The return of Rachman

So David Cameron announces class war by ending lifetime council tenancies

Cameron said he wanted to see fixed terms for all new council and housing association tenancies lasting as little as five years to help increase social mobility. The prime minister admitted that “not everyone will support this and there will be quite a big argument”. Speaking in Birmingham, he said: “There is a question mark about whether, in future, we should be asking when you are given a council home, is it for a fixed period? Because maybe in five or 10 years you will be doing a different job and be better paid and you won’t need that home, you will be able to go into the private sector.”

So if by hard graft a working class person starts to earn a bit more that a pittance that extra is not for them but is there to be snaffled up by a buy-to-let landlord. For the Tories and their scummy voters  the housing market is not there for people to get an affordable roof over their heads, or even to keep the roof that is over their heads but is a way of screwing ordinary people. Any LIb-Dems out there feeling proud of this latest bit of class war from their “partners” in government? By the way once you are in the private sector and you get made unemployed the amount of Housing Benefit you will get for a private sector rent will be reduced. For many private tenants it already does not cover all the exorbitant rent charged by most private landlords. Lose your job lose your home. Spend your last pay cheque down at Millets…perhaps they have a tent sale on now the festival season is drawing to a close……

Miliband younger and trade unionism

Well, I suppose if you have the 3 biggest trade unions backing you then you probably have to show how in favour you are of fighting unions (though this is a signal more to the bureaucracy than the rank and file).

I am determined to make sure that the Trade Unions are able to fairly represent the interests of their members and the wider workforce. Of course industrial action is a last resort, but the right to strike is a fundamental human right which must be protected and I will make sure it is. The British Airways dispute showed that the rules governing strike ballots are in urgent need of reform. Supporting strong, vibrant unions means we must re-visit the rules relating to access to workplaces and we must ensure that during a dispute either side can refer to the mediation service ACAS. It is a real shame that so few people in the private sector are trade union members. I want to see that change.

But what is Ed Miliband saying? He mentions ACAS. He mentions the need for reform over strike action. But doesn’t exactly go into detail (and the devil is in the detail) unlike Diane Abbott who is a lot more straight forward about what she means, what she supports and has had experience of being in a trade union:

I support John McDonnell’s Trade Union Freedom Bill and I have signed the Early Day Motion to demonstrate my support. I think we have to free up some of the legislation around industrial action which paints workers as criminals. I think we also have to simplify the technocratic rules and regulations around disputes.

But the most importantly, I want to make it unlawful to strike down an otherwise lawful ballot because of unintentional technical breaches of the regulations which would not have altered the outcome of the ballot. I would also change the law to stop employers taking vexatious injunctions.

The right to strike is a fundamental right and in Britain we have stifled this right for too long. As Labour leader, I would make sure this right is reinstated.

Miliband younger makes no mention of this Bill from John McDonnell. Again, does this expose more opportunism from Miliband trying to open up a modernised version of labourism with a left gloss, along with seeing himself as reconciling the Labour base but which is amenable to the establishment…? And interesting that the 3 big unions back Miliband younger while Abbott is more radical in her support for the trade unions. But then the bureaucracy see Miliband as a ‘safe pair of hands’…

In the GMB press release they see him as the only candidate who understands how much Labour needs to change. He will end the division and posturing of the past. He will end the era of New Labour technocrats. And most importantly for GMB members, he will return the party to its values.

No mention of the anti-trade union laws in the press release and the need for repealing. Not a priority for my union? Seems like the GMB has conveniently forgotten the fact that Miliband younger was part of the NL machine. Oh, ‘cuse my cynicism, but if Miliband is so utterly passionate  about the trade unions then why wasn’t he when in the cabinet? Vestas, Ed, remember Vestas?

As someone who has been a member of all 3 of these unions it doesn’t surprise me that they have backed Miliband younger. The bureaucracy see him as the “right person for the job”.

Nothing what I have read so far from Miliband younger inspires me to vote for this opportunistic  individual (1st or 2nd preference….and oh lucky me… being a member of a Labour affiliated TU and a member of the LP …it gives me 2 votes… to spoil).

As I said before, vote for Ed Miliband and get what…..exactly? Empty rhetoric. And let’s not forget that he was part of the NL machine therefore more spin no activism and certainly no principles either.