tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post8771743358689615281..comments2024-03-04T17:54:32.559+00:00Comments on Iain Dale's Diary: Labour Gives More Taxpayers' Money to the UnionsIain Dalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03270146219458384372noreply@blogger.comBlogger59125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-31519289185593368492009-09-17T19:30:45.294+01:002009-09-17T19:30:45.294+01:00They seem to have no problem with other groups act...They seem to have no problem with other groups acting collectively to influence government policy (e.g City,CBI, fox hunters etc.)<br /><br /><br />Yes you make a good comparison but while you might be sanguine at the thought of say the CBI funding the Conservative Party100% and openly buying Policy others are less so . In fact they have suggested that there be a limit of £50,000 so no special interest group can out bid the ordinary democratic process. Would you care to hazard a guess at who these deep thinkers are ?Newmaniahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11922161971821380803noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-82072295199901210142009-09-17T15:49:04.784+01:002009-09-17T15:49:04.784+01:00"BUT I see a few have pointed out that the le..."BUT I see a few have pointed out that the level of political levy is in the hands of the individual union and they could simply levy less, then pay less to Labour and modernise themselves"<br /><br />Perhaps those of us who pay the political levy are entitled to see that our contributions are spent on political activities - and in those cases where we have voted (under a law brought in by the Conservatives) for the levy to be used in affiliating to the Labour Party would expect it to be used for such a purpose. <br /><br />Perhaps we could see an equal level of shareholder involvement being required when companies make political contributions. <br /><br />Of course most of the Tories would like to see a system where individual workers are not allowed to act collectively in order to see their grievances addressed - because they know from long experience that is the best way of avoiding those grievances being addressed. They seem to have no problem with other groups acting collectively to influence government policy (e.g City,CBI, fox hunters etc.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-30114071169743403112009-09-17T13:35:42.659+01:002009-09-17T13:35:42.659+01:00"they could join the Labour Party in fact . &..."they could join the Labour Party in fact . "<br /><br />Remind me one day to tell you how the Labour Party got it's interesting name.Jimmyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01542633492362670045noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-22351123742736792232009-09-17T12:49:29.183+01:002009-09-17T12:49:29.183+01:00These are additional amounts thought the total us...These are additional amounts thought the total used to be about the same as the Unions actually did contribute to the Labour Party about £10,000,000.<br />Mathew is obviously thirteen years old ..he thinks you can ring fence money . Probably thinks you can juggle with water as well <br />It is a source of continuing amazement to me that in an age where 80% of the UK working population is not unionised 20% can openly buy Policy from the Labour Party to the detriment of the majority who then pay for the whole thing <br />Union political funding as a whole is a bizarre anachronism and should not be allowed beyond £50,000 or so. There is no amount of ‘ring fencing ‘that makes up for the fact that membership is linked to benefits not to say actual employment withheld from non members . All, of the members are at Liberty to give as much as they want privately so what’s the problem , if they wish to start up a Labour support club not linked to work and benefits they can do so , they could join the Labour Party in fact . <br /><br />Example - teaches are only protected from malicious actions under their Unions , Unions should not do this but as long as they do who is not going to join<br /><br /><br />Wages in the Public sector the chief beneficiaries of this con have outstripped the private sector by x2 over the last ten years and lest not even get into pensions <br />Bottom line - If the people of this country re-elect a Brown owned by the Unions he will have to go to the tax payer to fill his gaping fiscal canyon . <br /><br />It would be madness of a kind which rarely gets two chancesNewmaniahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11922161971821380803noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-68393574559534845832009-09-17T11:40:12.676+01:002009-09-17T11:40:12.676+01:00DespairingLiberal
Yes BUT that's not the poin...DespairingLiberal<br /><br />Yes BUT that's not the point - this is a government giving money to the unions.<br /><br />As I said in my comment above I was a union member for 40 years plus and we could as a union decide to support who we wanted - we didn't expect Tax Payers to fund it. GET A GRIP.Retired Davenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-15219126749920822132009-09-17T11:34:37.846+01:002009-09-17T11:34:37.846+01:00Matthew - I was about to put you straight, thinkin...Matthew - I was about to put you straight, thinking you naive or part of the problem.<br /><br />BUT I see a few have pointed out that the level of political levy is in the hands of the individual union and they could simply levy less, then pay less to Labour and modernise themselves. They don't actually take the money out a whisky bottle (labelled political fund) you know.<br /><br />It is corruption really however you look at it, whichever colour of government does it. BUT this lot have raised the practice to an art-form.<br /><br />Oh BTW - I was a union member for over 40 yearsRetired Davenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-10994517708115904442009-09-17T10:15:44.147+01:002009-09-17T10:15:44.147+01:00Yes Labour apologists.
God forbid that you bring ...Yes Labour apologists.<br /><br />God forbid that you bring facts into the issue or express your opinions or take part in the debate. <br /><br />If libel is binary then why does it decided on by a judge and jury?<br /><br />This contributor wins the prize for biggest moron on the thread. Cameron does not need defective hearts and minds like thisAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-69217689473356565262009-09-17T08:16:39.639+01:002009-09-17T08:16:39.639+01:00Yes, this is so much worse than routinely taking i...Yes, this is so much worse than routinely taking in large sums from tax exiles who live abroad and who refuse to disclose the source of their income, as with the Conservative Party for example.DespairingLiberalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02903904463236135611noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-16130037514128703572009-09-17T08:04:32.147+01:002009-09-17T08:04:32.147+01:00Most people accept that political work - and by &q...<i>Most people accept that political work - and by "political work" I include non-pro-Labour campaigning such as non-partisan lobbying, anti-privatisation campaigns etc - is part and parcel of the union's work. </i><br /><br />Anti-privatisation campaigns are certainly partisan, being an ancient left-wing policy. You also don't deny that pro-Labour partisan work does go on with this money. Oh and "most people accept" isn't an argument.<br /><br />So try again. Why do we need to pay left-wing organisations to campaign for left-wing values out of all of our taxes?<br /><br /><br />ShardovanAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-59207360787797063882009-09-17T00:55:05.017+01:002009-09-17T00:55:05.017+01:00We're going to need serious cash to tackle cli...We're going to need serious cash to tackle climate change<br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=688HLeGghXs&feature=channel<br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLoY1GsTu9M&feature=channel<br /><br />Will the money be forthcoming?belowtwonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-58304082213846224692009-09-16T23:15:03.665+01:002009-09-16T23:15:03.665+01:00However, the idea that the UMF is a funnel for sta...<i>However, the idea that the UMF is a funnel for state money to the Labour Party is absolute bunkum and, as others have pointed out, bordering on libel.</i><br /><br />Really? Then why don't they sue? "Bordering on libel" is a meaningles expression. Libel is binary - a thing either is or is not libellous. There is no halfway house.<br /><br />So maybe all you Labour apologists should spare us your weasel words and your oh-so-worthy legal opinions and just bugger off back to LabourList where you can spend your days merrily chanting the latest mantra. Is it still "Labour Investment. Tory Cuts"?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-2394906144237511132009-09-16T22:44:15.937+01:002009-09-16T22:44:15.937+01:00James asked me:
"Kit, why are there any exce...James asked me:<br /><br />"Kit, why are there any exceptions? Surely opting out of the political part of your subscription should ALWAYS reduce the amount due, unless the political levy is already set at zero? Otherwise, the union is effectively charging a lower price to those who opt in - which is exactly the cross-subsidy which is supposed to be illegal."<br /><br />I said "usually" or something like that because it depends from union to union and the only union which I know for sure that gives rebates on it's political levy for those who completely opt out is UNISON, because that's the union I'm a member of. <br /><br />I can't speak for other unions, but I would imagine that if you opt out of the political levy, then that portion of your subscriptions would go to the union's other work - campaigns, administration, anything else. <br /><br />Your argument that those who opt in to the political levy (it's probably more accurate to refer to it as "those who don't opt out" since you have to actively opt out of the levy) are paying less is absurd. Most people accept that political work - and by "political work" I include non-pro-Labour campaigning such as non-partisan lobbying, anti-privatisation campaigns etc - is part and parcel of the union's work. <br /><br />Everybody pays the same and contributes. They don't pay more, the argument is an absurd fallacy.<br /><br />Nick asks<br /><br />"On a related subject, is advertising by unions during an election campaign included in the cap on Labour's election spending?"<br /><br />Not as a part of Labour's spending, but they are capped to £5k per union as "third parties" and are regulated by the Electoral Commission. <br /><br />There is nothing stopping Tory supporting groups which are independent of the Party from doing the same, though. <br /><br />WV: "winge". Sums up most of the comments in this threat, tbh...Kit Learynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-77983510852105018062009-09-16T19:59:06.299+01:002009-09-16T19:59:06.299+01:00Whether the "political fund" is ringfenc...Whether the "political fund" is ringfenced or not, I don't want my taxes funding the unions.<br />On a related subject, is advertising by unions during an election campaign included in the cap on Labour's election spending? If not, why not, and if so why are they allowed to advertise on TV during commercial breaks rather than in official Party Election Broadcast slots?nicknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-53055565139084289562009-09-16T18:54:36.884+01:002009-09-16T18:54:36.884+01:00The idea of taxpayers' money being pumped into...The idea of taxpayers' money being pumped into unions to fund them holding us to ransom with threats of strikes and demands for increased subsidies, more generous pay etc disgusts me in the same way and for the same reason as quangos employing lobbyists to push for their own funding. The UMF should be terminated immediately, along with all other public funding for them.<br /><br />Kit, why are there any exceptions? Surely opting out of the political part of your subscription should ALWAYS reduce the amount due, unless the political levy is already set at zero? Otherwise, the union is effectively charging a lower price to those who opt in - which is exactly the cross-subsidy which is supposed to be illegal.<br /><br />I would certainly support a cap on donations to political parties - preferably zero for any entity other than an eligible voter.jas88https://www.blogger.com/profile/05563592458314214904noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-88985060029342118002009-09-16T18:19:28.121+01:002009-09-16T18:19:28.121+01:00Once again, Labour's funding of a public secto...Once again, Labour's funding of a public sector 'service' with taxpayers' money has failed totally. If the money was intended to modernise the unions, how come they are still the unreformed dinosaurs we remember from the '70s/80s.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-41222645040536729032009-09-16T17:48:03.848+01:002009-09-16T17:48:03.848+01:00Will the Tories hold the Labour Party to account f...Will the Tories hold the Labour Party to account for this theft of the Taxpayers money when they get in power ?<br /><br />I doubt it very much indeedGuthrumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17499979740864497256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-88416282808277005712009-09-16T17:23:58.010+01:002009-09-16T17:23:58.010+01:00*sigh*
First off, I don't generally approve o...*sigh*<br /><br />First off, I don't generally approve of Government money going to unions, on the principle that trade unions should be beholden to their members and not the Government. <br /><br />However, the idea that the UMF is a funnel for state money to the Labour Party is absolute bunkum and, as others have pointed out, bordering on libel. <br /><br />Political funds are a fixed percentage of subscriptions. This is why, in some cases (such as UNISON), if you opt out of paying any political levy, you actually get a rebate on your subs. The amount of levy that is included in your subs is fixed either by the union's rulebook or by conference policy; so it can't be changed by a click of the fingers. <br /><br />There are 212 Trade Unions registered with the Certification Office, according to the BERR (source: http://tinyurl.com/pbyvfs). There are only 15 uniona affiliated to the Labour Party (source: http://www.unionstogether.org.uk/pages/member_unions).<br /><br />It would be fair to assume that only a minority of unions getting UMF cash are affiliated to the Labour Party. <br /><br />Plus, UMF money, like any sort of Government money, is accountable, and there are accounts somewhere (though I'm not able to find them after a brief search). Also, unions publish their accounts and have to lodge them with the Certification Officer.<br /><br />Don't you think that if UMF money was being funneled to the Labour Party, we'd have found out about it now?<br /><br />Morons. <br /><br />The fact is that I am sure that more money and resources are being "funneled" to the Conservative Party through short money, council-funded offices at Town Halls, etc. than unions get from the UMF. It would be an interesting piece of research...Kit Learynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-9842488874900166122009-09-16T17:19:39.581+01:002009-09-16T17:19:39.581+01:00If TU activity should be funded by the members, no...If TU activity should be funded by the members, not the state, then surely we should be applying the same mentality to businesses. Should the taxpayer subsidise business? They subsidise it already, but should that practise carry on? I think not, but why they do get Government hand outs then TU's should have access to Government cash to modernise and provide a quality service to it's membership (it's shareholders to those that want to put a market spin on this).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-3018027717283750022009-09-16T16:31:41.956+01:002009-09-16T16:31:41.956+01:00This has been going on for a long, long time. For ...This has been going on for a long, long time. For example, why do you think Teaching can fund so many separate Trade Unions within a single profession?<br /><br />WGWalsingham's Ghosthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05813400475845295850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-16726645103191276732009-09-16T16:02:32.664+01:002009-09-16T16:02:32.664+01:00i dont think an african dictator would get away wi...<i>i dont think an african dictator would get away with this.</i><br /><br />No, you're wrong. An African dictator would certainly get away with this. Where do you think Labour got the idea?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-90959898632246019192009-09-16T16:01:19.703+01:002009-09-16T16:01:19.703+01:00I'm glad you're covering this, Dale, but i...I'm glad you're covering this, Dale, but it's not a new story. Labour has been using the unions to wash taxpayers' money for a very, very long time. I remember talking to people about it ten years ago.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-70181380270179743222009-09-16T16:01:09.596+01:002009-09-16T16:01:09.596+01:00"Matthew - the point is that the Unions could..."Matthew - the point is that the Unions could use the money they pour into Labour's coffers to fund these projects themselves."<br /><br />You're proposing this be financed by embezzlement of the ring-fenced political funds?<br /><br />That's blue sky thinking alright.Jimmyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01542633492362670045noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-46507521825447229572009-09-16T15:31:42.260+01:002009-09-16T15:31:42.260+01:00Golden Balls - as others have pointed out - Iain i...Golden Balls - as others have pointed out - Iain is correct. We have blatant money laundering and Labour effectively funding itself from taxpayers money. Its been well known for quite some time.<br /><br />Labour are a bunch of lying bastard toe rag scum. Get used to it. And keep apologising for them if you want.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-3950836241090261572009-09-16T15:23:44.992+01:002009-09-16T15:23:44.992+01:00Britain is corrupt.Britain is corrupt.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-81816818422883550002009-09-16T15:22:58.315+01:002009-09-16T15:22:58.315+01:00Darlings, have you forgotten that taxpayers money ...Darlings, have you forgotten that taxpayers money was used to buy extra large loo seats and clear out moats and buy floating duck islands , and add to the tuck boxes as well?<br /><br />Disgusting , disgraceful and dishonest thing to do re NuLab. <br /><br />BUT if I see the Tories swilling champers or nibbling canapes at the party conference, I will be equally furious because impoverished elderly ladies give up their minimum of at least £5 + membership in good faith to support the Tory cause!True Bellehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16296161522047947133noreply@blogger.com