New Labour,the party,s over. Goodbye.

[Buzzer]

Absolute tosh. One or 2 (including a backbencher) asking questions for cash.

As opposed to peerages for cash, invitations to met the PM for cash, influencing Government policy for cash. Making up new guidelines and then blatantly ignoring them (keeping your own treasurer in the dark) and getting the party secretary to okay a dodgy dea lwhilst in hospital recovering from a heart attack.

If that's ineptitude then I'm a Liberal Democrat. Repeat - Hamilton was a bakbencher taking bungs for asking questions. Offering peerages for cash is very much worse.

And...all this from the party that promised to be whiter than white. Did I mention trying to wriggle out of cross-party support for caps on donations by trying to argue their biggest supporters, the unions, was not one donation but a collection of individual donations. (If that's so then so are donations from companies with more than one shareholder).

It wasn't under a Tory Government that we had the 1st ever sitting PM formally questioned by police.

So...which is worse?

 

[perseus]

http://www.sirpeterscott.com/circleofcorruption.html

But it would be even worse under the proper Tories.

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

Did I mention trying to wriggle out of cross-party support for caps on donations by trying to argue their biggest supporters, the unions, was not one donation but a collection of individual donations. (If that's so then so are donations from companies with more than one shareholder).

Buzzer,
There is a difference here. Trade union political funds (from where the donations to Labour, Lib-Dems or whoever come from) are made up of personal, voluntary contributions from individual members.
I'll be surprised if political donations from Ltd companies originate from monies donated for this purpose by individual shareholders.

 

[Buzzer]

Buzzer,
There is a difference here. Trade union political funds (from where the donations to Labour, Lib-Dems or whoever come from) are made up of personal, voluntary contributions from individual members.
I'll be surprised if political donations from Ltd companies originate from monies donated for this purpose by individual shareholders.

Wrong. It's not tax deductible at all and therefore comes from otherwise directly distributable post-tax profits. Distributable to and belonging to the members. Also, the donations have to be passed by resolution from the members.

The analogy stands.

 

[Hatterlovesbrighton]

Absolute tosh. One or 2 (including a backbencher) asking questions for cash.

As opposed to peerages for cash, invitations to met the PM for cash, influencing Government policy for cash. Making up new guidelines and then blatantly ignoring them (keeping your own treasurer in the dark) and getting the party secretary to okay a dodgy dea lwhilst in hospital recovering from a heart attack.

If that's ineptitude then I'm a Liberal Democrat. Repeat - Hamilton was a bakbencher taking bungs for asking questions. Offering peerages for cash is very much worse.

And...all this from the party that promised to be whiter than white. Did I mention trying to wriggle out of cross-party support for caps on donations by trying to argue their biggest supporters, the unions, was not one donation but a collection of individual donations. (If that's so then so are donations from companies with more than one shareholder).

It wasn't under a Tory Government that we had the 1st ever sitting PM formally questioned by police.

So...which is worse?

I completely agree about the unions. Its scandalous that the unions give so much money to Labour. It would be interesting to see just how much of these unions memberships actually supported these donations rather than their grandees.

Cash for honours and peerages has been going on for centuries. All the parties reward their big donators. The difference here is that someone actually talked about the rewards in the same context as asking for dosh.

 

[Hatterlovesbrighton]

Buzzer,
There is a difference here. Trade union political funds (from where the donations to Labour, Lib-Dems or whoever come from) are made up of personal, voluntary contributions from individual members.
I'll be surprised if political donations from Ltd companies originate from monies donated for this purpose by individual shareholders.

Wouldn't quite say voluntary. Members in the UK whose union set up a political fund have to opt out if they don't want their subs to go into the fund. Wonder what the rates would be if you had to opt in?

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

Buzzer,
There is a difference here. Trade union political funds (from where the donations to Labour, Lib-Dems or whoever come from) are made up of personal, voluntary contributions from individual members.
I'll be surprised if political donations from Ltd companies originate from monies donated for this purpose by individual shareholders.

Wrong. It's not tax deductible at all and therefore comes from otherwise directly distributable post-tax profits. Distributable to and belonging to the members. Also, the donations have to be passed by resolution from the members.

The analogy stands.

I think you may have misunderstood my point.
Individual trade union members have a choice whether they wish to donate to their union's political fund or not from their personal net income.
Individual shareholders do not have a choice whether the 'post-tax' profit that would have been distributed to them, as individuals, is to be used for political donations. Sure, they do have a vote since, as you say, company donations have to be passed by a members' resolution (requiring a simple majority). This is not the same thing though.

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

Wouldn't quite say voluntary. Members in the UK whose union set up a political fund have to opt out if they don't want their subs to go into the fund. Wonder what the rates would be if you had to opt in?

Personally, I don't think I'd have too much difficulty in ticking the 'opt out' box on the membership application form. You have a choice so it's still voluntary.