The Labour Party - Part 2

[hackey lad 3,980]

2 minutes ago, Ridgewalk said:

The Labour conference is the decision and policy making institution within the party. Corbyn  who was always Euro skeptic had no choice but to go along with Party decisions. It was Starmer who led the call for a second referendum along with the majority of anti Corbyn MPs, some of whom called for the public to vote Tory such was their antipathy towards him.  
 

On the doorstep at the last election people in my constituency abandoned Labour for the Brexit Party.

 

No wonder Starmer is not liked, he's also hapless and hopeless. He needs to go.

Who would you like to replace him with?

[Ridgewalk 101]

3 minutes ago, hackey lad said:

Who would you like to replace him with?

That's the question. Andy Burnham possibly. Personally I liked Corbyn but due to recent history and his inability to face down his enemies he's a busted flush.

 

Starmer hasn't a clue. He and his backers have to stop blaming Corbyn at some point and face up to reality 

Edited June 21, 2021 by Ridgewalk
...

[hackey lad 3,980]

4 minutes ago, Ridgewalk said:

That's the question. Andy Burnham possibly. Personally I liked Corbyn but due to recent history and his inability to face down his enemies he's a busted flush.

 

Starmer hasn't a clue. He and his backers have to stop blaming Corbyn at some point and face up to reality 

Think it would be out of the frying pan and into the fire with Burnham (no pun intended ).

[Mister Gee 823]

16 minutes ago, hackey lad said:

Soz , try Maguire and while your here accusing people of being trolls , have a look at your past half a dozen or so  posts.

I’ll not have any lectures from you on that matter thank you very much, what with you being released early due to an amnesty after doing a stretch of cyber porridge.

[hackey lad 3,980]

2 minutes ago, Mister Gee said:

I’ll not have any lectures from you on that matter thank you very much, what with you being released early due to an amnesty after doing a stretch of cyber porridge.

I have often thought about who got me sent down . I have my suspicions 

[El Cid 220]

2 hours ago, West 77 said:

I agree with you regarding Starmer.  He was just as much to blame for the 2019 general election defeat as Corbyn,  There is no doubt Starmer is a more credible leader and  better candidate for Prime Minister than Corbyn but it does seem ludicrous that the person responsible for the Labour party's anti- Brexit policy that lost them the support of working people  at the last general election is now leading them.

I thought it was the members or the leader that set policies, was Corbyn so weak that other cabinet members set policies?

What other cabinet members set policies?

[tinfoilhat 11]

1 hour ago, West 77 said:

I'm not sure how the Labour party choose policies but understand they have some kind of committees who decide them.  At their conference they seem to have lots of votes to decide things. What I do know is the Labour  party leader doesn't have the same powers as the Tory party leader. I've always thought it was madness that the Labour party membership choose who their deputy leader is rather than the Labour party leader.  I've know idea how the Labour party would get on if they ever won a general election when decisions have to be made quickly. It most certainly wouldn't be good to wait for conference to decide decisions which need to be made quickly in order to govern a sovereign nation. 

Tony Blair managed alright.

 

But, quite frighteningly, I do sort of agree. Labour over a past few leaders l, has been a horrible composition of every members thoughts and dreams crammed into whichever face is in charge. Kier starmer needs to bin off the doubters and make a case for what he wants to do and be judged on that.

[El Cid 220]

1 hour ago, tinfoilhat said:

But, quite frighteningly, I do sort of agree. Labour over a past few leaders l, has been a horrible composition of every members thoughts and dreams crammed into whichever face is in charge. Kier starmer needs to bin off the doubters and make a case for what he wants to do and be judged on that.

Starmer was elected leader by promising to get more public ownership into the public sector. That is holding him back, as those promises should be long term aims.

 

https://keirstarmer.com/plans/10-pledges/

[banjodeano 31]

7 minutes ago, El Cid said:

Starmer was elected leader by promising to get more public ownership into the public sector. That is holding him back, as those promises should be long term aims.

 

https://keirstarmer.com/plans/10-pledges/

Number 10...forensic opposition to the tories..hahaha..then i think there was something  about building on the mass membership....Well, that's going well,

[apelike 10]

1 hour ago, El Cid said:

Starmer was elected leader by promising to get more public ownership into the public sector. That is holding him back, as those promises should be long term aims.

 

https://keirstarmer.com/plans/10-pledges/

But will he bring back clause IV which was abandoned by Tony blair as leader and wanted back in place by Corbyn and other hard left Labourites.

 

As the link states "Based on the moral case for socialism, here is where I stand" and if that is so then clause IV will need reinstating as socialism in the UK cannot be proper socialism without that. Can't see any mention of it however.

[El Cid 220]

4 hours ago, apelike said:

But will he bring back clause IV which was abandoned by Tony blair as leader and wanted back in place by Corbyn and other hard left Labourites.

Blair didnt abandon clause 4, he just rewrote it.

 

"The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few, where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe, and where we live together, freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect."

[apelike 10]

13 minutes ago, El Cid said:

Blair didnt abandon clause 4, he just rewrote it.

 

"The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few, where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe, and where we live together, freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect."

Yep he rewrote it alright and abandoned what it originally it stood for. That was also the reason why Corbyn wanted it restoring to its original form.

 

As the wiki page puts it:

 

"Presentationally, the abandonment of the socialist principles of the original Clause IV represented a break with Labour's past and, specifically, a break with its 1983 Manifesto (dubbed "the longest suicide note in history", by Gerald Kaufman, one of the party's MPs), in which greater state ownership was proposed.