advertisement


Labour Leader: Keir Starmer VII

Funny that supertanskiii thinks Christian Wakeford's defection was a "moral decision".

The guy was railing against refugees crossing the English Channel and calling the Labour front bench a bunch of ****s just a few weeks before he crossed the floor.

You'd have to be supremely gullible to think he had suddenly seen the light.
I imagine it’s going to be tricky if a Red Wall MP defects to Labour, given that these were previously generational Labour safe seats and there’s potentially a former Labour MP first in line at the GE, not a Tory Borisite who’s suddenly discovered a protean conscience. I’d be very suspicious of that sort of person. Could always remove them at constituency level I assume?
 
Yes, it strikes me as political suicide to take a Tory Brexit gammon all the proper Labour voters in the seat actively voted against at the last election. The worst of all worlds. Especially when one factors a lot of these seats only fell because Banks/Farage bought a lot of the vote to rig the seat. The Daily Fascist getting wound up about legitimate tactical voting in the recent by-elections is highly amusing given the Brexit Party electoral pact with the Tories.
 
I don't get it either. The affiliated unions must be wondering why they're contributing millions to the party.

The Labour Party was formed out of the trade union movement to give working people their own political voice. The link from the workplace to the party through the affiliated trade unions is what makes it unique to this day. This link is more important than ever as we work together to tackle the urgent problems we face as a country, from stagnating wages to failing public services.

https://labour.org.uk/people/unions/
Ultimately this is a classic example of a silo mentality whereby interconnected organisations grow larger & become disconnected. The link between unions & Labour has been far from harmonious for many years.
 
I imagine it’s going to be tricky if a Red Wall MP defects to Labour, given that these were previously generational Labour safe seats and there’s potentially a former Labour MP first in line at the GE, not a Tory Borisite who’s suddenly discovered a protean conscience. I’d be very suspicious of that sort of person. Could always remove them at constituency level I assume?
Not really. There are numerous examples now of constituency parties having their favoured candidates rejected and having a shortlist of just two candidates imposed by the NEC and regional Labour HQ. Wakefield is just one example:

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...alks-out-of-final-vote-on-bylection-candidate

The Labour Party is organised as a collection of regional fiefdoms (mostly dominated by the right of the party). Starmer is an authoritarian so he is more than happy to turn a blind eye to these shennanigans, as they favour the faction he represents.
 
Not really. There are numerous examples now of constituency parties having their favoured candidates rejected and having a shortlist of just two candidates imposed by the NEC and regional Labour HQ. Wakefield is just one example:

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...alks-out-of-final-vote-on-bylection-candidate

The Labour Party is organised as a collection of regional fiefdoms (mostly dominated by the right of the party). Starmer is an authoritarian so he is more than happy to turn a blind eye to these shennanigans, as they favour the faction he represents.
So to use a clourful example- if the Beast of Bolsover said he wanted to stand again and the local voters had his full support, the party leader would let ex-Tory MP Justin Squire/ Rupert Whiteman stand as candidate?
 
It suits the interests and the propensities of the Labour right for the two (three, ideally) parties to be interchangeable. So beyond any strategic considerations they take genuine delight in Tories defecting to their team. I don’t think they can see past this to consider the possible downsides.
 
So to use a clourful example- if the Beast of Bolsover said he wanted to stand again and the local voters had his full support, the party leader would let ex-Tory MP Justin Squire/ Rupert Whiteman stand as candidate?
Nor sure what you’re getting at but in my experience from when I was a Labour activist visiting different local associations, there was more than one who were not permitted to field their own local candidate, but had a candidate ‘bused in’ by the NEC.
 
So to use a clourful example- if the Beast of Bolsover said he wanted to stand again and the local voters had his full support, the party leader would let ex-Tory MP Justin Squire/ Rupert Whiteman stand as candidate?
Well, we're talking about members of the constituency party, not voters in a general election, but yes, quite possibly.

Note: Corbyn's room for similar manoeuvres was seriously limited beacause: (a) he didn't have a majority on Labour's NEC until late in his leadership; (b) regional Labour HQs, which play a key role in candidate selection, are strongholds of the Labour right.
 
Corbyn's room for similar manoeuvres was seriously limited beacause: (a) he didn't have a majority on Labour's NEC until late in his leadership; (b) regional Labour HQs, which play a key role in candidate selection, are strongholds of the Labour right.
But when he had the opportunity to do so, Corbyn figured that what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, as in the case Claudia Webbe.
 
Interesting Lammy interview on BBC - avoid picket lines, support all workers and act as lead negotiator when in government. Seems to view strikes/picket lines as rather anachronistic and grubby. Maybe Labour have realised that the majority of workers don't strike and are not particularly fond of them. Confronting for the trade unions but will they leave Labour...?
 
Yes, smart grown-up politics from Lammy. A future leader?
David Lammy's constituency party just passed the following motion:

FWLL1vjWAAAwGh8


These people seem to be stuck in the student politics of the 1970s.

Lammy's brand of muscular pragmatism is clearly far too good for them.
 
Surely the CLP need to run that past the Daily Mail and Express first? Don’t they know anything about internal Labour Party structure?
 
Is it opportunistic to remind people of your party's support for strikes and unions, when the party that was founded on the trade union movement has apparently abandoned them, though?
 
Yup, more opportunism. Her position during the Brighton refuse collection strike was a bit more 'nuanced'.
Agreed

Her party has no chance of winning a GE and not much chance of even gaining more seats, so the tory far right propaganda machine has no interest in making political mileage from her position should the majority of the public be against strike action. She has nothing to lose. This is more like another example of those supposed to be against the tories being unable to work together to remove the tories in 2024. A new govt in 2024 is the most important thing, imo.
 
Is it opportunistic to remind people of your party's support for strikes and unions, when the party that was founded on the trade union movement has apparently abandoned them, though?
Almost by definition, yes. Also, hers is a party that went into coalition, locally to me, with the Lib 'no more broken promises era' Dems as they were about to go into coalition with the Tories. In Ireland with Fianna Fail, for God's sake,- saving their bacon in a no confidence vote in the Dail. They have opportunism written right through them as a political party.
 
I don't get it either. The affiliated unions must be wondering why they're contributing millions to the party.

The Labour Party was formed out of the trade union movement to give working people their own political voice. The link from the workplace to the party through the affiliated trade unions is what makes it unique to this day. This link is more important than ever as we work together to tackle the urgent problems we face as a country, from stagnating wages to failing public services.

https://labour.org.uk/people/unions/

This is The Genetic Fallacy - you’re confusing what they were, their origins, with what they have become, what they are now.

If the Labour Party is moving to the space formerly occupied by The Conservatives, then it’s a good idea for them to disassociate themselves from strikes. They will be the party of paternalistic capitalism.
 
Yup, more opportunism. Her position during the Brighton refuse collection strike was a bit more 'nuanced'.

Caroline Lucas says she has spoken with representatives of Brighton and Hove City Council (BHCC) to encourage dialogue in an attempt to break the negotiations deadlock. The Green Party MP for Brighton Pavilion said she has also been contacted by numerous constituents about the strike but explained she does not have a say in council matters.

“I think it is right and fair for a pay review to take place to ensure that Cityclean drivers are properly renumerated, and from what I've been told I believe that BHCC are open to this ... It’s promising that the council has made two pay offers so far and it is right they should continue to listen the GMB if there are remaining concerns – I hope both sides will keep talking,” she said.


https://www.theargus.co.uk/news/19643829.caroline-lucas-speaks-brighton-bin-strike/

Rather more reasonable than the unnamed Conservative councillor who apparently referred to GMB as 'terrorists'!

https://tribunemag.co.uk/2021/10/how-the-brighton-bin-strike-won
 


advertisement


Back
Top