The Labour Party. All discussion here please

[I1L2T3 10]

He needs to address it though. Especially the being friendly with Hamas and Hezbollah bit. It's weird, if he came out strongly against immigration he'd be a shoe-in to win. It has never made any sense for Labour to be pro-immigration and it's something that would serve as a clear "crossing the Rubicon" moment to differentiate the party now from "New Labour".

 

Interesting they've got straight for the jugular though but I don't think the Torys can make much of this stick.

 

Corbyn is obviously not the devil incarnate.

 

The problem is he isn't going to be scared to ask a whole load of very awkward questions. Tories want to snuff that out ASAP. They don't want Corbyn around any longer than Blair and Mandelson do.

 

---------- Post added 12-09-2015 at 22:38 ----------

 

What do other posters think about Corbyn's plans to

 

1. Apologise for Iraq war

 

2. Refer Tony Blair to the International Criminal Court at the Hague to stand trial for war cimes

[Guest sibon]

Interesting they've got straight for the jugular though but I don't think the Torys can make much of this stick.

 

Corbyn is obviously not the devil incarnate.

 

The problem is he isn't going to be scared to ask a whole load of very awkward questions. Tories want to snuff that out ASAP. They don't want Corbyn around any longer than Blair and Mandelson do.

 

---------- Post added 12-09-2015 at 22:38 ----------

 

What do other posters think about Corbyn's plans to

 

1. Apologise for Iraq war

 

2. Refer Tony Blair to the International Criminal Court at the Hague to stand trial for war cimes

 

I think that once he has done both of those things, I will rejoin the Labour Party.

 

So will many others. Let's see whether the Tories are still cheering in twelve months.

[Anna B 1,414]

Trouble is can he fight back without resorting to the same dirty tricks? And will he get the necessary media coverage to get his real points across?

 

A number of ordinary people on TV when interviewed have been parroting - 'he will make Labour unelectable.' How many of them actually know what he really stands for, rather than simply regurgitating what they've heard said of him without any attempt to find out for themselves?

 

Same with the Hamas and Hezbollah bit. He thinks talking with them is the only way to solve problems and differences, that doesn't mean he agrees with them and their views.

 

Do we really want to go back to Thatcher's method of dealing with the Irish problem, of seeing their faces on TV, but not allowing their voices to be heard, or even more ridiculously, voiced by actors? I seem to remember that did nothing to solve the Irish problem, and they continued right up until Tony Blair signed the Good Friday agreement.

 

---------- Post added 12-09-2015 at 23:27 ----------

 

Just got an email from the Tories with this.

 

Yes I'd say they're seriously rattled if they can't do better than this. They obviously haven't realised yet that the game has suddenly changed.

[drummonds 10]

What do people think about senior Labour figures resigning from front bench politics?

 

IMO it is pretty disgusting and self-serving. They have been elected as MPs for a party that they knew would form the official opposition. They knew before the election they were regarded as senior figures in the party and integral to providing opposition from the front benches.

 

By playing a role in providing a strong opposition they do the rest of the country a service in holding the government to account but some of the people best able to do so have walked away. they have effectively gone on a work to rule.

 

IMO they should be considered for deselection by their constituency parties.

 

i would assume that they stood as mps on the labour manifesto presented to the electorate in may. it seems the new leader intends to tear up that manifesto. so i suppose a lot of labour mps don't want to be backing policies they did not endorse.

[Guest sibon]

i would assume that they stood as mps on the labour manifesto presented to the electorate in may. it seems the new leader intends to tear up that manifesto. so i suppose a lot of labour mps don't want to be backing policies they did not endorse.

 

The Lib Dems and Tories didn't resign en masse from the coalition government. That was despite a total ripping up of two manifestoes.

 

It follows that either, Labour MPs are more principled, or that the right wing of the Labour Party is out to cause trouble.

[ormester101 10]

What do people think about senior Labour figures resigning from front bench politics?

 

IMO it is pretty disgusting and self-serving. They have been elected as MPs for a party that they knew would form the official opposition. They knew before the election they were regarded as senior figures in the party and integral to providing opposition from the front benches.

 

By playing a role in providing a strong opposition they do the rest of the country a service in holding the government to account but some of the people best able to do so have walked away. they have effectively gone on a work to rule.

 

IMO they should be considered for deselection by their constituency parties.

 

thats what corbyn wants and his cronies

[I1L2T3 10]

i would assume that they stood as mps on the labour manifesto presented to the electorate in may. it seems the new leader intends to tear up that manifesto. so i suppose a lot of labour mps don't want to be backing policies they did not endorse.

 

Yes fair point. But then they're going to be opposing policies that are (mostly) mainstream and attract significant amounts of public support.

 

I'm guessing what they signed up to would now be more in line with Tory policy. Perhaps they should leave Labour.

 

---------- Post added 13-09-2015 at 00:18 ----------

 

thats what corbyn wants and his cronies

 

No, I don't think he wants that for one minute.

 

Certain individuals who are damaging for the party and the country need to be taken out the picture, but not the front benchers.

[drummonds 10]

Yes fair point. But then they're going to be opposing policies that are (mostly) mainstream and attract significant amounts of public support.

 

I'm guessing what they signed up to would now be more in line with Tory policy. Perhaps they should leave Labour.

 

---------- Post added 13-09-2015 at 00:18 ----------

 

 

No, I don't think he wants that for one minute.

 

Certain individuals who are damaging for the party and the country need to be taken out the picture, but not the front benchers.

 

should they lose the labour whip then?

 

the talent was always a bit thin. it is getting thinner by the minute.

[tinfoilhat 11]

Interesting they've got straight for the jugular though but I don't think the Torys can make much of this stick.

 

Corbyn is obviously not the devil incarnate.

 

The problem is he isn't going to be scared to ask a whole load of very awkward questions. Tories want to snuff that out ASAP. They don't want Corbyn around any longer than Blair and Mandelson do.

 

---------- Post added 12-09-2015 at 22:38 ----------

 

What do other posters think about Corbyn's plans to

 

1. Apologise for Iraq war

 

2. Refer Tony Blair to the International Criminal Court at the Hague to stand trial for war cimes

 

For starters, as I understand it from the quote I read today, he said Blair "could" be charged with war crimes not "would" or "will" but I'm prepared to be corrected.

 

Just out of interest, why do we think old jezza will be truthful and do everything he proposes. It would be an absolute first in the history of politics if he did.

[Anna B 1,414]

Just got an email from the Tories with this.

 

Whereas I just got a text from Jeremy Corbyn asking me if there's any question I'd like him to ask David Cameron in next week's prime ministers question time, with a little form to fill in stating said question...

 

Slightly different approach, eh? I know which I prefer.

[paulo n 10]

Trouble is can he fight back without resorting to the same dirty tricks? And will he get the necessary media coverage to get his real points across?

 

A number of ordinary people on TV when interviewed have been parroting - 'he will make Labour unelectable.' How many of them actually know what he really stands for, rather than simply regurgitating what they've heard said of him without any attempt to find out for themselves?

 

Same with the Hamas and Hezbollah bit. He thinks talking with them is the only way to solve problems and differences, that doesn't mean he agrees with them and their views.

 

Do we really want to go back to Thatcher's method of dealing with the Irish problem, of seeing their faces on TV, but not allowing their voices to be heard, or even more ridiculously, voiced by actors? I seem to remember that did nothing to solve the Irish problem, and they continued right up until Tony Blair signed the Good Friday agreement.

 

---------- Post added 12-09-2015 at 23:27 ----------

 

 

Yes I'd say they're seriously rattled if they can't do better than this. They obviously haven't realised yet that the game has suddenly changed.

 

like chamberlain did with hitler?

[Happ Hazzard 10]

Appeasement is never the answer. Never. Terrorists need to be wiped off the face of the earth, not invited round for tea and biscuits at number 10.