskey actually is?
http://bit.ly/19TtljB
http://labourforareferendum.com/
For instance, see this blog from January 2012. There are plenty of earlier ones as well.
http://www.christianwolmar.co.uk/2012/01/rail-688-hs2-go-ahead-does-not-settle-issue/
I think he is wrong. But it is interesting to see someone who was shouting 'infrastructure' just a year ago at every available opportunity, now turn to 'housing', and be against infrastructure.
How long before you will be against housing?
@MSmithsonPB How many people watch all of PMQs?! If it's in BBC News once he's done what he meant to.
I believe this article has been made with Tim in mind...
though to be serious, the May plan does look like a transparent attempt to make it easier to harrass people originating in east africa..
"The BBC has been too slow to reflect public concerns about immigration and may still be failing to do so, according to a report for the BBC Trust. Helen Boaden, the BBC’s former director of news, said there had been a “deep liberal bias” in the way the corporation approached the topic of immigration when she began overseeing its news output in 2004.
The report also found that the corporation, which supplies about half of the news consumed by the average person, had been slow to reflect increasing public opposition to UK membership of the EU. Stuart Prebble, former chief executive of ITV, was commissioned by the trust to consider whether the BBC was fulfilling its obligation to be impartial by reflecting a “breadth and diversity of opinion” on immigration, religion, and the EU. He found that it had been too reliant on the views of politicians, who tended to be uncomfortable voicing strong concerns about the impact of immigration on wider society.
Mr Prebble concluded: “The BBC was slow to reflect the weight of concern in the wider community about issues arising from immigration. It remains the case that the agenda of debate is probably too driven by the views of politicians..." http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/medianews/article3807129.ece