Unite are threatening to sever ties with Labour:

[Link]

Would be good for them not to be dictated to by the Union, and in Len McCluskey clearly a man that wants to be the unelected kingpin of the party but would conversely create a major funding issue for them.

"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

I don't think floating voters care much whether Labour has financial support from unions, or that Conservatives get financial support from big business, and Lib Dems from non-dom foreign billionaires.
They don't mind that Labour front benchers are highly educated. On the contrary, they want MPs who are educated, and class origins these days are increasing less important.
It is the policies and general outlook that are key. Labour did not lose because their leaders were graduates or from the wrong tribe or funded by unions. They lost because their policies did not appeal to floating voters, and because of their contempt of those who raised issues that concerned them, like immigration, the housing crisis, the fruits of multiculturalism and the general pandering to minorities at the expense of the majority. Of course, even now, after the election, those who voted Tory or Ukip are branded as akin to racists, sexists and homophobes - they voted out of fear because they were stupid. Go on thinking that and you will go on losing general elections.

Edited by derben (19 May 2015 8.16am)

So the Labour vote did not vote Labour because the leader and deputy leader enjoyed privileged upbringings and top class education. Instead they went and voted Conservative and UKIP, whose leaders and deputy leaders enjoyed privileged upbringings and top class education?

Not at all, Labour didn't actually do all that badly in the election, but the losses to the SNP and the losses of the Liberal Democrats hit them much worse than I think people expected (Infact Labour increased their share of the vote, despite being led by a Guff in a suit who looked and sounded like he was a special needs student on work experience).

But it shouldn't matter where you were educated, its suspicious that so many of the cabinet and shadow cabinet went to 'the same schools and come from the same background'. There has always been a political class in the UK, typically the middle and upper middle classes (with the aristocratic tending more towards the house of lords than commons).

What is interesting is how that hasn't really changed, despite massive changes in society and social mobility.

Edited by jamiemartin721 (19 May 2015 10.42am)

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

I'm only going on my experiences, so that's going back quite a while. The truth really is that as 'Excellent Universities' Oxford and Cambridge have a lot more competition these days, especially when you're talking about specific subjects.

Still, the fact the degree says Oxford or Cambridge will open more doors than anything else.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]