Comments on: Is Gordon our Steve McLaren? http://skuds.org/2007/11/is-gordon-our-steve-mclaren/ "Please send me evenings and weekends" Mon, 21 May 2012 15:06:39 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Danivon http://skuds.org/2007/11/is-gordon-our-steve-mclaren/comment-page-1/#comment-97482 Danivon Wed, 28 Nov 2007 19:12:53 +0000 http://skuds.org/2007/11/is-gordon-our-steve-mclaren/#comment-97482 Anyway, Skuds, I am pretty annoyed about this, it was beyond stupid of Watts (and possibly his predecessors?) to allow this arrangement to exist. Anyway, Skuds, I am pretty annoyed about this, it was beyond stupid of Watts (and possibly his predecessors?) to allow this arrangement to exist.

]]> By: Danivon http://skuds.org/2007/11/is-gordon-our-steve-mclaren/comment-page-1/#comment-97481 Danivon Wed, 28 Nov 2007 19:08:00 +0000 http://skuds.org/2007/11/is-gordon-our-steve-mclaren/#comment-97481 Well, ash, the Labour Party didn't exist in the 19th Century, but aside from that, it was the Conservatives who walked out of talks on Phillips, because they didn't like the idea of restrictions on spending between elections (because that nice Lord Ashcroft, who wasn't a peer of the realm before he started his largess, spends lots of money in marginal seats). The Union thing could conceivably be worked around anyway. The unions can only donate out of the political levy, which is collected from individual members (and they can decide not to pay the levy). If unions individualise the political levy, and bundle it up on behalf of their members, each individual donation will be very small. Of course, that would mean that unions would have to decide up front how much goes to the Labour Party, and how much is spent on other things (such as their own campaigning and other political activities). Alternatively, unions could break up into smaller units which act alongside each other but don't individually have enough members for the political donations to exceed £50K. Well, ash, the Labour Party didn’t exist in the 19th Century, but aside from that, it was the Conservatives who walked out of talks on Phillips, because they didn’t like the idea of restrictions on spending between elections (because that nice Lord Ashcroft, who wasn’t a peer of the realm before he started his largess, spends lots of money in marginal seats).

The Union thing could conceivably be worked around anyway. The unions can only donate out of the political levy, which is collected from individual members (and they can decide not to pay the levy). If unions individualise the political levy, and bundle it up on behalf of their members, each individual donation will be very small. Of course, that would mean that unions would have to decide up front how much goes to the Labour Party, and how much is spent on other things (such as their own campaigning and other political activities).

Alternatively, unions could break up into smaller units which act alongside each other but don’t individually have enough members for the political donations to exceed £50K.

]]> By: Ash http://skuds.org/2007/11/is-gordon-our-steve-mclaren/comment-page-1/#comment-97480 Ash Wed, 28 Nov 2007 06:01:31 +0000 http://skuds.org/2007/11/is-gordon-our-steve-mclaren/#comment-97480 If the Labour Party had accepeted the Phillips Review on party funding like the other parties and committed itself to accepting nothing more than £50k then it wouldn't keep getting caught up in these sleazy deals. Until Labour stop trying have 19th Century special deals with organisations like the unions rather than becoming a 21st Century political party then this sort of sleaze is bound to occur. If the Labour Party had accepeted the Phillips Review on party funding like the other parties and committed itself to accepting nothing more than £50k then it wouldn’t keep getting caught up in these sleazy deals.

Until Labour stop trying have 19th Century special deals with organisations like the unions rather than becoming a 21st Century political party then this sort of sleaze is bound to occur.

]]>