From: hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phill Hallam-Baker)
Subject: Re: Silly Bible semi-pedantry [was: Re: Happy Christmas!]
Reply-To: Hallam@zeus02.desy.de
Organization: Deutsches Elektronen Synchrotron, Experiment ZEUS bei HERA
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 21:44:30 GMT

In article <1993Jan8.035351.24878@philmtl.philips.ca>, ray@philmtl.philips.ca
(Ray Dunn) writes:

|>In refd article, mmh@dcs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) writes:
|>>Most people don't sit down, analyse the policy of each
|>>political party, and vote accordingly. If this were the case,
|>>the Liberals would win every time.
|>
|>Even if this were true, and there's no evidence one way or another, the
|>liberals _lose_ every time.  With the best will in the world (and even some
|>approval of their policies) I can't interpret this as effective political
|>strategy.

It is not an intelligent political strategy to blame the failure of a party to
get public support on the stupidity of the public. The Liberal/SDP alliance had
a chance in '83, blew it and have declined ever since.


|>>In fact, given the bias of
|>>British politics towards the two party system
|>
|>But the Liberals are _part_ of that system, if they haven't found a way to
|>break through and obtain significant power, don't blame the system, blame
|>their strategies.  Many groups achieve power by fighting from within one of
|>the two parties for example.
|>
|>> (the Conservatives are funded by big
|>>business, Labour is funded by the Trade Unions, the Liberals
|>>are funded by jumble sales - I am not joking here)
|>
|>I know, but it _is_ a joke.

Labour don't have an easy time over funds either. I remember at the last
election being told in one constituency that the normal rules on election
expenses where only the agent was allowed to spend money didn't matter since
there wasn't anywhere near enough money in the consituency party funds for the
maximum spending limit to be anything like a problem.

Now nationaly of course all the parties spend too much. But lumping the Labour
party together with the Conservatives just does not wash. They spend twice as
much as all the other parties put together and then give out knighthoods to the
chairmen of the companies who came up with the money. Don't hold your breath for
the Tories comming out with any action on reducing smoking - like allowing the
proposed Europe wide advertizing ban. The tobacco companies bribed them by
loaning them their advertizing sites at the last general election.

Also the conditions under which the money is given is different in the Tory and
Labour cases. Every Trades Union member has the right to opt out of contributing
to the political fund and has done since the political funds existed. The Tory
party funds itself by stealing from pension funds. If you have a pension fund
that invests in British industry then you are almost certainly giving some of
your money to the Tory party. You have no right to refuse. You cannot object as
a shareholder because although it is your money that is invested you have no say
in the administration of the companies it is invested in. Individual
shareholders have no right to opt out of contributing.

The Tory Party is 15 million in the red. Watch out, its your money that they are
after!



--

Phill Hallam-Baker
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british