Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour’s union plans are about culture as much as cash
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour’s union plans are about culture as much as cash
Lord Collins’ interim proposals for Labour’s relationship with its affiliated unions were published yesterday. They don’t settle the issue of union funding and affiliation to Labour. In fact it provides more questions than answers.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Do I spot some long grass over there?
(c) SeanT
The missing parts will be revealed on the Mail's website on Sunday.
The man on Miliband's left has his eyes fixed on the incriminating evidence.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/19/tony-blair-gordon-brown-war-labour
It is called .. being gullible
Henry, how does that relate to and work with AWS, approved candidates list or imposition of candidates by the Party?
In a dwindling constituency party, it is easy for one determined faction to gain control of its offices (e.g. Militant) and so dominate the candidate selection. Surely the answer is to enlarge the constituency party. Also who will be entitled to vote in the Primary: only valid members of that constituency party or any member of the electorate of that constituency? Please clarify.
On another note, my hatred for Gordon Brown, something that I've thought was irrational at times, now appears to be justified. He really was mad, and bad.
http://www.focus-home.com/index.php?rub=news&id=406
@JosiasJessop
We are about to witness what looks like the formation of another coalition in Germany, albeit with a strong leading party and Chancellor. Not sure how it plays out regarding enaction of manifesto promises or whether the electorate get a watered-down version of what the country really needs.
I did work for a while in East Germany under a totalitarian regime and that was an experience I would not want to repeat.
@MorrisDancer
Politics is the art of the possible and in a democracy we are in the hands of the electorate - so if there is a hung parliament then a coalition will always result in compromise of one sort or another. The UK's problem is that it had not experienced a coalition for some 65 years and the minor party had an agenda that consisted more of political ambitions that were not was needed by the country at that moment in time.
We have seen how Blair, Brown, Mandelson and Campbell hi-jacked a desperate Labour party, tried to control and manipulate the media and imposed their placemen in constituencies where the electorate's economic circumstances was something totally foreign to them. As is usual in such regimes, it all fell apart due to personal ambitions and jealousies.
There appears to be no place for spin in this exchange - has Hawkins' view already been discussed here? It sort of seems a big call to me...
If the unions were truly democratic, they'd put sections on the forms saying whether members want to be associate members of the Conservatives, Lib Dems, Greens, UKIP etc as well as Labour. After all, most of the members of most unions are not Labour voters.
As long as they still have that sort of thing for just Labour, the link between unions and the Labour Party would still be too strong. There needs to be a total decoupling.
I hope you noticed that the subtitle to the article differs in one very significant detail from Wegg-Prosser's concluding text:
Ed Miliband defeated David Miliband in 2010 by making Blair's political brand toxic and (very cutely) putting his brother on the wrong side of this argument. When Labour returns to office, as it could do in less than two years, Ed will no doubt consider how the errors of the last generation should not be repeated by his
The Guardian sub-editor has assumed that Miliband would lead Labour if the party were returned to office. Wegg-Prosser hasn't.
When you consider that it would only take a swing of about 2% for Labour to become the largest party it doesn't seem like that big a call. There would have to be a very definite shift in the mood of the country to prevent it - and I'm sure if there were such a shift Hawkins would have the evidence of it in his opinion polls to change his view.
On another note: welcome, Dafel.
Firstly, many thanks for all the wishes of support that I have received on PB.
'Law makers should not be law breakers' is a sensible starting point. But there are obviously offfences which cannot sensibly disqualify a candidate.
Where to draw the line? I received the maximum sanction for a procedural error, which was less than the penalty for overstaying time in a paid car-park. I viewed the offence as trivial, and I am sure would have been struck out in any case had I chosen to spend 12 days defending myself.
But the question I was asked, when took my candidates' suitability test was 'Is there anything in your background which, if it came out at the wrong moment, could embarrass you or the party?' I replied that there was not. The UKIP hierarchy seem to think that my 'No' was such a substantial error of judgement that they don't want me to be a UKIP candidate ever again. I have also withdrawn as a UKIP candidate at the district council elections next year.
The decision was made 'on-the-run' just before an important Conference, taking place for the first time with a substantial number of our own councillors present.
While I think in principle it is good that firm decisions are made, rather than interminable 'internal enquiries', it does not stop me from being disappointed when it goes against me.
I hope a very strong UKIP candidate for Cambridge is found, and I will continue to work for a BREXIT.
So far as McBride is concerned I think Labour will do their best to ignore this. McBride was indeed poisonous and completely untrustworthy but as a result any publisher who wants to remain in business would have required credible document trails at the time of the alleged actions before putting ink on paper. In short challenging any of this filth is just likely to make it worse by producing material on which it is based. Much better to stick your hands in your ears and make lala sounds.
Of course a party that was fit to lead the country might take a different approach but I am not holding my breath.
Labour not the nasty party- who are people trying to kid.
Based on probabilities, its probable still of course, but for a pollster to do that.. very strange.
You already know what your getting with GTA, you can car-jack, murder, and all sorts of underhand things, so it's not surprise. I would personally link it to a crime drama like the Soprano's or any other number of simpler shows. As long as you can delink fantasy and drama from reality, there really shouldn't be any moral problems, should there? We're all just actors on the stage now.
Ben Page of Mori was the only one to get it right.
http://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2010/04/11/should-you-be-betting-on-the-pollsters-or-their-polls/
Mind you that's cos he's a fellow xID. (can you believe how bad Tromso were, why wasn't Fryers etc playing last night!!)
2) You don't need to be on the approved candidates list to seek parliamentary selection in the Labour party. Candidates on the party and affiliates (unions and Co-Op) approved parliamentary candidates lists are directly approved by the NEC once selected. If you are not on any of these lists but manages to win a selection, you are interviewed later by a NEC panel to get the endorsement. It sometimes happens in hopeless CLPs. And it happened last time in Hull East when Prescott's successor wasn't on the candidates list and was interviewed later.
So the question would be if the NEC would dare not to endorse a primary selected new candidate
3) I am sure they will find a way to parachute who needs to be parachuted. They will us not dwindling constituency parties
Are you resigning from Ukip whilst still supporting their main aim of BREXIT ?
I hate myself.
I thought they didn’t know each other…!
Excellent piece Henry.
Anything that encourages primaries should be welcomed.
Sad day for politics and David.
(You will share the best bits won't you?)
Ordered the kindle version so will be easier to share the best bits.
While this is head-shakingly noteworthy in its own right, what caught my eye was that about 95% of the queue was male, and 70% of the men were Asian.
Does anyone have an explanation for this wildly disproportionate mix?
New Ladbrokes prices today:
Lab 4/11 (from 1/3)
SNP 2/1 (from 9/4)
LD 33/1
Con 100/1 (you can get 150/1 at BetVictor)
" Damian McBride, Mr Brown’s former communications chief, said he discredited the former prime minister’s enemies by tipping off the media about drug use, spousal abuse, alcoholism and extramarital affairs.
In an autobiography that will cast a shadow over Labour’s party conference in Brighton next week, Mr McBride admits attempting to ruin the careers of the former home secretaries Charles Clarke and John Reid. Mr McBride claims that he did it all out of “devotion” and “some degree of love” for Mr Brown, whom he describes as “the greatest man I ever met”.
The disclosures will cause acute embarrassment to Ed Miliband, the Labour leader, and Ed Balls, the shadow chancellor, who were allies of Mr Brown during his time in Downing Street..." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10322367/I-destroyed-careers-of-Blairs-ministers-admits-former-Brown-aide-Damian-McBride.html
It's like crack cocaine*
*Not that I've ever done cocaine
- In 2012/13, public sector net borrowing excluding temporary effects of financial interventions and also excluding the effects of the transfer of the Royal Mail Pension Plan and the transfers from the Bank of England Asset Purchase Facility Fund was £115.7 billion. This was £2.8 billion lower than in 2011/12.
- In 2012/13, public sector net borrowing excluding temporary effects of financial interventions (PSNB ex) was £81.3 billion. This was £37.2 billion lower than in 2011/12 when it was £118.5 billion.
- In August 2013, the £3.9 billion transferred from the Bank of England Asset Purchase Facility Fund to HMT Treasury did not reduce the public sector net borrowing excluding temporary effects of financial interventions (PSNB ex). There were not any special factors affecting public sector net borrowing in August 2012 or August 2013.
- In August 2013, public sector net borrowing excluding temporary effects of financial interventions (PSNB ex) was £13.2 billion. This was £1.3 billion lower than in August 2012 when it was £14.4 billion.
- Public sector net debt excluding temporary effects of financial interventions (PSND ex) was £1,193.3 billion at the end of August 2013, equivalent to 74.6% of gross domestic product (GDP).
- The central government net cash requirement for the 2013/14 year to date was £26.4 billion, £3.8 billion lower than the same period in 2012/13.
My skills (such as they are) are in selling, not administrative or organisational. UKIP don't want to me to front the party. Fair enough; I won't. So there is no appropriate local 'back-room' role, and I will no longer be a local activist. I will be an ordinary party member.
FYI, I have offered to do some sales training for UKIP candidates on a pro bono basis, though it remains to be seen whether the powers that be within UKIP choose to take up that offer.
Looking at the queue it seems rumours of Apple's demise have been much exaggerated.
Never got it myself. Have a 4S now (first Apple product). Will be going back to Android tho'.
In marginal seats, I would be quite willing to open the electorate to the entire electorate of that constituency. Costs would be an issue.
The shortlisting will be done by the Party like today. So, A Tory could not be a candidate.
My work mobiles are mostly Android.
Both are good things.
You have to tip your hat at that.
Brown's aide @DPMcBride talks in his book of his confessions to priest. Christian moral of the story? Beware, your spins will find you out!
http://order-order.com/2013/09/20/how-mcprickface-took-out-browns-rivals/
Awesome timing
London bound with a bunch of UKIPPERs playing Farage speeches to each other. Whilst this is deplorable as it breaks the solemn code of train etiquette, can't quite imagine other party members being quite so enthusiastically garish.
Interesting times.
Expect Dave and The Tories to keep on repeating that.
Ed M the favoured candidate of the Unions and Brown.
Some wondered about mixed wards. In theory, they're gone; in practice, frayed knot. Still there folks.
But then I rather imagined my couple were stuck in a corridor, where I understand 'customers' can still wait for eight hours.
And don’t forget, the impartial civil servant was handpicked by Gordon Brown for his ‘abilities’. I’m sure the adoration was mutual, they were the worst kind of kindred spirits.
"It's a matter of record that I had close links to Damian and wrote in his defence at the time of his self-defenestration. I was one of the journalists who benefited, if that's word, from his operations. Which compromises me of course, but it also gives me a better than average sense of just how reliable his account is. I'll wait until I've read the whole thing before pronouncing in full, but based on the Mail's initial extracts, here are some initial observations.
First, day one hasn't produced a show-stopper of a revelation. The overall impression of fear and loathing at the heart of the Labour Party will be horrifying to read for those who weren't aware of quite how bad it was, but even the extraordinary account of the invented Charles Clarke plot is just more of what we knew.
Second, it is worth noting his expression of contrition – "I regret the majority of what I did" – and the part his faith plays in that (he reveals that as a Catholic he goes to confession). Read in particular his account of his vindictiveness in his destruction of Ivan Lewis, and how he should have walked away but "to my eternal regret" didn't. It's a terrifying insight into the darkest side of politics, one that will make it all the more difficult for his former colleagues to forgive him. I suspect those who opposed him will find that bit hard to swallow, not least because they will suspect that his regret is insincere. Why? Because he remains devoted to Gordon Brown ("the greatest man I ever met"), though I gather their relations are not what they were, and goes out of his way to exonerate and build up his ally Ed Balls...>> http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100237018/damian-mcbride-reveals-fear-and-loathing-at-the-heart-of-the-labour-party/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
It's all for charidee of course - you know sending money to teach wee africans to worship the church - you know the one with the huge gold plated palace in Italy filled with treasures worth more than the GDP of africa. I am confessing and saying 3 hail Tonys - can I go to heaven now ?
Puke.
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/thecolumnists/2013/09/from--2.html
Thus there are a lot of people in the queue being paid to buy the maximum number of new phones they are allowed, and they will be shipped off to Qatar, Singapore, Brunei, or wherever, to be sold on at a premium.
Labour nearly went bust last time they were in power, only sustained by centrally-approved union donations and the money of big donors (which stopped dead after cash-for-peerages and is unlikely to be a viable route again for at least a decade due to that scandal). If Labour come to rely on large numbers of half-hearted union members signing up, what will happen once they start doing things that annoy those people, as is inevitable once faced with the choices that power brings. To govern is to choose and to choose is to piss off.
Miliband's reforms are a gamble in the short term but short of a wholescale revolution in the level of political activity in the country, they'll be a disaster come their return to power.
what impeccable timing, we will be reading all weekend about the "culture" of Ed's Labour.
Or as they used to be notated, L.S.D.
Is it simply that it acts in the interests of its donors, so does not piss them off, and so retains their support?
Perhaps, by forcing the Labour party to rely on the support of a large number of individuals, rather than a small number of Union bosses, Miliband will ensure that the Labour party is more democratic and accountable - and doesn't shaft its own supporters so comprehensively when in government.
From a democratic point of view this would be a good thing, wouldn't it?
If you read today's press, it seems to be the Labour 'culture'.
Poly Toynbee and any other journalists who knew what was going on:
a) Didn't help the Labour Party.
b) Don't deserve to be journalists.
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/investing/article-2423718/A-Shade-Greener-woos-investors-18-upfront-rate-year-retail-bond.html
It's time you faced up to the bitter truth, Nick. You don't have "constituents" any more. Anna does.
I suspect very few who worked for or against Brown between 1980 and 1997 will deny his quality, or perhaps, his 'greatness'. But his unpreparedness for the job of Prime Minister will forever be his legacy: a clear indication that after 2000 he spent too much of his enormous resources on battling Blair and engaging in paranoid and spiteful insurgencies rather than planning with clarity for the job that would one day inevitably be his.
A Greek tragedy indeed, and McBride's take as an insider will be well worth reading.
Strange times.
As Peter Oborne points out, the poison of spinning was not all with Brown's team
"I was a political reporter throughout the Blair era, and there is no mystery at all why Mr Brown felt that he needed to employ McBride and Whelan.
Gordon Brown employed them because Tony Blair employed Alastair Campbell.
Numerous ministers were targeted by Mr Campbell and his team of Downing Street spin doctors during his time at No 10 from 1997-2003. The viciousness of the briefing – and the willingness to destroy the reputations of decent people who were members of the government – was utterly shocking."
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peteroborne/100237005/why-did-gordon-brown-need-damian-mcbride-because-tony-blair-had-alastair-campbell/