If some people are entitled to vote more than once, which it seems they are, then it is not one member one vote..........is it?
One member one vote would apply to everyone, and it seems that a select few can vote more than once.
That being the case to wriggle by saying " each member of each trade union gets one vote ", is slightly twisting things as that is not answering the question.
So I will ask again............are there members who have voted more than once in this leadership contest? You have stated that trade unionists only get one vote, but what about the others who are entitled to vote?
I would like an answer that includes EVERYONE that has a right to vote.
" Labour MPs, MEPs, party members and members of affiliated trade unions and socialist societies are all entitled to take part in the contest.
But people can register for more than one vote by joining different bodies.
Senior MP Tony Lloyd said it reflected Labour's federal nature and that they had never said the contest was run on a strictly one member, one vote basis ".
After reading the above statement do you want to re-think your answer above?
Not you Googs as you would not even agree that this is October!!!
I would have preferred David to ED ..... I think he has a real PR job, showing the country he is not wildly left wing. The country has clearly showed over last 20 years it does not want far right or left wing politics. It seems as a rule we like middle of the road.
I do think in reality the coalition will break down within the next 12 month's and we will have an election. once again no overall majority for anyone.....I think the Tories will then form a minority government. this is reality is quite good...as stops any extreme measures being pursued. I think it will be a long time untill we see a majority government again.
The funny thing is Davey...............it went completely over his head.
:grin::grin:
No wonder the unions voted for Ed eh?
" refusing to condemn unions over public sector strikes".
" Fears unions will demand more power as their members deliver Ed victory ".
Even on Talk Sport this morning they had that falling over idiot Kinnock cock a hoop at Ed's victory. That to me is more worrying than any cuts we will all have to endure soon.
Kinnock could not even run a bath and has found his little niche in European politics......something for nothing politics I call it.
So NOOOOOOOOO Labour are no longer, but what is scary is that Eddy boy could return us all to old Labour, and that is scary shit.
The unions must be rubbing their greedy little paws, with lefty Ed now in control. How long before the strikes start? I reckon by March next year this country will have the unions trying to bring it to it's knees, and no doubt with the full support of Ed and his cronies.
Scary times ahead indeed......you have been warned.
David M's Foreign Affairs speech to conference was quite statesman like; no notes and very powerful; his brother almost giving half hearted token claps from the top table.
Ed is looking rather drained in my view. Deep dark patches under his eyes and nothing of the presence of his brother.
Tomorrow's leader's speech will be quite interesting!
kenty....you have made your views known...and no matter who it was you would still have no time for them.
Now Ed has clearly stated he is against the public sector cuts, being as savage as they are. there again most moderate, middle of the road, voters would say the same.
Whats the use of saving money by makeing public sector workers redundant....and then spending the money saved on unemployment benifit !!
AS I say...ED is certainly known as more left wing than his brother, and needs an image makeover to fully be acceptable to voting public at large. Like it or lump it..image and spin is now 50% of politics.
Sorry Dean but I fail to see your points at all.
It was the last Labour Government that overspent to such a degree that these cuts are now needed...........badly.
As a private sector employer and a private sector employee for all the other years I have been working, I am tired of public sector workers never baring the brunt of any recession, I saw it in the 90's as well as now.
The public sector in many areas is overmanned badly and they will have to be cut as well. A shame but no more of a shame when private sector workers are laid off. This current recession has hit my industry which is the print very badly, and I have seen many firms go to the wall over the last two years, yet I do not know of one public sector worker, and I know a few, who have been laid off.
Anybody can realise that these cuts are needed, and if any Labour supporters or union members want to moan about the cuts, then look no further that the last Labour administration for the blame.
I think it's called the Micawber principle flower.
Details
Problem is, the labourites are STILL in denial. Quote GDP all day brothers... it don't alter the fact one iota - Labour spent what they didn't have.
every government for the last 50 years spent money it didn't have. Yes the last administration overspent highly....in an attempt to lessen the effects of a golbal recession. We bailed out the banks. What would of happened if we hadn't ?? Also reading the last set of figures, it seems this new administaration will reap the benifits of this, as the money is now being re-paid and at a healthy profit !!
I do not argue that we need cuts, and we need to tighten our belts. What I am saying is the cuts are to severe, and will risk any growth that we may see.
Kenty..as for not knowing a single public secor worker that has not been laid off, in last few years....lol....If that really is the case you really need to widen your circle of friends !!!..lol
But going back to point of all this. Its not being wildly left wing, to oppose the severity of the cuts.
Yes edited three times there as the first couple were a bit strong I thought.
Said with the greatest of respect of course.
:rotflmao::rotflmao::rotflmao::rotflmao::rotflmao::rotflmao:
of late (as they head towards retirement) in comparison to a new broom partnership who will want to make early impressions on the new Labour leadership to show Ed "who's boss".
The word " thug " simplifies my argument for you. 