Ed Miliband urges 'historic' changes to Labour links with unions

I follow quite a few journalists on Twitter, and one of Sky ones posted a tweet something like "Coming up on Sky News, is there still a point to Unions?" Cue a deluge of responses all along the lines of "Shouldn't your question be 'Is there still a point to the Labour party?'"

I have to agree. I would think that the unions would be better off taking their money and found a proper party that supports workers rather than the bosses that employ people. Labour have forgotten their roots and while it might mean a few years without supporters in the house of commons what they have now is no different. Labour did nothing to protect workers rights in the last parliament.

Both parties need funding reform. There needs to be a cap on all donations from all sources and from any one donor.

Yeah, I can't see the tories going for that one, can you?

No but it would be a start. Also labour get lots from rich individuals as well.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

Go down that route and they will demand state funding and they can jog on about that. Ni caos but all donations no matter how big or small need to be declared.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

I'd go for that. Full disclosure. Plus a ban on accepting donations from anyone not resident in the UK for tax purposes - no pay, no say.

Also a ban on non voters ie companies or trade unions, though they could act as conduit but must name every shareholder or trade unionist who donates money.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

Would you include charities in that? I'm fine with a charity making a contribution to an MP who has worked towards some good cause.

I don’t see what the fuss is about Labour being funded by Unions. After all, that’s their historical roots, and they should be the party for the working man/woman. The Tories are quite happy to accept donations from their traditional allies, and that seems to be quite acceptable. However, it seems that what’s good for the goose is not good for the gander.

I do take the point that not everyone in a union would want their membership to handed on to Labour, so being able to elect to do so (or not do so) wold be a good alternative. However, rather than being scared of their union connections, Labour should really be embracing them and shouting it from the rooftops. Right now, they could be making hay in this particular field. Sadly, though, it’s the age old story: the Tories blunder somewhat, hand ammunition to Labour who seem to shoot themselves in the foot with it.

By the same token, I’d love to be able to tell my bank/building society that in no way should my investments be used to generate donations for the Tory party. I can’t see that happening.

Yes. Is it right that a charity gives money to MP's? They could offer time life delivering leaflets, or speaking on his or her behalf.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

+1


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

But you do have the option to move Banks / BS to one that does not whereas at the moment if you are in a (some) union you have no option not to have some of your contributions being paid to the Labour Party

That's not actually true in a legal sense. Trade unions are required, by law, to maintain a political fund that is separate from the other funds of the union if it wishes to engage in any political activity. Under Chapter VI of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 any member of a Trade Union may object to and therefore withdraw from contributing to the Unions political fund. Contributions to a political party must only be made from a Unions political fund so it's possible to opt out of supporting whichever political party your union ostensibly supports. I'm fairly certain any union that deviated from these rules would rapidly be jumped up and down on by their numerous opponents.