Popular Post Alf Bentley Posted 18 November 2020 Popular Post Share Posted 18 November 2020 The decision to readmit Corbyn to the party was taken by the National Executive Committee (NEC), not by Starmer.....whereas the decision whether to restore the Labour whip will be taken by Starmer & the Chief Whip. So, that decision over the whip will be interesting - particularly as Margaret Hodge is reportedly considering leaving the party. This readmittance is too quick, in my view. It gives the impression that the criticism of anti-semitism isn't being taken seriously enough, whatever the reality - and Starmer does seem determined to take it seriously. As I understand it, Corbyn no longer has majority support on the NEC - but is only just short, so presumably won a few other NEC members over on the grounds that allowing him back was in the interests of party unity, after he issued another mealy-mouthed, Jesuitical statement of "regret". Difficult situation for Starmer as he needs to take this seriously (and seems to want to) yet could do without a needless civil war with the Hard Left, which would look massively irresponsible and self-indulgent given Covid, Brexit, Boris omnishambles etc. Enormously selfish and irresponsible of Corbyn to pipe up with his stupid comment about the "exaggerated" report - and of his supporters to push for his early admission, thereby making Starmer's life difficult - and potentially helping the Tories. But I think we already knew that winning power and changing the country was of little importance to the Corbynistas. For them, it's all about sanctimoniously feeling good about themselves by parroting a wish list of every utopian policy they'd love in an ideal world - and uncritically hero-worshipping "a good man" . 13 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the Hat Posted 18 November 2020 Share Posted 18 November 2020 I was hoping we could stop talking about this nasty piece of work by now and move on with a decent opposition. Hopefully Starmer at least keeps him out of the PLP. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Finnaldo Posted 18 November 2020 Popular Post Share Posted 18 November 2020 Yeah if it was my call he wouldn’t have the whip restored. If he really cares about making a difference and making Labour electable he should just retire now and save the drama, there’s plenty of reasonable voices in the left wing of the party to take up the mantle that don’t have a closet choc full of skeletons. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urban.spaceman Posted 18 November 2020 Share Posted 18 November 2020 Disappointing to see Jezbollah back. Should have been kicked out for gifting the Tories their best victory in 80 years. Every sane person should support that. Kick the useless twat out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dahnsouff Posted 18 November 2020 Share Posted 18 November 2020 Weak from the party, worse it undermines Starmer, its a preposterous decision. Its not like Corbyn is in any believable was even slightly contrite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicester_Loyal Posted 18 November 2020 Author Share Posted 18 November 2020 It’s almost as if Labour finally wants my vote Keep up the good work Keir. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosbehFox Posted 18 November 2020 Share Posted 18 November 2020 (edited) Starmer doesn't win either way - personally I think he's played it okay, it's whether he can get Corbyn back to play backbencher role rather than wanting the limelight for more. I have no shadow that Corbyn started off as an idealist who played a decent role in holding account on certain policies and decisions but his ego built and built as the idolisation surrounded him. You know does it come across better if Starmer defeats the hard left in a democratic, slow erosion rather than kicking them out to split votes/party? Edited 18 November 2020 by Cardiff_Fox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl the Llama Posted 18 November 2020 Share Posted 18 November 2020 2 hours ago, Cardiff_Fox said: Starmer doesn't win either way - personally I think he's played it okay, it's whether he can get Corbyn back to play backbencher role rather than wanting the limelight for more. I have no shadow that Corbyn started off as an idealist who played a decent role in holding account on certain policies and decisions but his ego built and built as the idolisation surrounded him. You know does it come across better if Starmer defeats the hard left in a democratic, slow erosion rather than kicking them out to split votes/party? We don't need to cut out further left-wing thought, that can only benefit the people and indeed the planet as a whole (we're running out of time to undo the disastrous impact of laissez-faire capitalism). What we need to stamp out is prejudicial behaviour of the bigoted and extremist sorts without tarnishing left-wing politics by association. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Oxlong Posted 18 November 2020 Share Posted 18 November 2020 My considered opinion on the Starmer - Corbyn debacle is that the likes of Momentum and McCluskey are a bunch of cvnts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UpTheLeagueFox Posted 19 November 2020 Share Posted 19 November 2020 15 hours ago, Alf Bentley said: I think we already knew that winning power and changing the country was of little importance to the Corbynistas. For them, it's all about sanctimoniously feeling good about themselves by parroting a wish list of every utopian policy they'd love in an ideal world - and uncritically hero-worshipping "a good man" . One of the finest sentences FT has probably ever seen. Nailed it. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenTheFox Posted 19 November 2020 Share Posted 19 November 2020 On 15/11/2020 at 11:27, urban.spaceman said: Diane "on balance Mao did more good than harm" Abbott thinks the Uyghur is a place, not a people being put into concentration camps. She absolutely terrifies me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the Hat Posted 19 November 2020 Share Posted 19 November 2020 25 minutes ago, BenTheFox said: She absolutely terrifies me. I think actually she is a decent person, however she is not what she was mentally, and should retire. Without Corbyn she would be forgotten a long time ago. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finnaldo Posted 19 November 2020 Share Posted 19 November 2020 6 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said: I think actually she is a decent person, however she is not what she was mentally, and should retire. Without Corbyn she would be forgotten a long time ago. Think you’ve got it right there Jon. Heart in the right place but some of the stuff she’s done/said over the last four years are a bit strange at best and downright embarrassing at worst. Being in the limelight hasn’t done her or Labour any favours. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoopid Posted 19 November 2020 Share Posted 19 November 2020 4 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said: I think actually she is a decent person, however she is not what she was mentally, and should retire. Without Corbyn she would be forgotten a long time ago. She is such an easy target and predictably attracts a lot of rancour. I always felt she was a prime example of someone promoted a fairly long distance beyond her ability, but so what - she's hardly unique in that. But when I saw some of the flack she was getting (online especially), I actually felt quite sickened by it. And while it's true that kind of abuse reflects much more on the deficiencies of the poster than anything else, it's still hard to stomach. She at least adds to the gaiety of the nation, and as such I'm all for her. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bovril Posted 19 November 2020 Share Posted 19 November 2020 Abbott is well-liked by her constituents but doesn't have much political acumen. That's not necessarily a bad thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanSP Posted 19 November 2020 Share Posted 19 November 2020 What will happen as a result of this then? Patel found to have broken ministerial code, evidence Patel was bullying... Reprimanded and heavily warned I guess. Quote A draft report concluded in the summer that Home Secretary Priti Patel had broken rules on ministers' behaviour, sources familiar with the contents say. The Cabinet Office began an inquiry into her conduct after Sir Philip Rutnam, the most senior Home Office official, resigned in February. Sir Philip - who is suing for unfair dismissal - alleged that staff felt Ms Patel "created fear" in the department. Ms Patel has always strongly denied allegations of bullying. The report, carried out by the government's independent adviser on standards, Sir Alex Allan, has not been published. But one source said it had concluded that the "home secretary had not met the requirements of the ministerial code to treat civil servants with consideration and respect". They added that the investigation had found evidence of bullying, even if it had not been intentional. Another source who saw the report called it "unambiguous in stating that Priti Patel broke the ministerial code and that the prime minister buried it". A spokesman for the home secretary said she had always denied the allegations and that there had never been any formal complaints made against her. A different government source has suggested that the report also paints an unflattering picture of how she was sometimes treated. The report is understood to have looked at Ms Patel's behaviour at three different government departments - the Home Office, Work and Pensions and International Development. The evidence gathering was completed several months ago, but Downing Street has delayed giving a verdict. The prime minister is the ultimate arbiter of the ministerial code, and there is no requirement on the government to publish Sir Alex's report. The BBC understands there have been conversations in government this week about how to manage the situation, with suggestions that Ms Patel may be given a reprimand, or be asked to apologise, but keep her job. It is possible Boris Johnson's decision could be revealed as early as Friday. Normally if a minister breaches the code they are expected to resign. But earlier this week former Cabinet Secretary Sir Mark Sedwill suggested there could be a "wider range of sanctions", telling MPs: "I don't think it should be binary between let off or sacked." He confirmed then that the report was already "with" Mr Johnson. Dave Penman, general secretary of the FDA senior civil servants' union, said "thousands" of civil servants would be asking what "message" it would send if the government suggested Ms Patel did not have to resign over a "little bit of bullying". He described the system as not "fit for purpose", adding: "We need an independent process that's not relying upon a prime minister making a political judgement rather than judging based on the evidence." A government spokesperson said: "The process is ongoing and the prime minister will make any decision on the matter public once the process has concluded." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facecloth Posted 19 November 2020 Share Posted 19 November 2020 29 minutes ago, StanSP said: What will happen as a result of this then? Patel found to have broken ministerial code, evidence Patel was bullying... Reprimanded and heavily warned I guess. Been sacked as a minister before hasn't she? So has history of bad behaviour. I personally don't think she should be allowed to carry on in high ranking roles, as she's clearly not fit to hold the office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ealingfox Posted 19 November 2020 Popular Post Share Posted 19 November 2020 5 minutes ago, Facecloth said: Been sacked as a minister before hasn't she? So has history of bad behaviour. I personally don't think she should be allowed to carry on in high ranking roles, as she's clearly not fit to hold the office. She reports to Johnson, who has been sacked as a minister before, a history of bad behaviour, and is clearly not fit to hold the office. 5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facecloth Posted 19 November 2020 Share Posted 19 November 2020 (edited) 4 minutes ago, ealingfox said: She reports to Johnson, who has been sacked as a minister before, a history of bad behaviour, and is clearly not fit to hold the office. Good point EDIT: Just checked, resigned as Foreign Secretary. Edited 19 November 2020 by Facecloth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zorro en españa Posted 19 November 2020 Share Posted 19 November 2020 5 hours ago, Stoopid said: She is such an easy target and predictably attracts a lot of rancour. I always felt she was a prime example of someone promoted a fairly long distance beyond her ability, but so what - she's hardly unique in that. But when I saw some of the flack she was getting (online especially), I actually felt quite sickened by it. And while it's true that kind of abuse reflects much more on the deficiencies of the poster than anything else, it's still hard to stomach. She at least adds to the gaiety of the nation, and as such I'm all for her. Well said. I have never been an Abbott supporter but the vitriol she has faced - often dodgy internet memes - has been appalling. A woman ..... and black to boot. What is there not to **** 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ealingfox Posted 19 November 2020 Share Posted 19 November 2020 8 minutes ago, Facecloth said: Good point EDIT: Just checked, resigned as Foreign Secretary. He was sacked from the Shadow Cabinet under Howard (for lying, obviously). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facecloth Posted 19 November 2020 Share Posted 19 November 2020 26 minutes ago, ealingfox said: He was sacked from the Shadow Cabinet under Howard (for lying, obviously). Ah I was only looking at his ministerial role, not shadow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ealingfox Posted 19 November 2020 Share Posted 19 November 2020 10 minutes ago, Facecloth said: Ah I was only looking at his ministerial role, not shadow. Shadow Ministers are Ministers, but we're getting into semantics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuna Posted 20 November 2020 Share Posted 20 November 2020 Apparantly they call her "The Prittster" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dahnsouff Posted 20 November 2020 Share Posted 20 November 2020 Boris you spineless coward. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts