Jeremy Corbyn - Not Not Labour Party(?), not a Communist (BBC)

@Ubik Not sure if you've said and I missed it but just wondering if you have a preferred candidate you're hoping the PLP will unite behind?
 
MikeUpNorth said:
It probably should have been made very clear that refugee status is temporary and the aim is to send them back to their home country if and when it is safe to do so. That is what refugee status is after all.
Click to expand...

You think that would have stopped them coming to Europe?
 
Under Corbyn: Bad results in Scotland, disappointing results in Wales, bad local election results and lost the referendum ... that went well
 
SteveJ said:
Guardian: Jeremy Corbyn plans to address a rally of grassroots supporters at the gates of parliament tonight after facing down his critics within the Parliamentary Labour party.

Labour’s leader will at first attend a crucial meeting of MPs where he is expected to face calls for his resignation including former members of his shadow cabinet.

But after calling for party unity, he plans to address a Momentum rally on Parliament Square, 20 yards from the parliamentary estate, sources said.

He may well be flanked at the rally by up to 20 MPs, who among those who remain loyal to Labour’s leader.

The address will offer a stark reminder to MPs that Corbyn’s support remains outside the Parliamentary party which has always been hostile towards him.

A source close to his office confirmed that he would address the rally following the PLP meeting. Corbyn also thanked Diane Abbott for the casserole.
Click to expand...

Saw that on the news last night, what a pathetic bunch of deluded idiots the lot of them.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
What was the final ratio of opportunist migrants and genuine refugees? I think it was 70/30 IIRC. She made it worse for the refugees and the EU IMO. Although my point isn't the specifics of that, it is how to deal with the consequences.

For the right it gives them leverage. The hard left just want to bury their head in the sand, denigrate the section of society complaining about it and come out with insanely stupid comments from the top like 'in the future there won't be any borders'.

@712

I take you are a Tory then?
Click to expand...

I still see no solutions from you, just complaining about what she did. What could she have done to stop those people coming to Europe?
 
DiseaseOfTheAge said:
@Ubik Not sure if you've said and I missed it but just wondering if you have a preferred candidate you're hoping the PLP will unite behind?
Click to expand...
It's at the stage now where I've thrown positioning out the window and just want someone that can actually put together a team, focus them rigidly on their jobs and ensure Boris isn't allowed to get away with anything. Looks like it'll either be Watson or Eagle, neither are ideal for me but both would do that job. And both would highlight it as nonsense when Corbyn allies describe it as a "Blairite coup". Have them try to stitch the party back together in time for the inevitable election, then after that try and bring in someone that is more of a long term bet (be that either Nandy to the left or Umunna/Jarvis to the right). Benn would've been my preferred candidate as caretaker but fairly obvious that's not happening.

Don't want to think much about the consequences if Corbyn hangs on, but a split is likely (either formal or informal).
 
Sweet Square said:


Yay can't wait for the new leader.
Click to expand...


I get your point, but things were more nuanced than that.

On 6 July, two days before George Osborne’s emergency budget, and with a vote on fresh government cuts to benefits and tax credits looming in a new welfare bill, Harman decided to broach the welfare issue at a thinly attended shadow cabinet meeting. She said the party could not resort to reflex opposition. When Burnham resisted, Harman told him bluntly: “You may have noticed we lost the election.” According to one of the people present, “She was unspeakably rude to him.”

Six days later, Harman hurled a grenade into the leadership contest. Speaking on the BBC’s Sunday Politics programme, she announced: “We’re not going to be voting against the welfare bill, we’re not going to be opposing the household benefit cap. We’re going to be understanding about the point about three or more children.”

Burnham supporters were furious. An incandescent member of his camp rang Harman’s aides to complain that the leadership campaign teams had not been informed. “She over-reached herself, basically,” one campaign source said. “It was a political management feck-up. So just as everyone is arriving on the Corbyn train, the mainstream leaderships are being asked to leave in the opposite direction.”

Burnham responded by calling for “a reasoned amendment” to the welfare bill – setting out the arguments for its inadequacy. (Cooper quickly adopted the same line.) But Corbyn’s response was unequivocal. “I am not willing to vote for policies that will push more children into poverty,” he said in a statement shortly after Harman’s TV appearance. “Families are suffering enough. We shouldn’t play the government’s political games with the welfare system if children are at stake.”

Privately, Cooper had warned Harman that her decision could help hand the contest to Corbyn – as the only candidate not in the shadow cabinet, he was not bound to support the interim leader’s line, and was therefore free to rebel. On 14 July, a difficult meeting of the shadow cabinet took place. Harman began by saying that she was going to take contributions in sequence round the table, rather than choosing speakers from those with their hands raised. She started with Tristram Hunt, who was sitting next to her. He launched into a “long and emotional” speech supporting Harman’s position, according to one person present at the meeting. “If she was retiring at that point, I would have booked Tristram to make that speech. It was a great after-dinner speech, but it went on for hours.” After Hunt had finished, Harman said that Cooper would have to speak next since she needed to leave the meeting early – giving Cooper the opportunity to call for an amendment to the bill. The Burnham camp wanted to take the lead in proposing an amendment, and believed they had been stitched up. “It was obvious [Cooper] was plotting with *******, because she then stayed another hour,” one witness said.
Click to expand...

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/25/jeremy-corbyn-earthquake-labour-party

EDIT: Here is the Shadow Cabinet at the time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Shadow_Cabinet_of_Harriet_Harman
 
Mozza said:
I still see no solutions from you, just complaining about what she did. What could she have done to stop those people coming to Europe?
Click to expand...

The large volume of opportunist economic migrants that came after she declared that everyone can come are we talking about here?

As for the genuine refugees.

Pay several billions of Euros into refugee camps to make them habitable and safe.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
The large volume of opportunist economic migrants that came after she declared that everyone can come are we talking about here?

As for the genuine refugees.

Pay several billions of Euros into refugee camps to make them habitable and safe.
Click to expand...

No refugees are staying without going through the formal process, they will try to weed out the false assylum seekers

They were already on their way or in Europe so spending cash on camps wasnt going to change the situation then. Further people want to live, not just be parked in a camp in the middle of the desert
 
Mozza said:
No refugees are staying without going through the formal process, they will try to weed out the false assylum seekers

They were already on their way or in Europe so spending cash on camps wasnt going to change the situation then. Further people want to live, not just be parked in a camp in the middle of the desert
Click to expand...

Besides I said her declaration of an open door was the mistake. She didn't have to say that. Genuine refugees would still have made the journey.
 
Frosty said:
I get your point, but things were more nuanced than that.
Click to expand...
It was pretty simply actually,they thought it would good for the Labour image to hit people on welfare. Nothing nuanced about it.

Here's them last year trying to worm out of their decision(It the first question)-

 
Sweet Square said:
It was pretty simply actually,they thought it would good for the Labour image to hit people on welfare. Nothing nuanced about it.

Here's them last year trying to worm out of their decision(It the first question)-
Click to expand...

Labour, and centre-left parties, have wages a war on the welfare state for the past 30 years (at least). Clinton did so before the 1996 election. That doesn't excuse their decision. I disagreed with it then and still do now. The Labour Party have too often failed to present a vision of progressive politics, and too often focused on policy minutiae which hits the people they are meant to represent and stand for, in the aim of claiming mythical middle England voters.

But (and there is obviously a but here), this is more nuanced than sheer self-interest, painting these figures as rebelling when they want to. I do believe that for a number of those who resigned, they did so because they genuinely have fears about the continued existence of the Labour Party. I think this fear (although not as existential as it is now) motivated many to abstain from the 2015 vote on benefits, which came very soon after a massive, massive electoral defeat.
 
Sweet Square said:
It was pretty simply actually,they thought it would good for the Labour image to hit people on welfare. Nothing nuanced about it.

Here's them last year trying to worm out of their decision(It the first question)-

Click to expand...


ABSTAINED - Ronnie Campbell, long time member of the awkward squad in the Labour left
ABSTAINED - Jo Cox, the one everyone agreed was a fantastic MP a week ago, and who Corbyn did not describe as Tory-lite after leading the condolences after her murder
ABSTAINED - Barry Gardiner, newly appointed to the shadow cabinet, was literally only person at PLP meeting yesterday to speak up for Corbyn
ABSTAINED - Pat Glass, newly appointed to the shadow cabinet
ABSTAINED - Harry Harpham, former miner who sadly died last year, Corbyn once again led the condolences well
ABSTAINED - Andy Slaughter, only resigned from his shadow ministerial position after 90% of his local party agreed, long time friend of Corbyn
ABSTAINED - Emily Thornberry, now shadow foreign secretary, one of the few left who'll defend Corbyn
ABSTAINED - Jon Trickett, Corbyn's biggest ally in the PLP aside from McDonnell, now an important member of the shadow cabinet

It's almost like you can't boil down someone's political views based on a single abstention, isn't it.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
It has always appeared obvious to me. The older generation are more likely to react badly to immigration because they remember a time when there were hardly any immigrants. The younger generations have grown up in a multicultural society and went to school with immigrant and have friends of other ethnicities. It becomes normalised and a part of 'British culture'. It helps to explain the age demographics of the Leave vote.

It is also why I said Merkel made a huge huge mistake around the immigrant crisis because a society cannot adapt peacefully to that level of immigration at once. It could be one of the key moments that we look back on as deciding the fate of the EU.

It is fear rooted in ignorance. But to continue to dismiss or demonise the phenomenon will get you no where IMO. It has to be tackled with logic and understanding.

I don't think the hard left are capable of that.
Click to expand...

Completely agree, I really do think Merkel's actions were the straw that broke the camel's back.
 
Ubik said:
ABSTAINED - Ronnie Campbell, long time member of the awkward squad in the Labour left
ABSTAINED - Jo Cox, the one everyone agreed was a fantastic MP a week ago, and who Corbyn did not describe as Tory-lite after leading the condolences after her murder
ABSTAINED - Barry Gardiner, newly appointed to the shadow cabinet, was literally only person at PLP meeting yesterday to speak up for Corbyn
ABSTAINED - Pat Glass, newly appointed to the shadow cabinet
ABSTAINED - Harry Harpham, former miner who sadly died last year, Corbyn once again led the condolences well
ABSTAINED - Andy Slaughter, only resigned from his shadow ministerial position after 90% of his local party agreed, long time friend of Corbyn
ABSTAINED - Emily Thornberry, now shadow foreign secretary, one of the few left who'll defend Corbyn
ABSTAINED - Jon Trickett, Corbyn's biggest ally in the PLP aside from McDonnell, now an important member of the shadow cabinet

It's almost like you can't boil down someone's political views based on a single abstention, isn't it.
Click to expand...
I never did(I also never called any Tory lite by the way).

I just simply stated the reason why I thought they abstained(If you listen those three in that interview I think it's pretty clear why some of them abstained). Also as for the people you mentioned - then yes they fecked up and thought it was good for the Labour image to hit people on welfare as well.

Christ I'm not calling them evil or anything.
 
Mozza said:
You think that would have stopped them coming to Europe?
Click to expand...
No, but it changes the narrative to one of helping people in temporary need rather than one about long term immigration.
 
Sweet Square said:
I never did(I also never called any Tory lite by the way).

I just simply stated the reason why I thought they abstained(If you listen those three in that interview I think it's pretty clear why some of them abstained). Also as for the people you mentioned - then yes they fecked up and thought it was good for the Labour image to hit people on welfare as well.

Christ I'm not calling them evil or anything.
Click to expand...
True, I mistook responses to your original post to be yours, apologies.
 
Looks like it's between Eagle and Watson. If its Eagle then I'm done feck knows how she's any more electable and it shows she'll place blame for the failure of the referendum but not take any.

I'd be willing to give Watson a chance but I'd be suprised if that's the route the party wants to go down.
 
Ubik said:
It's at the stage now where I've thrown positioning out the window and just want someone that can actually put together a team, focus them rigidly on their jobs and ensure Boris isn't allowed to get away with anything. Looks like it'll either be Watson or Eagle, neither are ideal for me but both would do that job. And both would highlight it as nonsense when Corbyn allies describe it as a "Blairite coup". Have them try to stitch the party back together in time for the inevitable election, then after that try and bring in someone that is more of a long term bet (be that either Nandy to the left or Umunna/Jarvis to the right). Benn would've been my preferred candidate as caretaker but fairly obvious that's not happening.

Don't want to think much about the consequences if Corbyn hangs on, but a split is likely (either formal or informal).
Click to expand...
I'm thinking a split is quite likely now.
 
Angela arable is quite close to the Unions so she might have a better chance.
 
Labour and Tories are a complete mess.

Somehow David Cameron now looks like a titan compared to the rest.
 
The fact that 40 voted for Corbyn shows he has enough support to get on the ballot box.
I just think he should quit. He will look like a crazed power hungry, elitist socialist if he's hell bent on continuing.
 
Adisa said:
The fact that 40 voted for Corbyn shows he has enough support to get on the ballot box.
I just think he should quit. He will look like a crazed power hungry, elitist socialist if he's hell bent on continuing.
Click to expand...

There's absolutely no reason for him to resign and if anyone looks power hungry and elitist it certainly isn't him.

Strategically it's also idiotic for the PLP to try and make him do so. At least if he loses an election it shows the members want a new leader if they force him out they could be abandoned.
 
Adisa said:
The fact that 40 voted for Corbyn shows he has enough support to get on the ballot box.
I just think he should quit. He will look like a crazed power hungry, elitist socialist if he's hell bent on continuing.
Click to expand...
He'd need 50, so he'd need to convince some abstainers and/or some of Labour's 20 MEPs, that's if he's not automatically on it.
 
I'll laugh if there isn't actually a snap general election after all this.

(By laugh I actually mean cry.)
 
Adisa said:
The fact that 40 voted for Corbyn shows he has enough support to get on the ballot box.
I just think he should quit. He will look like a crazed power hungry, elitist socialist if he's hell bent on continuing.
Click to expand...
The Labour party desperately needs to be lead by someone who couldn't be arsed to vote on the Welfare Bill. If they also voted for the war in Iraq and then consistently against an investigation into it, even better. That'll win the voters over.
 
Not that I'm the biggest fan of Corbyn's, but I will never, ever vote for any Labour candidate who's done anything to deliberately undermine him. They apparently see themselves as above the results of a democratic vote by their members if they simply don't like the result. Or think listening to their members is beneath them if they simply don't want to. So you have to wonder what the point in voting for any of them would even be. They're alll dead in the water as far as I'm concerned...and they should be fecking ashamed of themselves for making a vitally important moment in the Country's history all about them.

Labour will be wiped out at the next election and this lot are entirely to blame, not Corbyn.

Best thing that can happen is there's a suitable candidate who isn't responsible for any of this mess, who can give the party a purpose. At least Corbyn has tried to do that...he's survived the brutal media campaign to bury him, the questioning of his backround and scrutiny for doing things like admitting he wouldn't want to start a nuclear war...but is instead being destroyed by members of his own party who are too childish to accept why Corbyn got voted in to begin with...because the rest of them are spineless dullards trying to preach politics that absolutely no one wants. Most of them abstained on the most fecking right wing welfare bill you could ever wish to see...who the feck do they think they are to be trying to dictate anything when they don't even do their jobs?
 
Dobba said:
If they also voted for the war in Iraq and then consistently against an investigation into it, even better. That'll win the voters over.
Click to expand...
Wonder what effect the Chilcot Inquiry will have on soon to be leadership race. Also I might be wrong but I'm pretty sure Watson voted for both.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.