Labour Leadership Contest

[Pogues Mcgogues]

I'll summarise it for you. It really is £20m of debt.

[llcoolphil]

Well this is certainly heartbreaking for you? If it is £20m of debt and you'll be rejoicing, but was it not you who talked about the big money backers of Labour getting privelage. Well, I guess you were wrong, cause if there were big money backers then it wouldn't be £20m. So is it not £20m and you were right?

[oafc0000]

Here you go pogo...

http://www.electoral...10_14-54-36.pdf

Before the general election the party already owed out £16.5 million in loans falling due in one year and 8 million in the future... One would imagine that number easily hit £20 million during the course of an election if not worse.

The accounts also seem to show that the party is managing to meet its obligations during 2009... In fact they reduced it from the 2008 level... But if membership / donations is falling then they could be in trouble in the future. aka Prescotts warning...

That is if i am reading the accounts right. I only had a quick look.

Edited August 24, 2010 by oafc0000

[Pogues Mcgogues]

Seriously pogo, for a graduate you are a complete f**kin moron at times. You're too stupid to understand the information you were given, fair enough. But it just makes you look a dick when you make posts like this from a position where you have absolutely no understanding of the situation. Having big money backers and £20M of debt are NOT mutually exclusive things. What you should be worried about is if the coalition collapses in the next two years as Im sure you would like to see - how does labour fight a general election campaign with no money?

[llcoolphil]

Ill informed surely, but not "a dick"?

Edited August 24, 2010 by llcoolphil

[Pogues Mcgogues]

Before we go any further, show me. Give me some verifiable figures and we can move this conversation on.

eta

In fact, show me some evidence for all these claims and we can move this conversation on. Because right now I have your word against the word of the former deputy leader and likely future treasurer and I think he has better informaton than you.

[llcoolphil]

Rise since May

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/may/13/labour-party-record-surge-membership

[Pogues Mcgogues]

It's actualy commenting and advancing on an entirely different Guardian story. The link shows you. It also links to the Observer one, which is why I gave you that second link.

I'll reply fully when I've had my dinner.

[llcoolphil]

And no, again I repeat I AGREE WITH LORD PRESCOTT! IT'S NOT MY OPINION AGAINST HIS, IT'S JUST THAT YOU HAVE CHOOSEN TO TAKE A CERTAIN SIDE OF THE SPIN ON WHAT HE SAID.

[llcoolphil]

It's actualy commenting and advancing on an entirely different Guardian story. The link shows you. It also links to the Observer one, which is why I gave you that second link.

I'll reply fully when I've had my dinner.

[Pogues Mcgogues]

This what he wrote

here

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/aug/19/labour-party-treasurer-change-john-prescott

The only person I can see spinning this is you and your claims that it isn't really a £20M debt ( ) and that party membership is both rising and falling. At the same time.

[llcoolphil]

So Labour says one thing and Labour says another thing. Which one is right? The one that fits your agenda? Keeping in mind Prescott is running for a job position, he may want to spin things? Where as the Labour party have nothing to gain from lying, their membership figures are posted year on year.

[Pogues Mcgogues]

The whole point being that labour is saying two contradictory things, I dont give a stuff which is right and what agenda might I have? It is also interesting to hear you suggest that one of its most senior members is spinning information to better himself. Though if it is spin, interesting that none of the leadership candidates have contradicted it. Or anyone else from the party come to think of it, seeing as John Prescott speaking as a senior official and the labour party are two very different things apparently.

Moved on massively since losing the election, eh!

[Pogues Mcgogues]

Actualy that last comments wrong.

I admit it's a bit of a shambles the now (it happens when you don't have a proper leader yet).

I'll admit the Labour party have a lot of debt. Not £20m.

I'll admit membership up until this year has decreased. I know it is rising however.

[oafc0000]

I'll admit the Labour party have a lot of debt. Not £20m.

[RABun]

membership went up by one last month - I joined!

[Pogues Mcgogues]

membership went up by one last month - I joined!

[oafc0000]

How much debt is it then ?

[RABun]

Realy? Ah that's good to hear! What was you reasoning?

[oafc0000]

So i can vote for Diane Abbott, can't bare the thought of a carbon copy of Blair in charge but i think i might have to suck it up. Not because Tony was a shit but because i want to see an actual left wing person have the labour party leadership.

[RABun]

Do you think she is electable though ? I think the whole school thing has compromised her...

[Pogues Mcgogues]

So i can vote for Diane Abbott, can't bare the thought of a carbon copy of Blair in charge but i think i might have to suck it up. Not because Tony was a shit but because i want to see an actual left wing person have the labour party leadership.

[oafc0000]

I think shes the best option.

I was listening to her on the radio the other day, and compared to the others, who just seem to be spouting what they think people want to hear, she sounds believable.

get rid of trident and save all the money they're trying to save by scrimping and saving a few million here and there on public spending cuts

Edited August 25, 2010 by oafc0000

[oafc0000]

Emmmm, do you not need to be a member for a year to get voting rights?

[Pogues Mcgogues]

no