Labour trying to distance itself from the unions

[Wade Garrett]

Ed wants individual members to choose whether they donate to the party though their union subs.

 

Unions will have their influence reduced. Good. If it wasn't for them pigeon-holing Ed to the leadership, Labour would have a leader that would have torn this shabby Government to shreds. What have the unions got with their Ed. A leader about as electable as Kinnock, and reduced influence in how the party is run, and who gets selected to fight seats.

 

You reap what you sow. And this from someone who has been a member of a union for over 20 years. Still really angry with them in getting the wrong Milliband in.

[buctootim]

Ed wants individual members to choose whether they donate to the party though their union subs.

 

Unions will have their influence reduced. Good. If it wasn't for them pigeon-holing Ed to the leadership, Labour would have a leader that would have torn this shabby Government to shreds. What have the unions got with their Ed. A leader about as electable as Kinnock, and reduced influence in how the party is run, and who gets selected to fight seats.

 

You reap what you sow. And this from someone who has been a member of a union for over 20 years. Still really angry with them in getting the wrong Milliband in.

 

I thought this already happened and had done for decades - you could opt out of the political levy. Is the plan that only people who opt in will pay it?

[bridge too far]

Here is a counter-weight

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/jul/14/conservative-dining-clubs-party-funding

[Viking Warrior]

Some of the union stewards I have to deal with have become more militant during the past year . The concept of closer cooperation is diminishing by the day . I'm not sure if it is because of ideology from regional officers or down to the sheer incompetence of the actual stewards . Some of the new ones we have to deal with have either been disciplined in recent years and therefore seek some form of pay back . Others seem to not understand the concept of equality prefering to support men rather than women in a range of issues including dinity at work or even worse making complete opposite claims against another union . In. This day of austerity there needs to be greater cooperation between unions and employers . In the next couple of years there will be further job cuts many directly resulting from the behaviour of some union officials and not because of the behaviour of the employer. I could be more specific but for obvious reason I will not say anything

 

I will add there are some good union folks to work alongside . But I do wonder about some of the people becoming stewards

[JackFrost]

Ed wants individual members to choose whether they donate to the party though their union subs.

 

Unions will have their influence reduced. Good. If it wasn't for them pigeon-holing Ed to the leadership, Labour would have a leader that would have torn this shabby Government to shreds. What have the unions got with their Ed. A leader about as electable as Kinnock, and reduced influence in how the party is run, and who gets selected to fight seats.

 

You reap what you sow. And this from someone who has been a member of a union for over 20 years. Still really angry with them in getting the wrong Milliband in.

 

LOL, Ed Miliband was distancing himself from the unions in his first speech after being elected as Labour Party leader (just after their votes had helped elect him)

 

As for choosing the wrong Miliband, or Labour having a leader that could tear the government to shreds, just who on earth could do that exactly? Ed Balls? David Miliband? I don't think so. They'd have been exactly the same. The only MP that could have genuinely made Labour a real alternative to the Tories in that leadership contest would have been Diane Abbot, but she's way too much of a loose cannon and a free-thinker to ever be elected.

 

The real issue is that the Labour Party the unions have always been associated with no longer exists. It's now a directionless entity in the most elitist parliament in modern history, that is the first to bash the Tories cuts yet will do nothing to reverse them, that advises it's wealthy donors on how to avoid paying tax on their donations, that says the coalition's budget shouldn't be trusted because George Osborne didn't buy the right ticket when travelling on a train. Some of this is down to a shift in culture over a period of time, for instance in the 1980s 40% of Labour MPs had a background in manual or office work, now it is less than 10%. But some of it is also down to "New Labour" shifting the party to the right and them effectively becoming a knee-jerk party of spin that in reality is little different from the Tories.

[View From The Top]

LOL, Ed Miliband was distancing himself from the unions in his first speech after being elected as Labour Party leader (just after their votes had helped elect him)

 

As for choosing the wrong Miliband, or Labour having a leader that could tear the government to shreds, just who on earth could do that exactly? Ed Balls? David Miliband? I don't think so. They'd have been exactly the same. The only MP that could have genuinely made Labour a real alternative to the Tories in that leadership contest would have been Diane Abbot, but she's way too much of a loose cannon and a free-thinker to ever be elected.

 

The real issue is that the Labour Party the unions have always been associated with no longer exists. It's now a directionless entity in the most elitist parliament in modern history, that is the first to bash the Tories cuts yet will do nothing to reverse them, that advises it's wealthy donors on how to avoid paying tax on their donations, that says the coalition's budget shouldn't be trusted because George Osborne didn't buy the right ticket when travelling on a train. Some of this is down to a shift in culture over a period of time, for instance in the 1980s 40% of Labour MPs had a background in manual or office work, now it is less than 10%. But some of it is also down to "New Labour" shifting the party to the right and them effectively becoming a knee-jerk party of spin that in reality is little different from the Tories.

 

The other brother would have wiped the floor with the coalition.

[bridge too far]

The other brother would have wiped the floor with the coalition.

 

Did you see him on the Andrew Marr show this morning? Very impressive and Dodgy Dave would surely have struggled with him. Mind you, Ed is reducing Dave to a perpetual state of puce these days

[trousers]

Here is a counter-weight

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/jul/14/conservative-dining-clubs-party-funding

 

Careful. You know "whataboutery" raises Verbal's hackles...

[Lord Duckhunter]

There's only one thing worse than the unions bankrolling labour and business bankrolling the Tories ,and that's us mug taxpayers bankrolling the whole lot of them.

[pap]

I say this as a current Labour Party member. I'm not impressed with the present setup. A few days ago, "Ed Miliband" wrote to me about becoming a candidate ( he actually wrote to all members with a "do not reply" return address, so I'm nowt special, and not even eligible yet ). Anyway, this email has a "send your feedback" bit tagged on the end.

 

My local MP is Luciana Berger. She is a close personal friend of Euan Blair's, a member of Labour Friends for Israel ( massively funded, btw ) and despite having no prior experience with Liverpool Wavertree, managed to secure the selection for said constituency. Now I don't mind Luciana as a person, but am totally against her selection here. It smacks of the same sense of entitlement that Labour allude to when they accuse the Tories of being a "born to rule" party. The contrast is made even more evident when you compare Ms Berger with Stephen Twigg, the chap who holds West Derby. Now I'm perfectly aware that you could put a red rosetta on a pig and get a Labour result in most of Merseyside, but Twigg didn't get into Parliament by winning West Derby. He took Basildon from Portillo in 1997.

 

My overall point? Labour can distance itself from the unions all it wants, but until it sorts out the king-making in its own ranks, the problem of persistent career politicians is always going to dog them. More than anything else, the Labour Party needs real people to represent it. There's a case to be made that a union rep is far closer to the concerns of real people than career politicians fresh out of Uni.

[trousers]

I say this as a current Labour Party member. I'm not impressed with the present setup. A few days ago, "Ed Miliband" wrote to me about becoming a candidate ( he actually wrote to all members with a "do not reply" return address, so I'm nowt special, and not even eligible yet ). Anyway, this email has a "send your feedback" bit tagged on the end.

 

My local MP is Luciana Berger. She is a close personal friend of Euan Blair's, a member of Labour Friends for Israel ( massively funded, btw ) and despite having no prior experience with Liverpool Wavertree, managed to secure the selection for said constituency. Now I don't mind Luciana as a person, but am totally against her selection here. It smacks of the same sense of entitlement that Labour allude to when they accuse the Tories of being a "born to rule" party. The contrast is made even more evident when you compare Ms Berger with Stephen Twigg, the chap who holds West Derby. Now I'm perfectly aware that you could put a red rosetta on a pig and get a Labour result in most of Merseyside, but Twigg didn't get into Parliament by winning West Derby. He took Basildon from Portillo in 1997.

 

My overall point? Labour can distance itself from the unions all it wants, but until it sorts out the king-making in its own ranks, the problem of persistent career politicians is always going to dog them. More than anything else, the Labour Party needs real people to represent it. There's a case to be made that a union rep is far closer to the concerns of real people than career politicians fresh out of Uni.

 

That's assuming union reps (and union leaders) aren't on some self fulfilling power trip too...

[pap]

That's assuming union reps (and union leaders) aren't on some self fulfilling power trip too...

 

I come into contact with shop stewards quite frequently. The vast majority of them are poor beleaguered souls who don't want the job; the very opposite of those seeking power.

[trousers]

I come into contact with shop stewards quite frequently. The vast majority of them are poor beleaguered souls who don't want the job; the very opposite of those seeking power.

 

If they're reluctant union reps then they're hardly going to be rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect of becoming an MP then, I'd have thought?

[Viking Warrior]

trousers

That's assuming union reps (and union leaders) aren't on some self fulfilling power trip too...

 

Some are very much on power trios, especially some of the regional officers who have equally obscene salaries and benefits.

 

Mike Hogg , Tommy Campbell to name but a few

[JackFrost]

The other brother would have wiped the floor with the coalition.

 

David Miliband would have been no different because he'd have had to tow the party line ala Ed and I'm afraid Labour's problems go way deeper than Ed Miliband. David Miliband has now left politics altogether so he's got a lot more freedom as to what he can say at the moment.

 

It's the party's complete lack of direction and the "New Labour" era leaving it in complete limbo on the political spectrum. Their more interested in slamming the Tories with meaningless rhetoric than actually being a credible alternative to the coalition, because in reality they are not. Labour are barely any different from the Tories and spend most of their time pretending they're something they're not, because they no longer have substance as to what they are supposed to represent ie. the working class.

[View From The Top]

 

It's the party's complete lack of direction and the "New Labour" era leaving it in complete limbo on the political spectrum. Their more interested in slamming the Tories with meaningless rhetoric than actually being a credible alternative to the coalition, because in reality they are not. Labour are barely any different from the Tories and spend most of their time pretending they're something they're not, because they no longer have substance as to what they are supposed to represent ie. the working class.

 

Which is why I left the party.

[solentstars]

David Miliband would have been no different because he'd have had to tow the party line ala Ed and I'm afraid Labour's problems go way deeper than Ed Miliband. David Miliband has now left politics altogether so he's got a lot more freedom as to what he can say at the moment.

 

It's the party's complete lack of direction and the "New Labour" era leaving it in complete limbo on the political spectrum. Their more interested in slamming the Tories with meaningless rhetoric than actually being a credible alternative to the coalition, because in reality they are not. Labour are barely any different from the Tories and spend most of their time pretending they're something they're not, because they no longer have substance as to what they are supposed to represent ie. the working class.

 

Agree they are more conservative than the present Tory party.

 

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

[buctootim]

The contrast is made even more evident when you compare Ms Berger with Stephen Twigg, the chap who holds West Derby. Now I'm perfectly aware that you could put a red rosetta on a pig and get a Labour result in most of Merseyside, but Twigg didn't get into Parliament by winning West Derby. He took Basildon from Portillo in 1997.

 

My overall point? Labour can distance itself from the unions all it wants, but until it sorts out the king-making in its own ranks, the problem of persistent career politicians is always going to dog them. More than anything else, the Labour Party needs real people to represent it

 

??? Stephen Twigg is the epitome of a career politician. He was President of NOLS (National Organisation of Labour Students) in the 1980s and all he has done since is politic.

[pap]

??? Stephen Twigg is the epitome of a career politician. He was President of NOLS (National Organisation of Labour Students) in the 1980s and all he has done since is politic.

 

I'm not making the claim that Twigg isn't career, but at least he got into Parliament in a genuine contest.

[Lord Duckhunter]

I'm not making the claim that Twigg isn't career, but at least he got into Parliament in a genuine contest.

 

Twigg won Enfield Southgate from MP, not Basildon.

 

To me that's the issue, you hold him up as an example of some sort of clean selection. But he was born and bred in Southgate, won the seat , but as soon as he lost it got parachuted into a safe Labour seat. Surely the better thing was for someone from West Derby should have got the seat, rather than a career politician who had been kicked out of his own manor. And I know all parties do it, but it's wrong IMO.

 

Twigg is the worst type of career politician.

[pap]

Twigg won Enfield Southgate from MP, not Basildon.

 

To me that's the issue, you hold him up as an example of some sort of clean selection. But he was born and bred in Southgate, won the seat , but as soon as he lost it got parachuted into a safe Labour seat. Surely the better thing was for someone from West Derby should have got the seat, rather than a career politician who had been kicked out of his own manor. And I know all parties do it, but it's wrong IMO.

 

Twigg is the worst type of career politician.

 

My preference would be for local politicians to contest local seats. Have to say, haven't done my homework on Twigg (as you pointed out). There's also an argument to be made that Twigg didn't really achieve anything; was elected on the wave of national sentiment directed against the Tories.

 

Not a great example.

[aintforever]

David Miliband would have been no different because he'd have had to tow the party line ala Ed and I'm afraid Labour's problems go way deeper than Ed Miliband. David Miliband has now left politics altogether so he's got a lot more freedom as to what he can say at the moment.

 

It's the party's complete lack of direction and the "New Labour" era leaving it in complete limbo on the political spectrum. Their more interested in slamming the Tories with meaningless rhetoric than actually being a credible alternative to the coalition, because in reality they are not. Labour are barely any different from the Tories and spend most of their time pretending they're something they're not, because they no longer have substance as to what they are supposed to represent ie. the working class.

 

I agree that Labour are not much different from the tories but that's why, with a half decent leader, they would have walked the next election. They spend most of their time pretending they're something they're not but that's all the tories do.

 

Ed Milliband is unelectable. He comes across as a bit simple and can't even speak properly. The fact that the party elected him as their leader (thanks to the unions) is reason enough for the British public to not trust them with running the country.

[pap]

I agree that Labour are not much different from the tories but that's why, with a half decent leader, they would have walked the next election. They spend most of their time pretending they're something they're not but that's all the tories do.

 

Ed Milliband is unelectable. He comes across as a bit simple and can't even speak properly. The fact that the party elected him as their leader (thanks to the unions) is reason enough for the British public to not trust them with running the country.

 

Labour were never going to win the 2015 election, certainly not after the Union-savin' (capital u) no vote for Scottish Independence.

[JackFrost]

I agree that Labour are not much different from the tories but that's why, with a half decent leader, they would have walked the next election. They spend most of their time pretending they're something they're not but that's all the tories do.

 

Ed Milliband is unelectable. He comes across as a bit simple and can't even speak properly. The fact that the party elected him as their leader (thanks to the unions) is reason enough for the British public to not trust them with running the country.

 

Not sure about that.

 

I don't think the Tories are pretending to be anything other than Tories. Yes, there's one or two issues where they've adopted a rather liberal stance (gay marriage for example) but in the main they seem to be pretty Tory on most of the policies they've pushed through, and they've ensured anything unpopular has been all the Lib Dems fault. They have problems themselves (Gove being a complete liability for one) but in the main they've been pretty mediocre and predictable thus far.

 

Labour are currently in limbo but that isn't just down to Ed Miliband. The party is a poor man's Conservative party (pun not intended) which comes with a transparent socialist/working man's facade and at the current rate they'll struggle to get their own voters to vote for them, never mind attract voters from other parties. The party has turned it's back on what it believed in for generations and all it stands for now is barely anything more than meaningless rhetoric. Labour are a directionless shambles and unless they appoint a Diane Abbot or another curveball that can get the party heading somewhere it once stood for, it won't matter who leads the party.

[Barry Sanchez]

As a Labour party and Union member I am seriously considering whether to leave to leave the party, Miliband and his ineffectiveness against the most unpopular Government in memory, his treatment and hypocritical nature of the way he has used the Unions and the elitist set up now that is modern politics are the main reasons.