Also in the news

[Kopfkino]

 

A kinder, gentler politics and definitely not a cult. 

 

Fair play to the 7 though, good for politicians to just lay the truth out for a change. 

[EnderbyFox]

"The Independent Group" Wow what an exciting name. This will galvanize the "FBPE" oddballs on Twitter but will it really sway Labour voters? We already have the Lib Dems filling up the boring WE MUST REMAIN IN THE EU OR WE WILL ALL DIE quota. 

[urban.spaceman]

 

 

[Kopic]

12 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

 

 

Dan Roan strikes again.

[Guest MattP]

19 minutes ago, EnderbyFox said:

"The Independent Group" Wow what an exciting name. This will galvanize the "FBPE" oddballs on Twitter but will it really sway Labour voters? We already have the Lib Dems filling up the boring WE MUST REMAIN IN THE EU OR WE WILL ALL DIE quota. 

One of the basic things they haven't addressed is that a new "centrist" party can't just be a Remain one, if Soubry, Allen etc join up they may as well just join the Lib Dems.

 

Fair play for these finally having the balls to leave the hard-left nutters/antisemitism in Labour behind but I'm not sure whether this has legs or not in the long term. 

[Strokes]

31 minutes ago, EnderbyFox said:

"The Independent Group" Wow what an exciting name. This will galvanize the "FBPE" oddballs on Twitter but will it really sway Labour voters? We already have the Lib Dems filling up the boring WE MUST REMAIN IN THE EU OR WE WILL ALL DIE quota. 

Should have called it ‘new labour’ for shits and giggles.

[urban.spaceman]

2 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Should have called it ‘Jew labour’ for shits and giggles.

[ealingfox]

Shock horror none of these brave, principled people are brave or principled enough to re-contest their seats. I would have a lot more respect for them if they did. They do not have a democratic mandate to sit as an independent MP, particularly with no election on the horizon, and it really only seems a self-serving empty gesture to do this without then consulting their electorate.

 

If you ask me it should be mandatory for any Member to call a by-election in such circumstances.

[Innovindil]

2 minutes ago, ealingfox said:

Shock horror none of these brave, principled people are brave or principled enough to re-contest their seats. I would have a lot more respect for them if they did. They do not have a democratic mandate to sit as an independent MP, particularly with no election on the horizon, and it really only seems a self-serving empty gesture to do this without then consulting their electorate.

 

If you ask me it should be mandatory for any Member to call a by-election in such circumstances.

It's funny because for the last 2 years we've been told that MP's should ignore the electorate and do whatever they felt was right for the country. 

 

Guess it depends what you personally think is right for the country eh. 

[purpleronnie]

Obviously they feel that Labour has failed on stamping out anti-Semitism among other things, or maybe they feel leaving in this way will give their new political party more legs, the tories never let their anti-islam sentiment split the party....why?  Maybe they thought it would harm the party too much, maybe it wasn't as widespread as some suggest, maybe they thought it would change, maybe they didn't care enough?  I'd be amazed if this new party lasts very long, all it will do is knock the labour party back and we'll have to endure tories in power for probably decades to come.

[Guest MattP]

1 hour ago, Kopfkino said:

 

A kinder, gentler politics and definitely not a cult. 

 

Fair play to the 7 though, good for politicians to just lay the truth out for a change. 

At least if they did have any doubts about whether they were doing the right thing they can read stuff like this and have it confirmed they are.

 

The replies to that tweet are great as well.

[foxy boxing]

Reminiscent of the "gang of four" that left Labour to form the SDP.

[ealingfox]

45 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

It's funny because for the last 2 years we've been told that MP's should ignore the electorate and do whatever they felt was right for the country. 

 

Guess it depends what you personally think is right for the country eh. 

 

Could you provide an example of where I've said that? 

 

There are a multitude of differences between the respective circumstances anyway, but I expect you already know that.

[Guest MattP]

24 minutes ago, ealingfox said:

Could you provide an example of where I've said that? 

 

There are a multitude of differences between the respective circumstances anyway, but I expect you already know that.

No idea about you personally but fascinating how so many in Labour all think these people are morally now obliged to call a by-election but didn't say a word about it with Jared O'Mara.

[Jon the Hat]

1 hour ago, ealingfox said:

Shock horror none of these brave, principled people are brave or principled enough to re-contest their seats. I would have a lot more respect for them if they did. They do not have a democratic mandate to sit as an independent MP, particularly with no election on the horizon, and it really only seems a self-serving empty gesture to do this without then consulting their electorate.

 

If you ask me it should be mandatory for any Member to call a by-election in such circumstances.

Well under these circumstance they would lose to momentum selected Labour candidates.  So they wouldn't quit the Labour party.  Do we really want a system where MPs cannot leave their party?

[ealingfox]

14 minutes ago, MattP said:

No idea about you personally but fascinating how so many in Labour all think these people are morally now obliged to call a by-election but didn't say a word about it with Jared O'Mara.

 

As I have said, it's my personal belief that any Member diverging from the terms on which they were elected should have to re-contest.

 

I know he ended up shithousing it but I did respect Goldsmith for doing so at the time after resigning over Heathrow.

 

I might add that I am not a member of the Labour Party in case that is the impression you are under.

Edited 18 February 2019 by ealingfox

[leicsmac]

3 hours ago, AKCJ said:

For me, she lost her rights when she decided to join an international terrorist organisation that's famous for robbing other people of basic human rights.

 

 

Morally, you're probably right.

 

Legally, there's good reasons why nations can't render someone stateless and so rightly or wrongly she's the UK's responsibility. If she comes back, lock her up, foster her child and find out as much as is possible from her and see whether deradicalisation is possible.

 

3 hours ago, ARTY_FOX said:

So let’s say they let her in, that sets the precedent for others that want to come back. They then commit an act of terrorism here where even one person is killed. How do the people responsible for these people coming back then feel? She has no remorse, she’s not bothered about the murders she should stay there. 

If the UK security services can't keep tabs on a known high-risk British citizen (or even a few of them) for long enough to find out any useful information the UK can then that says something about their competence tbh. That's part of their job, after all, and FWIW I think them competent enough to have enough eyes and ears on any Daesh fighter who comes back to the UK to neutralise any threat they may pose.

[urban.spaceman]

18 hours ago, Kopfkino said:

Tbh I find it a little disconcerting that people think the UK can just wash its hands of its international responsibilities. Whether you like it or not she's a British citizen, has rights, but tbh most importantly she is our responsibility. 

 

17 hours ago, Strokes said:

As much as it goes against my instincts, I agree. She is a British national and if she has committed an offence in or against this country, she should face justice here. 

 

17 hours ago, Salisbury Fox said:

Agreed, although I don't feel we should go out of our way to repatriate her by putting anyone in danger. 

I do agree that she’s our problem but she needs to be treated as harshly as possible. She’s betrayed her fellow citizens and rejected everything this country has ever given her. If she was top be brought back, the child should be put into care and she should face terror charges akin to those who have been convicted of plotting attacks. 

[EnderbyFox]

 

 

 

Good start 

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

2 minutes ago, EnderbyFox said:

 

 

 

Good start 

Well she's definitely right, she deserves a party thats all her own.  That kind of oration would bust the seams of any conventional party

[ARTY_FOX]

46 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Morally, you're probably right.

 

Legally, there's good reasons why nations can't render someone stateless and so rightly or wrongly she's the UK's responsibility. If she comes back, lock her up, foster her child and find out as much as is possible from her and see whether deradicalisation is possible.

 

If the UK security services can't keep tabs on a known high-risk British citizen (or even a few of them) for long enough to find out any useful information the UK can then that says something about their competence tbh. That's part of their job, after all, and FWIW I think them competent enough to have enough eyes and ears on any Daesh fighter who comes back to the UK to neutralise any threat they may pose.

They can try and keep tabs all they like but it wouldn’t be the first time a known person goes out and does something. It doesn’t take loads of intricate planning to go on a lone wolf attack. Even if he went out and starting stabbing people down the street one person is too many. 

[urban.spaceman]

19 minutes ago, EnderbyFox said:

 

 

 

Good start 

 

[Jon the Hat]

1 hour ago, foxy boxing said:

Reminiscent of the "gang of four" that left Labour to form the SDP.

It a bit before my time but I think they were much higher profile defections.  Apart From Chuka, and more recently Luciana due to the AS row, these are relative unknowns.

[Jon the Hat]

31 minutes ago, EnderbyFox said:

 

 

 

Good start 

What did I just watch??  How bizarre, she knew she was saying something crazy as she was saying it!!

[Alf Bentley]

 

Unclear where, if anywhere, this "Gang of Seven" Labour breakaway will go. A lot will depend on the Brexit outcome and on whether there's a similar split in the Tory Party, I think.

 

If the Brexit outcome is a big mess and both main parties are even more unpopular as a result, maybe there'll be an appetite for some new centrist party (like Macron appeared from nowhere). There seems to be no appetite for that yet, though - and that's a major difference with the SDP breakaway in 1981. Back then, there was a lot of disillusionment with both Labour and Tories - and a lot of interest in a new centrist party. Polarisation was unpopular - now it seems popular. It's not as if discontent with May and Corbyn has led to a surge in support for the Lib Dems....

 

The SDP also had a lot of favourable media coverage - and much bigger names. Of the "Gang of Four", Jenkins had been Chancellor & Home Secretary, Owen had been Foreign Secretary, Shirley Williams had been Education Secretary & one of the best-known female politicians of her time.

 

Maybe it'll really take off if Brexit is a disaster or if a confrontational response from Corbyn provokes further resignations or if there's a similar split in the Tory Party. Some combination of those factors could lead to a complete realignment of politics, especially if it brought electoral reform into play. 

 

But I presume that these 7 will have spoken to likely Tory defectors, and presumably the likes of Soubry weren't interested in coming on board. Tories could still resign separately and form some sort of pro-Remain centrist alliance, I suppose. The SDP did that for the 1983 election, forming an alliance with the Liberals, before merging over subsequent years.

 

But this breakaway could easily be a complete damp squib. If some sort of Brexit deal is cobbled together, there are few Tory defections and not many more Labour defections, it could quickly fall flat - especially as there's no obvious public appetite for centrism and most of those involved are unknown.

 

Apart from Angela Smith, they all got big majorities as Labour MPs. So, unless the breakaway group gets massively popular, at the next election most of their seats would go back to Labour with smaller majorities, Smith's seat probably to the Tories.

The SDP lost nearly all their seats in 1983 despite polling 20%+ nationally.....and this breakaway is a long way from that level of popularity so far.

 

Then there's the impact if they do glean significant support, but get it mainly from moderate Labour voters. That's what happened in 1983 and it just handed about 100 extra seats and a landslide victory to Thatcher on a lower percentage of the national vote than she had gained in 1979!