Britannist

The majority of Labour's money still comes from trade unions.

The unions do not pay into Labour by monthly instalments.

These are well known facts.

There is every possibility that the majority of the donations to Labour in the quarter referred to in the report (on the link in the first posting to this thread) are from trade unions.

TonyG

and

One minute it's an "I don't suppose", the next it's a "well known fact". :roll:

__________________
If you don't think you can change the world, who do you expect to do it for you?

----

http://www.mercola.com/townofallopat...ofallopath.htm

TonyG

It would appear that the extra money was a donation, not union money. Otherwise their income would have only been up £330,000.

__________________
If you don't think you can change the world, who do you expect to do it for you?

----

http://www.mercola.com/townofallopat...ofallopath.htm

Britannist

Riveting.

I stand by what I wrote earlier - the majority of money the Labour Party gets over the course of a full year is from the trade unions.

TonyG

And I haven't disagreed with you. You are just trying to move the argument because you got the rest wrong.
You know as well as I do that we were talking about the extra cash, not what they get month in month out, year in year out, from the unions.

__________________
If you don't think you can change the world, who do you expect to do it for you?

----

http://www.mercola.com/townofallopat...ofallopath.htm

Britannist

You started off by foolishly trying to claim that Labour had done nothing for the Unions and the Unions were broke. You gradually were forced by me to admit that you were wrong and that Labour does, in fact, get a huge amount of money from the trade unions.

As I have correctly stated, Labour gets a large amount of money from the unions (the majority of its donations) and the unions are not broke, or almost broke, as you wrongly claimed.

You have deliberately started a pointless argument over an extremely petty matter which is of virtually no interest to anyone - and not for the first time.

The more important facts are the ones I highlighted earlier - UKIP getting a significant amount in donations (for a small party) this time and the europhile Liberal Dims down by half compared to the donation figures published for the previous quarter.

TonyG

I'm terribly sorry if you misunderstood the point, which was that Labour had a large increase in income - over £2 million more. You attributed it to the unions, I said that they didn't have the money. They don't. They levy is paid by 3 million odd members, that isn't union money, it is paid through the unions. They wouldn't have any choice over paying it even if they wanted to stop.
The unions have had diminishing membership for years, their power has been neutered, hence the need to merge.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6531749.stm

They wouldn't have an extra £2.5 million to put into labour and if they had the money there would be little or no point in them doing it when they need to look after what they perceive to be the interests of their members.

You didn't force me into anything, you aren't that good. I simply elaborated on a very short post that you chose to fly off the handle at.
You then made your silly "I suppose" and "well known fact" contradictions.

As you are so keen to point out, it is really of little interest, so have your final say, as you are always wont to do, and leave it at that.

__________________
If you don't think you can change the world, who do you expect to do it for you?

----

http://www.mercola.com/townofallopat...ofallopath.htm

Britannist

Aren't that good? You are in no position to talk - you got a laughable and highly embarrassing 0.9% of the vote as Veritas candidate at Northampton South at the last General Election.

I asked you in another thread if your low vote might have been because people didn't like you.

I notice you never answered the question.

Now stop wasting my time by arguing over pointless, petty matters.

If you are genuinely against the EU - and you barely mention the issue - then go and pester someone on a europhile forum. They are welcome to you.

TonyG

Typical, your measure is made.
Every time you find yourself in a corner you resort to stupid remarks about Veritas as if it makes you some kind of superhero. Or maybe Popeye would be more appropriate.
There are lots of points that you don't answer and I'm not going to waste my time reiterating them, it's easy enough just to look through this thread and see them.

And where do you keep fetching that moronic charge of 'europhile' from? You really are dredging the bottom, aren't you!
I'm not a rabid bigot, if that's what you mean. I try to keep a sane perspective, but that isn't what you want though, is it?

__________________
If you don't think you can change the world, who do you expect to do it for you?

----

http://www.mercola.com/townofallopat...ofallopath.htm

TonyG

Sorry, I thought that only an idiot would expect an answer to a question like that...

__________________
If you don't think you can change the world, who do you expect to do it for you?

----

http://www.mercola.com/townofallopat...ofallopath.htm