farfromtheland
Regular AND Goofy
Lobbyists have ongoing influence.
Reform, and the death of the Tory Party
- Thread starter briantrumpet
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
OP
OP
briantrumpet
Timewaster
OK, Suzanne Moore is a token lefty at the Telegraph, but they carried this:
farfromtheland
Regular AND Goofy
I keep trying to quote the Unite cut in Labour funding, weird no?
Anyhow, Labour knows damn well that if Labour politicians treat union members badly, the converse will occur.
This is not quite the same as paying in advance for favours, but you could say if the business funders don't get what they want they won't pay again. But they will get their interests favoured because Reform shares those interests.
Anyhow, Labour knows damn well that if Labour politicians treat union members badly, the converse will occur.
This is not quite the same as paying in advance for favours, but you could say if the business funders don't get what they want they won't pay again. But they will get their interests favoured because Reform shares those interests.
Psamathe
Legendary Member
I agree but also consider that unions are not entirely "for the benefit of the general public" but rather for the benefit their members.
I do see that unions have a stronger justification for influence that eg those recently donating to Reform. But not for me to say one group buying influence should be allowed and another disallowed. I do feel that money should not buy influence.
farfromtheland
Regular AND Goofy
The founding of the Labour party was a wrong fork.
It lead to the total betrayal of the principle of workers' control - ownership of the product of our labour was consciously ditched as an aspiration by Blair and Brown.
Maybe party politics could have achieved relatively better with more integrity , but state communism too has always betrayed the people when power became its own end.
What we need is means. The method is the essence of real democracy.
It lead to the total betrayal of the principle of workers' control - ownership of the product of our labour was consciously ditched as an aspiration by Blair and Brown.
Maybe party politics could have achieved relatively better with more integrity , but state communism too has always betrayed the people when power became its own end.
What we need is means. The method is the essence of real democracy.
bobzmyunkle
Guru
OP
OP
briantrumpet
Timewaster
Party that wants the UK to withdraw from the ECHR says what?
Psamathe
Legendary Member
The focus on the retrospective changes to block these donations is just daft. Say Labour change the rules to require donors be UK resident for 12 months ... so the donations are returned and in 6 months, maybe a bit longer they make the same donations again complying with the backdated rules. Labour look vindictive and Reform still have the money.
secretsqirrel
spiteful class warrior
There was no deranged rant.
secretsqirrel
spiteful class warrior
Vindictive or not, I hope they succeed. The idea of saturation coverage of Farage for the next couple of years is most unappealing. Unless they overdo it and people get sick of them, which I have a feeling they might be heading that way anyway.
Psamathe
Legendary Member
So stop the saturation coverage of Färage is not so much funding but more to get Gibb out of the BBC and muzzle Chris Mason.
I'm unsure Reform will make good use of money given those at the top of the Party love "rich living" (champagne and oyster lunches, getting places in private helicopters, etc.). And it does give the other parties the "no dirty money" to raise (except that might also encourage non-Labour to highlight Union funding and pressure ...)
C R
Squire
Braverman still under the illusion that when their revolution comes they won't notice her being brown.
OP
OP
