drat01 Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Shhh Peter the first rule of Donation Club is ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Shhh Peter the first rule of Donation Club is ........ I thought the first rule was it's only Tory donations that can be discussed ? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Shhh Peter the first rule of Donation Club is ........ I thought the first rule was it's only Tory donations that can be discussed ? Show us where other party donations have not been discussed Tony? - The union donations that form most of Labour's is probably one of the most open there is. Now shame how you still fail to stick to the topic about how the Tory party are keen to stop union donations but are seemingly very happy to continue with what sems to be a very clandestine way of getting funds in (and influence?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Shhh Peter the first rule of Donation Club is ........ I thought the first rule was it's only Tory donations that can be discussed ? Show us where other party donations have not been discussed Tony? - The union donations that form most of Labour's is probably one of the most open there is. Now shame how you still fail to stick to the topic about how the Tory party are keen to stop union donations but are seemingly very happy to continue with what sems to be a very clandestine way of getting funds in (and influence?) I could have sworn the topic was Labour , the unions and their ability to affiliate hundreds of thousands of members to Labour 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Shhh Peter the first rule of Donation Club is ........ You get a golden lion? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 And again Tony you deflect and refuse to debate the topic. Just to remind you because you have obviously forgotten (and so have your "likers") You made the ridiculous claim that Labour were finished based on the Tory idea that reforming the links that Labour has with the unions would kill off the party (not forgetting how Tories have been bleating on about this link for years). This seemed to be based on finance and then despite a typical attempt to deflect the topic when we started chatting nicely about finance of political parties and the secrecy (and subsequent hypocrisy) of the Tory donations, you make a bold claim about how we could not discuss Labour - which was never the case despite you claiming it was. So maybe you can advise on how you maintain that reforms that Milliband is suggesting will kill off the Labour party as you claim, and maybe you can give a few words on how the Tory donations sit with you (and fellow supporters) especially when one of the biggest claims by the same Tory party is about transparency etc. See it's all linked you just fail to see it :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 And again Tony you deflect and refuse to debate the topic. Just to remind you because you have obviously forgotten (and so have your "likers") You made the ridiculous claim that Labour were finished based on the Tory idea that reforming the links that Labour has with the unions would kill off the party (not forgetting how Tories have been bleating on about this link for years). This seemed to be based on finance and then despite a typical attempt to deflect the topic when we started chatting nicely about finance of political parties and the secrecy (and subsequent hypocrisy) of the Tory donations, you make a bold claim about how we could not discuss Labour - which was never the case despite you claiming it was. So maybe you can advise on how you maintain that reforms that Milliband is suggesting will kill off the Labour party as you claim, and maybe you can give a few words on how the Tory donations sit with you (and fellow supporters) especially when one of the biggest claims by the same Tory party is about transparency etc. See it's all linked you just fail to see it :-) Our survey says .... No points I said Labour was dead based on the fact they are pretty much already bankrupt and are about to potentially cut off their biggest source of income I made no comment on Tory funding , I believe that was yourself .. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 And again Tony you deflect and refuse to debate the topic. Just to remind you because you have obviously forgotten (and so have your "likers") You made the ridiculous claim that Labour were finished based on the Tory idea that reforming the links that Labour has with the unions would kill off the party (not forgetting how Tories have been bleating on about this link for years). This seemed to be based on finance and then despite a typical attempt to deflect the topic when we started chatting nicely about finance of political parties and the secrecy (and subsequent hypocrisy) of the Tory donations, you make a bold claim about how we could not discuss Labour - which was never the case despite you claiming it was. So maybe you can advise on how you maintain that reforms that Milliband is suggesting will kill off the Labour party as you claim, and maybe you can give a few words on how the Tory donations sit with you (and fellow supporters) especially when one of the biggest claims by the same Tory party is about transparency etc. See it's all linked you just fail to see it :-) I don't think he mentioned finance at all. I understood the point he was making was the link between new labour and the unions. And the alleged vote rigging. Whilst I don't think that will be the end of New Labour, I don't think it will help their cause. Along with big business there seems to be a mistrust of unions in this country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 If Tony did not mean finance then why doesn't he say that? Interestingly the tactic that the Tories are using is backfiring on them massively now. PMQ's was a complete and utter shambles for Cameron re finance of the Tory party just then - ooopps! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 And again Tony you deflect and refuse to debate the topic. Just to remind you because you have obviously forgotten (and so have your "likers") You made the ridiculous claim that Labour were finished based on the Tory idea that reforming the links that Labour has with the unions would kill off the party (not forgetting how Tories have been bleating on about this link for years). This seemed to be based on finance and then despite a typical attempt to deflect the topic when we started chatting nicely about finance of political parties and the secrecy (and subsequent hypocrisy) of the Tory donations, you make a bold claim about how we could not discuss Labour - which was never the case despite you claiming it was. So maybe you can advise on how you maintain that reforms that Milliband is suggesting will kill off the Labour party as you claim, and maybe you can give a few words on how the Tory donations sit with you (and fellow supporters) especially when one of the biggest claims by the same Tory party is about transparency etc. See it's all linked you just fail to see it :-) Our survey says .... No points I said Labour was dead based on the fact they are pretty much already bankrupt and are about to potentially cut off their biggest source of income I made no comment on Tory funding , I believe that was yourself .. :-) - Oh Tony, Michael Gove would be proud of you, especially re education and reading. Now read the post again - where did I say you mentioned Tory funding. You brought up the subject of funding and then when obviously the subject moved on to the whole hypocrisy of Tories making that accusation when they are funded in the secretive way as per Peters link, it's not an issue? So assuming that your idea of political funding was not the basis of your statement re the Labour party, how does that fit in with "I said Labour was dead based on the fact they are pretty much already bankrupt and are about to potentially cut off their biggest source of income" or is funding and income not the same thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 I don't follow, he said Labout RIP if I recall. What was he supposed to say, he made no made reference to finance 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 ........ I don't think he mentioned finance at all. I understood the point he was making was the link between new labour and the unions. And the alleged vote rigging. Whilst I don't think that will be the end of New Labour, I don't think it will help their cause. Along with big business there seems to be a mistrust of unions in this country. Seems that was not the case :-) I don't follow, he said Labout RIP if I recall. What was he supposed to say, he made no made reference to finance When digging a hole know when to stop "I said Labour was dead based on the fact they are pretty much already bankrupt and are about to potentially cut off their biggest source of income" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 but only responding to you when you said about the secret donors etc 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 (edited) Sorry Col don't understand the point you are making at all. But I suspect that has bugger all to do with the subject(s) of this thread anyway so shall we get back to talking about the Con-Dem's (and maybe a bit of Labour, Paid C and SNP also?) I see Hague was following the Tory leadership with his "Stupid woman" comment during PMQ's . I suppose video footage of him saying it will be denied? http://www.politicshome.com/uk/story/35939/ Edited July 10, 2013 by drat01 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Shhh Peter the first rule of Donation Club is ........ You get a golden lion? Cash for honours! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Is your Avatar Chico Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Is your Avatar Chico It certainly is - one of my first Villa "hero's" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 On zero hours contracts (300,000 in social care alone) the point is not that they are a bad thing or under which government they first appeared. The number of jobs "created" is being used by this government as a proxy for economic health (including the 200,000 not created but redesignated from public to private, deceitfully included in the total by Cameron on every occasion). This sort of works because most people associate having a job with being able to get by, not being socially excluded. In fact vast numbers of people are underemployed, involuntarily part-time, zero hours or notionally self-employed but not earning enough to live. Vast amounts of benefit are paid to people in work. The economy is in a dreadful state, and quoting the number of "new jobs" is just an attempt to disguise this. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 The economy is in a dreadful state, and quoting the number of "new jobs" is just an attempt to disguise this. when I mentioned something similar prior to 2010 I was told it wasn't the case and all was wonderful with employment figures , I'm guessing that isn't the case now The economy is in a dreadful state , but it's also in a slightly better state than it was ... still hardly the time to start popping the champagne corks of course Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 The economy is in a dreadful state, and quoting the number of "new jobs" is just an attempt to disguise this. when I mentioned something similar prior to 2010 I was told it wasn't the case and all was wonderful with employment figures , I'm guessing that isn't the case now The economy is in a dreadful state , but it's also in a slightly better state than it was ... still hardly the time to start popping the champagne corks of courseSome workers are having an 11% pay rise forced upon them, the poor bastards. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts