You are reading a single comment by @ReekBlefs and its replies. Click here to read the full conversation.
  • You can take the piss as much as you want but it's a statement of fact that Labour does not need the unions for funding

    Yes, but who is going to fund the party instead?

  • Yes, but who is going to fund the party instead?

    There are a tonne of options which do not require us to be in thrall to the unions.

    • we could have a subscription model above and beyond the membership model which frankly I find a bit of an anachronism
    • we could follow the Tory model of donations from the world of business
    • we could continue with the union model - albeit with a modernised relationship which confers no veto for them on Labour policy
    • we could argue for political parties to be funded by the state - would require legislative change but frankly I can see a good argument for it
    • we could argue to expand the current funding model for opposition parties from the Lords and the Commons - again not my favourite but its a realistic possibility
    • one off fundraising is an option too - wouldn't want to base your whole model on it, but crowdfunding works
    • we could pursue a mix of multiple options above - which I like a lot, as the more diverse our revenue streams are, the less we 'owe' one particular faction, and the more independent we can be with policy

    This idea that if we want to be funded we need to grant people like Len McClusky the whip hand over voters / members is just nonsense. It's proven nonsense because Blair's Labour didn't have this as a feature of its party.

  • we could have a subscription model above and beyond the membership model which frankly I find a bit of an anachronism

    Like a union?

    we could follow the Tory model of donations from the world of business

    and represent their interests first? That's what I'd want with my big donation

    we could continue with the union model - albeit with a modernised relationship which confers no veto for them on Labour policy

    so the PLP can do what they want?

    we could argue for political parties to be funded by the state - would require legislative change but frankly I can see a good argument for it

    This is good, but the I doubt the Tories will go for it, unless it also does redecorations and childcare

    we could argue to expand the current funding model for opposition parties from the Lords and the Commons - again not my favourite but its a realistic possibility

    I don't know anything about this tbf

    one off fundraising is an option too - wouldn't want to base your whole model on it, but crowdfunding works

    so funded by whoever can afford to invest at the time?

    we could pursue a mix of multiple options above - which I like a lot, as the more diverse our revenue streams are, the less we 'owe' one particular faction, and the more independent we can be with policy

    Sorry - just had a coffee

  • The party's finances were in an absolutely woeful state by the end of the Blair years, and it looks like they are heading that way again now.

    This is from a recent Guardian article:

    We haven’t got the small donors that Corbyn brought and haven’t got the big donors that [Tony] Blair had. We’re trapped between the two worlds.”

    That aside, this post is either pure fantasy ('crowdfunding for an election campaign') or just plain naïve: if you rely on big donors 'from business' for your funding then they are going to want something in return. And I guarantee that what they want is not going to be good for the people that Labour is supposed to represent (the clue's in the name). That's if you can even attract them in the first place: which fractions of capital do you propose to try and win over, and how, for instance? How do you ensure their long-term support for the party?

    As to getting individual members to simply pay more (an updated subscription model, as you suggest), what is the incentive for them to do this, especially if you're eroding what little democratic purchase members currently have? Contrary to what this forum might suggest I don't think the country's full of people with cash burning holes in their pockets

About

Avatar for ReekBlefs @ReekBlefs started