Should I vote Labour

Maybe the unions were involved, because there are going to be implications for jobs, such as changes or cuts.

Renationalising the railways won't necessarily cost a lot, if the government waits until the current franchises run out.

That is exactly what is planned. Each franchise will not be renewed as it runs out. Simples and cheap!!

So if the unions didn't agree with something it would be scrapped? The unions are to defend their members not to write a manifesto .

This makes me doubt all those promises, they are not solely labour policies they are Union and Momentum policies too.

I just cannot trust the Corbyn inner circle , wish I could.

Just looked up the panel for QT this evening, why oh why does it have to be Thornbury

Are you forgetting Labour history annie?

No Whitewave, neither am I forgetting the unburied dead in 1979

annie I just can't understand your views on unions. My father was a printer so I grew up understanding that the reason we have the workers' rights we have now are down to the action of unions. If people don't like their decisions they should join their union and vote!! Are you sure you're a labour supporter?

I will toss a coin and let you know Angelab

My DF was a staunch trade unionist and I was a union rep so can see the advantages of trades unions.

However - I can also see the faults and the aggravation caused to the general public by manipulative union bosses who 'bring out' their workforce for often spurious reasons under the guise of 'Health and Safety' when in fact investigation may prove that this is not true.

Gillybob we have been told by the LP in many, many interviews that full costings will be in the Manifesto.

I am sorry if you felt I was being sarcastic. It never occurred to me, I'm afraid that you actually would hold such a strong opinion without knowing the facts so I afraid I presumed YOU were being sarcastic in your post. I will take this into account in the future.

I support unions, good grief born and brought up in a mining valley. I do not think unions should be involved in writing a manifesto , not forgetting they are to be given stronger powers by this opposition party chiefs

I was in a print union in 1979 and went out on half a day's strike to support the Times.

The owner of Beaverbrook (now Express) Newpapers, where I worked, was forever trying to downgrade our working conditions and pay. He boasted that he had all our dismissal notices ready in a filing cabinet.

The unions were a force for good, on the whole.

Thanks for the link to the Resolution Foundation Daphne. It will make interesting reading. No doubt they will update when the actual manifestos come out.

Do you have a copy of the minutes ofthe meeting?

Of course unions should be involved in strategic planning! They're key to introducing change at every level.

Do you mean the rail strike Jalima? In which case, I agree with you.

I know the words head and brick wall should come to mind when I ask you a question Annie but I am really trying to understand where you are coming from. Are you really saying that you have been so very anti Union all the time you have been in the Labour Party?

Yes, that is an example

I don't think the actual facts were evident

jalima I take your point, but these union bosses were elected by union members - that's why I said that people should join their union and vote.

Thank God that the Labour Manifesto will never be put into action, what an omni-shambles it would be!
putting up Corporation tax to firms by a third, what harm would that cause?
It wouldn't, couldn't possibly pay for all the things they are promising, even if firms didn't relocate or shed staff.
No tuitions fees,and giving mainenance grants to students....whaaaat?
That could only be done when a smaller percentage went to Uni, say in the 1960's.
The less said about the rest of the manifesto the better.

Actially roses, I heard a man from the Institute of Fiscal Studies earlier this week (before the manifesto was leaked) and he commented that actually, at least in the short term, all the labour policies at that point could be funded by the increase in corporation tax.

I think when the final manifesto is publishes you should look at the funding, rather than dismissing it out of hand.

Given the current EU law we can't renationalise the railways as long as we're members of the EU - so dd and ww - I guess you are both Brexiteers?
If a Labour Government did renationalise it wouldn't be "simples and cheap" - even if they waited for franchises to expire - how much would the passenger rolling stock cost? And the freight rolling stock? And the infrastructure facilities? And TUPE costs? And a whole organisation & management & administrative structure? And training? And H&S licences? And fire safety certificates? And ... and ....
Then there would be the problems of running an interim network - mixed between private & public with no incentive for private companies to invest in the service.
Hopefully it will all be fully explained and costed in the LP manifesto.

Why is it an omni-shambles? I suppose it makes a difference from a "coalition of chaos".

Students had means-tested maintenance grants until this year (2016/17). What's the problem? Now they have to take out a loan, which probably won't be paid back. It will cost very little for another 30 years, when it will be written off. Meanwhile, the students will be paying an extra "graduate tax" (3% + CPI) to add to the coffers of the already wealthy asset holders.

That's what we will all be doing, of course, angielab. But until then let's not go OTT in praise of policies that apparently 'everyone on Twitter' loves.

Best you avoid brick walls GG.

'At that point' .....perhaps, but the leaked manifesto promises much much more.
We will see what the amended manifesto says, but who can say what firms would relocate or close down or shed their staff with a whacking increase in tax.
As there is no chance of Corbyn getting into power it is all academic what he would do.