Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

GJ - you have given me food for thought in comparing the Cruddas tape with that of the influence of Trade Unions within the Labour party. I kind of know what I want to say but find it hard to put into words. I equate the Trade Union link as a collective voice representing the under privileged and those without a political 'voice' but maybe that's an idealised/romantic/outdated view as for some workers the contribution is compulsory and may be contrary to their political beliefs.

 

However, the Cruddas tape was sickening to watch and listen to - I suppose it'll possibly open up a wider debate into funding of political parties in the future. 

 

I can't quite word what I'm wanting to say - I'll give it a bit of thought and get back to you.

Soozy Woo

I agree with Joe.

 

I'd rather keep the system we have now, than go to state funding for parties (including the BNP).

 

Anyone who talks to Cameron, or any cabinet minister, could influence policy, as could Union leaders influence Labour policy. Unless there is proof of illegality, this is just a bit embarrassing, as far as I can see.

Blizz'ard

(Just before I hoover the car, good progress so far, I've done the entire house)

 

 Influence of trade unions in the Labour Party......... We developed and financed it to represent our views. Somehow we became disenfranchised during the last few Thatcher decades, including an uneasy time with Blair. The balance between accepting money from us and trying to carry out Thatcherism better than the Tories has been one of the most fascinating aspects  of recent politics.

 

**waits patiently for Carnelian**

Garage Joe

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×