posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 06:52 AM
Originally posted by UKTruthSeeker
Would this really make a difference though? Would corruption be rooted out from out government?
- The focus on Labour is not unexpected and is of course quite topical but I expect the effects of this to be much broader.
In the end I expect we'll see the end of large-scale private funding.
This will be of huge importance to the tory party.
For instance the current handfull of company owners/directors will no longer be able to prop up the tory party in the same way they have done.
But I have to say I find the notion that there is "corruption" in the British Government (in any meaningful sense) ridiculous.
If getting a gong is "corrupt" then we really need to redefine 'corrupt'.
Is it a fair action to take? Massively limiting the Labour partys funding capabilities.
- I suspect some will dream of and see this in the same way as they thought Thatcher's anti-Trades Union legislation would work.
By making trades unionists have to 'opt in' annually they imagined the TU's would wither and die through the apathy and inaction of their
They also did the same thing with the TU's 'political levy' to the Labour party.
They were utterly wrong and the membership continue to choose 'opt in' annually.
I suspect the same will be true here; trade union members will continue to choose to fund the Labour party, whatever minor and short-term impact this
It might even have the welcome spin-off of making the regular TU membership more engaged with the party.
I also expect what we end up with will be some sort of compromise (and possibly with a long period of phasing in).
[edit on 14-12-2006 by sminkeypinkey]