Cf poster #4

Johnny P · Black Bloc

...i wouldnt describe him as a socialist...there is little that is socialist in a person following the labour party line, and im not talking about SWP socialist here Smile

. Anyho, i would say that social economy (co-ops and the like ) is inherently incompatible with social democracy as one is bottom up decentralised and the other is the large macro managed authoritarian centralism of our current government...and dont give me no crap about devolution.
_________________
"...a society that believes in nothing is particularly frightened by people who believe in anything." Bill Durodle, Director International Centre for Security Analysis, Kings College London

higuy · Black Bloc

Granting independence to the bank of England?

Low inflation, low interest rates, steady growth?

Socialism; do you fall with Kautsky or Bernstein? Is it in the means or the ends? For me it is the latter.

Johnny P · Black Bloc

Granting independence to the bank of england isnt an example of decentralisation but liberalisation, neither is the performance of the economy , which isnt quite as rosy as you would seem to suggest, and is the consequence of a continuing program of privatisation of public services through various mechanisms (e.g. PFI ) and liberalisation of domestic and international trade rules. And if we are to judge their 'socialism' by the ends and not the means then i would say a reduction in social mobility coupled with an increasing disparity between the rich and the poor in our society constitutes a failure of it. Labour is the self proclaimed party of business - and they dont mean nice small family run businesses, they mean the markets and those who command their largest share. Centralist governments spent most of the past century trying to reconcile 'socialism' with capitalism; its a failed experiment, new labour recognised this and jump on the wave of market liberalism sweeping the world (well, its pretty much in full swing now). This is all quite transparent, they have repeatedly admitted it whilst they have beem in office.
_________________
"...a society that believes in nothing is particularly frightened by people who believe in anything." Bill Durodle, Director International Centre for Security Analysis, Kings College London

Johnny P · Black Bloc

JulienP · Black Bloc

higuy · Black Bloc

JulienP · Black Bloc

Johnny P · Black Bloc

steven · Black Bloc

On the co-op front (I'm not getting involved in the socialism debate), I don't really think of it as a commercial venture because it would be non-profit. I expect it to make profit, but that money gets put into socially helpful projects - ie. it would be used to help fund things that students want to do to make a difference. So the Guild benefits entirely: the co-op pays the Guild for the lease of the space, cash that can go into boring things like admin or staff salaries, etc.; the co-op then makes money (theoretically Wink

), money which can ONLY go into things like campaigning, awareness raising events, feeding the homeless, etc.

As for saying that this isn't a priority compared to student representation and campaigning: I would say that this is a matter of student representation to some extent, or maybe student welfare. We're currently being fed rubbish (I emphasise the rubbishness) by people we have little control over. If this were the high street, we'd be told tough, you don't like it you don't buy it, if enough other people agree then we'll change. But this isn't the high street, it's the Guild, it represents all students, so students should have as much control over it as possible.

Equally, I think if we're gonna get more people interested in the representative/campaigning side of things, we need to make them aware of the Guild's existence, and we need to make them WANT to come into the Guild. The Guild is a physical space as well as an abstract collective of students, something I think we need to bear in mind. Takeaway subs that taste of salt and overpriced sarnies in plastic aren't going to make people want to stay in the Guild - they buy them, and go somewhere they'd rather be. Having the students feel like they actually control things in the Guild, and having better food as a result, would do wonders for the place in my opinion.

Johnny P · Black Bloc

Teapotboy · Black Bloc

But wouldn't the co-op have to pay the same for the lease as Subway would be willing to?

JulienP · Black Bloc

Yeah, but my understanding of steven's idea would be that all of the profit would go into campaigning and charity, instead of some of it being creamed off for Subway's shareholders, as well as the Guild getting the lease money.
_________________
Big Brother is watching YOU!

steven · Black Bloc

Spot-on Julien - the co-op has shareholders, but all of them own an equal proportion of it, and part of the agreement (at least as far as my understanding of Radical Routes, the co-op of co-ops, so to speak, goes) signed when they become shareholders in the co-op is that their share of the profit goes to good causes, to be decided on at a general meeting of the co-op members.

As to Teapotboy's question of leases: I'm not sure what the legal side of things is for this - I'm sure that Subway (or Spar, which is what I was mainly thinking of due to the shorter lease) would be willing to increase the amount they offer for the lease to get this relatively lucrative space. But I'm not sure that the Guild legally has to accept the highest offer. This would presumably be the case if there were shareholders, meaning they have to try and make as much money as possible, but the Guild doesn't have shareholders. I'm supposing that the Guild merely has to do what is in its best interests, and I think it could be argued that accepting a lower offer in order to have a student/graduate led co-op is in the best interests of the Guild. Am I right in thinking the Guild is officially an 'educational charity'? If so, having a co-op could be said to be actively educational (thus, entirely in line with our aims), as it promotes alternative business models, provides practical business experience, and actively helps those involved to foster new skills.

The next question is: who decides on the leases? My understanding is that it's the Exec (which I'm taking from an email I got from Gaz on these matters earlier in the year), though I assume the General manager or someone like that has input. So: could we, via Guild Council, mandate the Exec to heavily favour an offer from a co-op even if it were not the highest offer they recieved? Could we, via Guild Council, mandate the Exec to only renew Spar's contract for, say, one more year, (or even half a year) while a co-op is put together (I'm not sure if we have time to do it before the lease is up this year)? If not, why not?

Can anyone enlighten us on these matters, or must I start reading boring law tracts?