Miliband tables plan to dilute union power in Labour leadership elections
September 20, 2011 No Comment
Scheme will allow registered supporters to vote in union section of party’s electoral college Ed Miliband has tabled proposals to allow a new registered supporters’ group to vote in elections for the Labour leader and deputy leader. The proposals mean the supporters’ group will be able to vote in the union section, diluting the role of unions in leadership elections. Unions currently hold one-third of the vote in the leadership electoral college, with MPs claiming another third and constituencies the remaining third. But Miliband has been forced to defer plans to change voting powers at the Labour conference, leaving unions with 50% of the vote until a further review, due to be completed in the spring, can set out further, specific proposals. The Labour leader is also proposing that some multiple voting be banned, meaning MPs in the leadership election will only be allowed to vote in their section. A union affiliate will be able to vote twice if they are a party member – once in the union section and once in the party membership section. Miliband’s supporters claim he is backing large changes amounting to the biggest reforms to the party rule book for 20 years, but union leaders are likely to be pleased that they have not felt forced to give ground, at this stage, on whether their voting power at conference should be reined in. The registered supporters’ scheme will be run by local parties, and it remains to be seen whether there is a group of people who are interested in supporting the party but not going so far as to join it. Some people believe registered supporters could open the way to US-style primaries. Party sources said the unions had agreed for the first time that local parties would be able to communicate directly with union levy payers in their constituencies. At present, local parties do not have access to union political levy membership lists, leading to complaints that unions are controlling their members and not letting them be contacted by candidates directly, especially if they are opposed by the union hierarchy in a party leadership election. There are as many as 3 million political levy payers, and Miliband regards them as an untapped resource for the party. The proposals are due to be discussed at a meeting of the national executive, and then will go through party conference next week. Ed Miliband Labour party leadership Trade unions Labour Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
The incumbent, Rupiah Banda, is expected to narrowly beat Michael Sata, but young voters could still cause an upset Zambians have begun voting in a closely contested election between the incumbent president, Rupiah Banda, and the nationalist opposition leader, Michael Sata. Long queues of mainly young voters snaked outside polling stations in the capital, Lusaka, where voting picked up slowly after the official 6am start because of technical glitches. “The polling station should have opened at 6 o’clock, but by 8 o’clock we’re still here and no one is explaining what’s happening,” said James Phiri, an unemployed 22-year-old waiting in line at a Lusaka booth. Campaigning officially ended on Sunday to allow for a 24-hour cooling off period after six weeks of mudslinging. The candidates’ rhetoric occasionally touched on the growing clout of foreign mining firms, most notably from China, in the country, which is Africa’s biggest copper producer. The police have said they will be out in force to prevent any violence even though the country of 13 million is not known for political unrest. An opinion poll published a week ago suggested Banda held a narrow lead over Sata – nicknamed King Cobra on account of his vicious tongue – although a number of undecideds meant an upset was still possible. A large turnout of young voters, many of whom are unemployed, is likely to play into Sata’s hands. The Patriotic Front leader lost to Banda by just 35,000 votes, or 2% of the electorate, in a 2008 runoff. Banda appeared on state television on Sunday to announce that any troublemakers would be arrested. Banda, a former diplomat, has won accolades abroad for opening up the country to international investment, especially from China, and providing clear regulations on operations that have helped keep the playing field level. Sata, whose long and varied career includes work in British car assembly plants, has been a vocal critic of Asian mining investment, but toned it down in an interview with Reuters on Friday, saying he would keep Zambia’s strong diplomatic and commercial ties with Beijing. Chinese firms have become major players in the former British colony’s $13bn (£8bn) economy, with total investments by the end of 2010 topping $2bn, according to Chinese embassy data. Banda’s Movement for Multi-Party Democracy, which has run the nation since the end of one-party rule in 1991, claims most of its support in the countryside where farmers have benefited from a hugely successful agricultural subsidy scheme. Sata’s strength is in the capital, Lusaka, and the northern copper belt, where many people complain about receiving meagre returns from more than five years of strong economic growth. Banda and Sata have pledged hefty spending to woo voters by building up woefully inadequate infrastructure, raising concerns about elevated government spending at a time of potential weakness in the price of copper, Zambia’s economic mainstay. An alliance between Sata and another opposition party, the UPND, crumbled this year, improving the chances of a new full five-year term for Banda, who moved into the presidency after the death of his predecessor, Levy Mwanawasa, in 2008. Zambia Africa guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
The incumbent, Rupiah Banda, is expected to narrowly beat Michael Sata, but young voters could still cause an upset Zambians have begun voting in a closely contested election between the incumbent president, Rupiah Banda, and the nationalist opposition leader, Michael Sata. Long queues of mainly young voters snaked outside polling stations in the capital, Lusaka, where voting picked up slowly after the official 6am start because of technical glitches. “The polling station should have opened at 6 o’clock, but by 8 o’clock we’re still here and no one is explaining what’s happening,” said James Phiri, an unemployed 22-year-old waiting in line at a Lusaka booth. Campaigning officially ended on Sunday to allow for a 24-hour cooling off period after six weeks of mudslinging. The candidates’ rhetoric occasionally touched on the growing clout of foreign mining firms, most notably from China, in the country, which is Africa’s biggest copper producer. The police have said they will be out in force to prevent any violence even though the country of 13 million is not known for political unrest. An opinion poll published a week ago suggested Banda held a narrow lead over Sata – nicknamed King Cobra on account of his vicious tongue – although a number of undecideds meant an upset was still possible. A large turnout of young voters, many of whom are unemployed, is likely to play into Sata’s hands. The Patriotic Front leader lost to Banda by just 35,000 votes, or 2% of the electorate, in a 2008 runoff. Banda appeared on state television on Sunday to announce that any troublemakers would be arrested. Banda, a former diplomat, has won accolades abroad for opening up the country to international investment, especially from China, and providing clear regulations on operations that have helped keep the playing field level. Sata, whose long and varied career includes work in British car assembly plants, has been a vocal critic of Asian mining investment, but toned it down in an interview with Reuters on Friday, saying he would keep Zambia’s strong diplomatic and commercial ties with Beijing. Chinese firms have become major players in the former British colony’s $13bn (£8bn) economy, with total investments by the end of 2010 topping $2bn, according to Chinese embassy data. Banda’s Movement for Multi-Party Democracy, which has run the nation since the end of one-party rule in 1991, claims most of its support in the countryside where farmers have benefited from a hugely successful agricultural subsidy scheme. Sata’s strength is in the capital, Lusaka, and the northern copper belt, where many people complain about receiving meagre returns from more than five years of strong economic growth. Banda and Sata have pledged hefty spending to woo voters by building up woefully inadequate infrastructure, raising concerns about elevated government spending at a time of potential weakness in the price of copper, Zambia’s economic mainstay. An alliance between Sata and another opposition party, the UPND, crumbled this year, improving the chances of a new full five-year term for Banda, who moved into the presidency after the death of his predecessor, Levy Mwanawasa, in 2008. Zambia Africa guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Chris Huhne wants to strip the big six energy companies of their ability to impede action by regulator Ofgem under new plans Fresh powers to compensate consumers if they are the victims of anticompetitve practices by the big six energy companies will be proposed on Tuesday by the energy secretary Chris Huhne. Huhne is planning for energy companies to be stripped of their current ability to impede action by the regulator Ofgem by forcing it to seek a second opinion from the Competition Commission. Instead, Ofgem will have powers to impose its decisions and energy companies will have a right of appeal. Huhne is looking at giving Ofgem new powers to require energy companies to provide direct redress when consumers have lost out as a result of a company breaching a licence condition. The big six firms are EDF energy, British Gas, EON, Npower, Scottish and Southern Energy and Scottish Power. At present, Ofgem has powers to fine companies up to 10% of their annual turnover, which goes to the Treasury, But Huhne is to propose that the money could go direct to customers, either as compensation or in lower bills. He will also ask whether Ofgem should be given powers to prevent the big six freezing out new firms by offering excessively cheap online deals, making it hard for small firms to enter at a competitive rate. He will say it is not fair that energy companies can push their prices up for the vast majority of their consumers who do not switch while introducing cut throat offers for new customers that stop small firms entering the market: “That looks to me like predatory pricing. It must and will stop.” At the weekend Huhne was reported as describing consumers lazy for failing to shop around for cheaper energy. He will explain he did not regard consumers as indolent, but he will argue the average household could save £200 by switching to the lowest cost supplier. Consumers, he will explain, “still think that they face the same bill whoever they go to”. He is making it easier for consumers to change energy supplier so in future they will have a right to be switched within three weeks once a cooling-off period has elapsed. He is also to set up a working group on collective purchasing and switching in energy with Ofgem Consumer Focus and Whitehall to examine the potential for collective purchasing and switching in the energy market, and to review any barriers preventing consumers from coming together. EDF Energy was the last of the big six to raise prices last week increasing gas prices by 15.4% and electricity prices by 4.5% from 10 November. The firm said it had absorbed wholesale price rises for as long as possible before being forced to raise costs for customers. Energy industry Utilities Chris Huhne EDF Energy Scottish and Southern Energy Family finances Energy bills Household bills Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Chris Huhne wants to strip the big six energy companies of their ability to impede action by regulator Ofgem under new plans Fresh powers to compensate consumers if they are the victims of anticompetitve practices by the big six energy companies will be proposed on Tuesday by the energy secretary Chris Huhne. Huhne is planning for energy companies to be stripped of their current ability to impede action by the regulator Ofgem by forcing it to seek a second opinion from the Competition Commission. Instead, Ofgem will have powers to impose its decisions and energy companies will have a right of appeal. Huhne is looking at giving Ofgem new powers to require energy companies to provide direct redress when consumers have lost out as a result of a company breaching a licence condition. The big six firms are EDF energy, British Gas, EON, Npower, Scottish and Southern Energy and Scottish Power. At present, Ofgem has powers to fine companies up to 10% of their annual turnover, which goes to the Treasury, But Huhne is to propose that the money could go direct to customers, either as compensation or in lower bills. He will also ask whether Ofgem should be given powers to prevent the big six freezing out new firms by offering excessively cheap online deals, making it hard for small firms to enter at a competitive rate. He will say it is not fair that energy companies can push their prices up for the vast majority of their consumers who do not switch while introducing cut throat offers for new customers that stop small firms entering the market: “That looks to me like predatory pricing. It must and will stop.” At the weekend Huhne was reported as describing consumers lazy for failing to shop around for cheaper energy. He will explain he did not regard consumers as indolent, but he will argue the average household could save £200 by switching to the lowest cost supplier. Consumers, he will explain, “still think that they face the same bill whoever they go to”. He is making it easier for consumers to change energy supplier so in future they will have a right to be switched within three weeks once a cooling-off period has elapsed. He is also to set up a working group on collective purchasing and switching in energy with Ofgem Consumer Focus and Whitehall to examine the potential for collective purchasing and switching in the energy market, and to review any barriers preventing consumers from coming together. EDF Energy was the last of the big six to raise prices last week increasing gas prices by 15.4% and electricity prices by 4.5% from 10 November. The firm said it had absorbed wholesale price rises for as long as possible before being forced to raise costs for customers. Energy industry Utilities Chris Huhne EDF Energy Scottish and Southern Energy Family finances Energy bills Household bills Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Chris Huhne wants to strip the big six energy companies of their ability to impede action by regulator Ofgem under new plans Fresh powers to compensate consumers if they are the victims of anticompetitve practices by the big six energy companies will be proposed on Tuesday by the energy secretary Chris Huhne. Huhne is planning for energy companies to be stripped of their current ability to impede action by the regulator Ofgem by forcing it to seek a second opinion from the Competition Commission. Instead, Ofgem will have powers to impose its decisions and energy companies will have a right of appeal. Huhne is looking at giving Ofgem new powers to require energy companies to provide direct redress when consumers have lost out as a result of a company breaching a licence condition. The big six firms are EDF energy, British Gas, EON, Npower, Scottish and Southern Energy and Scottish Power. At present, Ofgem has powers to fine companies up to 10% of their annual turnover, which goes to the Treasury, But Huhne is to propose that the money could go direct to customers, either as compensation or in lower bills. He will also ask whether Ofgem should be given powers to prevent the big six freezing out new firms by offering excessively cheap online deals, making it hard for small firms to enter at a competitive rate. He will say it is not fair that energy companies can push their prices up for the vast majority of their consumers who do not switch while introducing cut throat offers for new customers that stop small firms entering the market: “That looks to me like predatory pricing. It must and will stop.” At the weekend Huhne was reported as describing consumers lazy for failing to shop around for cheaper energy. He will explain he did not regard consumers as indolent, but he will argue the average household could save £200 by switching to the lowest cost supplier. Consumers, he will explain, “still think that they face the same bill whoever they go to”. He is making it easier for consumers to change energy supplier so in future they will have a right to be switched within three weeks once a cooling-off period has elapsed. He is also to set up a working group on collective purchasing and switching in energy with Ofgem Consumer Focus and Whitehall to examine the potential for collective purchasing and switching in the energy market, and to review any barriers preventing consumers from coming together. EDF Energy was the last of the big six to raise prices last week increasing gas prices by 15.4% and electricity prices by 4.5% from 10 November. The firm said it had absorbed wholesale price rises for as long as possible before being forced to raise costs for customers. Energy industry Utilities Chris Huhne EDF Energy Scottish and Southern Energy Family finances Energy bills Household bills Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
My EBT the Rap! We’re a bit conflicted about this video. On one hand it seems to promote a lifestyle that punishes the tax payers and keeps its “beneficiaries” beholden to the state and trapped in a hardly ever ending cycle of disappointment and failure. On the other this guy is pretty damn funny and Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : I Hate The Media Discovery Date : 20/09/2011 02:14 Number of articles : 4
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media A Republican tea party candidate running for Ohio’s 8th Congressional District declared Monday that House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) was a “socialist.” David Lewis told Fox News’ Neil Cavuto that he hopes to defeat Boehner in the Republican primary by running on the tea party platform. “John Boehner is a socialist,” Lewis explained. “I’m not calling him names.” “Socialist!” Cavuto objected. “Now, David, come on. That’s a little extreme.” “It’s an economic policy. I’m not calling names,” Lewis insisted. “Here is someone that refuses to phase out Social Security. What I would do as a U.S. House member is work to phase out Social Security totally. 100 percent. That includes Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps. These are socialist policies.” “Does the tea party have your back?” Cavuto asked. “I believe so… The tea party is still trying to figure out whether they believe in socialist policies,” Lewis replied. “David, that’s a strong term to use. You know, many have been using it about liberals and those in Congress who want bigger and better government and all of that stuff. But you can call John Boehner probably a lot of things, but the socialist thing, don’t you think that’s a little over the top?” Cavuto wondered. Last September, Cavuto didn’t seem to mind as much when Home Depot founder Bernie Marcus told him that President Barack Obama was a “socialist at heart.”
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media There are moments where I despair for the fate of this country, because it seems to me that we operate from completely different sets of realities based on the same set of facts. Unfortunately, Jim Cramer exemplifies this kind of “make-your-own-reality” within the media. You’d think he’d have learned after his humiliation on The Daily Show . But no, Jim Cramer unabashedly keeps blurring the lines between business reporting and market advocacy . Cramer came on Hardball on Friday to insist that Wall Street just hates Obama’s guts and they’re just waiting for that cuddly Republican to get into office before they unleash all those jobs we all know they have. It’s all that taxation and regulations that mean ol’ Barack Obama insists on inflicting on Wall Street. CRAMER: Okay, first, I’m going to agree with you, that the market has been fabulous, which is one of the reasons I’m always so astonished when people tell me that the problem is Obama. I mean, it’s clear Washington can be dysfunctional, but Democrats and Republicans not getting together. But when you get offline with CEOs, it’s not just Wall Street, but Industrial America, what they tend to say is, listen, we want to add, we want to hire, we want to grow in the United States, but everything is so up in the air and when it gets to the point where we’re thinking about what Washington’s going to do, we know we’re going to be the loser if President Obama is making the decision, because President Obama does not favor wealth creation and corporate profits. Not, the profits are huge. People have made a lot of money, but that is the rap that I hear. MATTHEWS: What is it particularly when a banker or a rich guy, anybody who’s got to make thse big decisions—well, let’s look at some of these numbers first, because I think they’re really informative. When President Obama took office January 20th, 2009, the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed at 7949. Today, it closed at 11, 509, up from yesterday. That’s a 31% increase since Obama’s been president. Well, that alone sould be, wow, this guy’s good. And then there’s corporate profits. The New York Times cites a study by Northeastern University, and economist reports, “since the recovery began in June of 2009, corporate profits captured 88% of the growth in real national income while aggregate wages and salaries accounted for only slightly more than 1% of that growth.” This is the stuff that causes revolutions, from the bottom, not from the top. [..] CRAMER: Look, I’m telling you that when you get off the desk with them, they really just feel like, look, if we got a Republican in there, we could really do a great thing in this country by hiring a lot of people. My rage meter at Cramer’s gleeful dishonesty is just redlining. CEOs are telling him privately that they’re just waiting for a Republican in the White House to hire people while Americans suffer through massive unemployment? Well then NAME NAMES, Cramer, you dishonest jerk, and tell us just which CEOs are telling you this and who are acting so treasonously. Because Chris Matthews–to his credit, since you apparently don’t believe in offering up these facts to these business owners–pointed out all the reasons that Obama could hardly be considered anti-business. These asses were bailed out by American taxpayers, posted record profits, pocketed nice little bonuses…but they need a Republican in the White House to pass that largesse back to the Americans? Well to put it bluntly, eff that. And eff Cramer and his ridiculous advocacy for Republican lies. But I have to give kudos to Chris Matthews for having facts on hand to show the lies and propaganda of Cramer’s statements. Look how very differently Cramer was received earlier that day on Morning Joe. Click here to view this media
Continue reading …