Labour party civil war

[IrememberBobHazell]

I have always considered the Conservatives to be the true party of working people, or perhaps just this working person.

I can assure Cristoph that the government policy of presumed development is leading to greater housebuilding and many furrowed brows in local government circles. Numbers are minimum and the costs of legal appeals for wrongly refused applications scare local authorities all over.

As for Labour, well it's a rare mess. The Tories may be seen to have stitched it up but they got their proverbial sh*t together in a time of national trial. Labour seem locked in a death spiral leaving millions unrepresented.

[Thracian]

The last paragraph is the sad truth.

Who the **** is going to vote Angela Eagle in a general election?! Really? But then I can't see many people in the countryside and suburbs voting for Corby either.

Cant handle more years of Conservative rule. I could build more houses than this government..

 

 

Lots of houses have and are being built (they're all around me) and It would be something to fill all the empty houses too  - there's enough of them. I spent a couple of days in Gloucester last week and there were two essentially decent blocks of empty flats almost alongside my B&B, looking very sorry for themselves. The flats were close to the centre, the station, all sorts of shops, bus stops, the lot.

 

As for "The Conservatives" it sounded pretty positive as outlined by May and would certainly be better than the Marxist/Leninist Communism advocated by Corbyn and his Trades Union friends who seem to be enemies of the country rather than friends, especially when it costs their "own" workforces their jobs.

 

Just look at the mess on the southern Region railways (and no, i don't defend the company either).  http://steelerslounge.com/2016/07/southern-rail-can-now-cancel-350-trains-a-day/3240078/.

 

As ever a disagreement between the unions/workforce and company leads to strike action - and inconvenience to customers (people they all depend on) instead of sensible debate.

 

How that equates to sick leave I don't know and how that in turn equates to protecting employment rights I don't know either because those rights should be accompanied by a genuine commitment by the workforce to do the job they were employed for. 

 

Corbyn, of course would rather the railways were nationised but we've been down that route before and it was dreadful with British worker intransigence and unreliability becoming - with encouragement from the unions - so much the norm that employers just gave up and closed their factories down. Indeed industries were all but lost due to the politically motivated union belligerence in the big industries. 

 

I really would have more respect for Corbyn if he'd ran a company and experienced all the problems he's concerned himself with from both sides rather than aligning himself with those who make things as difficult as possible for those who do take the responsibility to employ people.

 

Instead he forever tries to impose highly doubtful political theories onto the psyche of others when he's never employed the workers he supposedly cares so much about, never faced the problems caused by staff taking sick leave, never invested his own money in employees or ever worried whether he could possibly risk taking on more staff (with the associated commitments) if there was a downturn in the business.

 

Basically the bloke is just an protester rather than a visionary ...a sort of (im)mature student....trying to use the wind and piss of his so called intellect (mostly derived from provenly flawed Marxism from what I can gather) to avoid doing anything of great consequence and certainly not with his own, rather than other people's, money.         

 

As the Independent llnk mentions below, even in politics he's never been one to take responsibility and that was only mirrored during his brief period as Labour leader by his absolutely pathetic non-contribution to the referendum debate.

 

I'd actually sooner see my eldest son, or someone like him,  lead the opposition (whoever it was) but, as he says, there's no real money in it and that's why the standard's so low.

 

He's 20 years younger than Corbyn, went to a state comprehensive, started work as a clerk, qualified in his own right, set up his own firm, bought several others over the years, employs nearly 30 people on damned good pay and conditions, supports a whole stack of charities and organisations in his own neighbourhood and beyond, and his company has twice been given an honourable mention in business of the year awards.

 

No he's not unusual. Not at all.  Lots of young entrepreneurs have done just as well and sometimes much better by working hard, taking initiatives, risking all they've got and actually solving problems rather than flying a flag for those who seem to delight in making problems and to hell with the consequences.  

 

Reading the two articles below I wonder what's Corbyn done except theorise and oppose?          

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/jeremy-corbyn-is-a-stranger-to-responsibility-and-will-loathe-leadership-10471438.html

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34184265

[Grewks]

Houses not being built?

 

The men in my family have been self-employed tradesmen ever since...well they can't remember the last member of the family who wasn't self-employed.

 

 

Just this week my old mans firm was offered £300 a day per bloke, plus travel costs, to put up roof trusses in Lincoln. 

Plasterers being paid between £150-200 a day on sites in Leicestershire.

 

The problem we have at the minute, is that we don't have the skills required to maintain the high levels of housing production.

[Guest MattP]

Politicshome reporting Owen Smith also going to join leadership race tomorrow.

[purpleronnie]

I told you all politics was heading back to the 1980's a couple of years ago.  Now we have a woman PM again and the Labour party are at each other's throats.

 

Where's spitting image when you need them?

[Christoph]

I'll go back into my hole now.

[Guest Bilo]

Let's hope that this is true and the electoral self harm the party has committed over the past nine months can finally come to an end.

[Strokes]

Let's hope that this is true and the electoral self harm the party has committed over the past nine months can finally come to an end.

It's a big call but there won't be a party left at this rate if they don't make it.

[Nick]

Personally couldn't bare a return to the labour days.

I will always vote for the working mans party, therefore, will always vote tory.

Righto.

[Jon the Hat]

Am I missing something or is it perfectly obvious that Angela eagle is the stalking horse here, running only to make the point that they need a leadership election, and allowing the legal argument to be taken to the NEC showing that Corbyn needs to get the 51 nominations lilke everyone else.   Once that is clear we get the real candidates coming onto the ballot.  Probably Yvette Cooper will be the next leader.  She is bloody annoying but credible opposition leader at least.

[Guest Bilo]

It's a big call but there won't be a party left at this rate if they don't make it.

 

I feared this would happen, but the hard left have done a real number on the party through blind worship, zero interest in looking outside the movement for votes, silencing any criticism of Momentum or Corbyn and flooding the party with people who have joined only Corbyn.

I honestly think the party could be half the size and twice as strong.

[Guest Bilo]

Am I missing something or is it perfectly obvious that Angela eagle is the stalking horse here, running only to make the point that they need a leadership election, and allowing the legal argument to be taken to the NEC showing that Corbyn needs to get the 51 nominations lilke everyone else.   Once that is clear we get the real candidates coming onto the ballot.  Probably Yvette Cooper will be the next leader.  She is bloody annoying but credible opposition leader at least.

 

If it emerges he does need the 51 votes, you'll see a better quality field.

 

Umunna and Cooper near certain to be on the ballot under those circumstances, and other quality candidates like Jarvis and Starmer may also be persuaded.

[Webbo]

The Corbynistas won't go away if Corbyn's kept off the ballot. They're entrenched in constituency parties now. They'll be pushing for deselection of some MPs, they'll get their revenge.

[fuchsntf]

Labour party, what Labour party..!!!

Wilson..Benn, kinnock, Probably..

Blair, Brown, born on Thatcher politics and sold socialism to politicians not the electorate.jobs for the boys.

Just listen to all the political docus, and discussion platforms, no promis, nor politician on either side

get it !!! They are too busy fighting a false corner, and non exsitent platforms.

They are denying the electorate a voice.

I was for remain, but the political family dont or wont listen to 17mil Brexiters.

The sh#t will go on, just without the EU to blame.

We needed a strong labour party, but Thracian hit it on the head, the party has individuals,

who are just moaners and protesters, there are no visionaries, neither cranky, moderate or

just simply socialists.

There could be a few in UKIP but they decided to jump on the wrong bus, for the wrong reasons.

Another brain drain in all career paths, is on the cards.Medical staff and services will be hit again.

If small and avg growth companies are not supported the next qualified tech staff will be off.

I just hope T.May can hold the cons. right wingers at bay, and I hope she doesnt want to follow

the wicked witch from Grantham's path.I hope she is her own person and can stand on her own.

With the labour party and socialists idea in incompetents hands imploding.

A central thinking T.May if possible might be the only hope, a rebuild of labour party has.

Too far right, few will have the balls for a fight..They will be just happy to keep a low key,

and keep their own pockets jingling..

[Guest Bilo]

The Corbynistas won't go away if Corbyn's kept off the ballot. They're entrenched in constituency parties now. They'll be pushing for deselection of some MPs, they'll get their revenge.

 

A lot will leave the party if their idol is removed.

 

It'll be a long, hard battle and it'll be ugly though, that much I'll accept.

[The Horse's Mouth]

labour must be close to poisoning him by now

[Alf Bentley]

Am I missing something or is it perfectly obvious that Angela eagle is the stalking horse here, running only to make the point that they need a leadership election, and allowing the legal argument to be taken to the NEC showing that Corbyn needs to get the 51 nominations lilke everyone else.   Once that is clear we get the real candidates coming onto the ballot.  Probably Yvette Cooper will be the next leader.  She is bloody annoying but credible opposition leader at least.

 

 

That assumes the NEC decision on the need for nominations is final and based on legal certainty. But both sides claim to have legal advice favouring their argument, and the NEC will be making an internal political decision, not a legal ruling.

 

If the NEC rules that Corbyn needs 51 nominations, there's every chance he'd take the party to court. I'm neither a lawyer nor a Corbyn supporter, but my layman's reading of the rule suggests that Corbyn has a case. The rule essentially states that if there is a vacancy (which there isn't), all contenders have to show 20% support among MPs/MEPs; but if there is no vacancy (the current situation), then challengers to the leader have to show that 20% support (suggesting the incumbent leader doesn't have to). The fact that Corbyn's opponents keep citing the "precedent" set by the rules for Kinnock v Benn (1988) under a completely different electoral system, suggests they're not confident that the current rules say what they want them to.

 

If the NEC does rule against Corbyn, any "real candidates" waiting in the wings might want to wait and see whether Corbyn takes his party to court. It would be typical of the current Labour fiasco for other candidates to be announced and then for Corbyn to win a legal case and end up back on the ballot paper. Of course, it could happen the other way round: the NEC might back Corbyn and his opponents might bring the court case. 

 

However, I suppose multiple candidates could stand against Corbyn and still win, because of the voting system (alternative vote, with lowest-ranked candidates eliminated & votes transferred until one has 50%+). 

[Guest MattP]

I almost think Corbyn is trolling now, he made an appearance at a Cuban solidarity event last night, no statement on the new Prime Minister, no statement on the Labour leadership contest but found time to show his support for an oppressive foreign regime.

It says on the back of every Labour membership card that the Labour Party is a democratic socialist one. There's nothing democratic about Cuba.

[leicsmac]

It's a bit frustrating that the party meant to hold the government of the day to account is too busy imploding to do so.

[Guest MattP]

It's a bit frustrating that the party meant to hold the government of the day to account is too busy imploding to do so.

 

No surprise really though is it? I mean they should have known this was going to happen when electing him, he's never been interesting in anything but preaching to the converted and surrounding himself with people who agreeing with him.

 

Although he's probably the last Brexiteer standing now which is impressive

[Guest MattP]

Good article from Neil Kinnock regrading the nomination process.

http://www.newstatesman.com/2016/07/neil-kinnock-when-corbyn-wanted-me-deposed-i-sought-nominations-mps

[Alf Bentley]

I almost think Corbyn is trolling now, he made an appearance at a Cuban solidarity event last night, no statement on the new Prime Minister, no statement on the Labour leadership contest but found time to show his support for an oppressive foreign regime.

It says on the back of every Labour membership card that the Labour Party is a democratic socialist one. There's nothing democratic about Cuba.

 

 

Despite Cuban anti-democracy, there might have been some grounds for his support a few years back when the US economic blockade was in force, and certainly in the wake of the very anti-democratic US invasion in the 60s.

 

It's certainly an odd priority to have now that Obama is normalising US-Cuban relations.

 

But then Jeremy has consistently shown odd priorities....

- Most important vote for decades? Avoid addressing millions of sceptics/uninformed on TV and concentrate on basking in the applause of hundreds of supporters at pro-Remain rallies...

- Mass discontent at poverty & economic insecurity among your voters? Avoid promoting your policies to them or to a wider audience; instead, launch a massive social media campaign highlighting your "personal decency"...  

- Party implosion and leadership challenge? Bask in applause at the Durham Miners' Gala (how many miners are there in Durham now? None? I mean, history should be remembered, but minds need to be won in the present....)

- Social, political and constitutional crisis in the UK in 2016? Attend an event supporting those involved in an ancient crisis on the other side of the world that is now being resolved....

 

The vanity politics prioritising personal purity over social/democratic progress is in vogue now, in the era of social media, but Corbyn & the Hard Left have been in that game for decades.

[Guest MattP]

I did have a chuckle when I saw him at the Durham Miners' Gala, it's even pushing the "preaching to the converted" line into parody.

 

There isn't even a minor interest to try and talk to an audience of moderates/swing voters is there? Let alone a desire for it in realising it's the only way to win an election.

[Alf Bentley]

Good article from Neil Kinnock regrading the nomination process.

http://www.newstatesman.com/2016/07/neil-kinnock-when-corbyn-wanted-me-deposed-i-sought-nominations-mps

 

 

I agree with his political stance on the leadership crisis, but am unconvinced by his interpretation of the rules...

 

The rule was quoted in New Statesman and the important bit is in bold, underlined. It specifically refers to "challengers" seeking MPs' nominations, then says "In this case, any nomination" must have 20% support. To my mind, that supports Corbyn's interpretation more than that of his opponents. I reckon those drafting the rules just didn't anticipate a situation where an incumbent lacked 20% support among MPs but still wanted to stand. If anything, Kinnock weakens the 1988 "precedent" by stating that he voluntarily sought the support of MPs. He was politically and morally right to do so, but Corbyn may be legally right to say he doesn't need to....

 

"2. Election of leader and deputy leader

 

a. The leader and deputy leader shall be elected separately in accordance with rule C below, unless rule E below applies. b. Nomination i. In the case of a vacancy for leader or deputy leader, each nomination must be supported by 12.5 per cent of the Commons members of the PLP. Nominations not attaining this threshold shall be null and void. ii. Where there is no vacancy, nominations may be sought by potential challengers each year prior to the annual session of party conference. In this case any nomination must be supported by 20 per cent of the Commons members of the PLP. Nominations not attaining this threshold shall be null and void".

[Guest MattP]

This is going to be tested in the courts Alf, I'm certain of it, the wording of challengers does seem to support Corbyn though. A decision will be made by the NEC today anyway so we'll soon find out, I can't believe they would put up Eagle if his name was sure to be on the ballot, it doesn't make any sense.

 

Meanwhile a brick was thrown through Eagle's window in her constiituency last night and she's had to cancel an event today after threatening phone calls, the new kinder politics.