The captain - again a huge misrepresentation of what he said. He said he did not believe that it should be on the ballot paper but it was up to conference and parliament to decide
Democrats you see. Not technocrats
The key sentence of the final draft says: “If we cannot get a general election Labour must support all options remaining on the table, including campaigning for a public vote.”
He said it would be a vote on the deal and they would be "respecting the referendum result". You know as well as I do what that means.
Are you writing for the mail there??
They know their position is at odds with the membership, in the same way as allowing Members to deselect them is democratic then accepting that you represent the members not yourself is democratic.
😀
Thecaptain - still total misrepresentation.
Thats his opinion. However he says its up to conference and parliament to decide the wording.
You see he is a democrat. He has his opinions, he will voice them but he will be bound by democratic processes.
So he is NOT saying staying in WILL not be on the ballot, He BELIEVES it should not be but that decision is one to be made in a democratic style
stop swallowing anti Corbyn / anti labour propaganda. Look to what is actually said
Conference motions are fudged to prevent the members forming Brexit policy.
MPs face three line whips to prevent them forming Brexit policy.
Listen to the actual words of the Labour leadership. See how their people act at conference and in parliament.
It is not anti Labour propaganda @tjagain.
I have done and its quite clear and is as I put it above
Unlike Blairs labour or other parties Labour leaders cannot dictate to their membership. Its a democratic party.
Just rolling back a few days to the “it’s not our new immigration policy honest gov” report that set out the new immigration policy.
It really is the last nail in the coffin of social mobility. If one can import highly skilled workers (that someone else paid to train) but you can’t import low skill workers, then the logical thing for companies to do is try not to let those low skilled (indigenous) workers climb into higher skill higher pay jobs. Not only will it be cheaper to import skilled staff, there is also a disincentive to reducing your stock of low skill workers.
Probably ok if you come from a middle class family, get the right grades, go to the right uni doing the right course, and start from day one as s highly skilled worker, but don’t make any mistakes along the way.
Back to the days before university expansion post war - skilled, affluent workers, not particularly allied to any country.
People (particularly poorer, less skilled people) are eventually going to see it as privileged foreigners taking all their aspirations away. Wait for the nationalism that releases.
Labour leaders cannot dictate to their membership. Its a democratic party.
The members want a referendum that includes Remain.
They will not get it with the current Leadership.
Just keep repeating "democratic" if you want.
Kelvin - but that is clearly not what O donnel has said
As an example - guardian headlines:
McDonnell: new Brexit referendum should not include remain option</h1>
Shadow chancellor says he would back second referendum but only if it is a ‘vote on the deal itself’
What he actually said
But he argued that while it was up to parliament to decide the question, he believed it should be just “a vote on the deal itself”.
And the composite motion?
“If we cannot get a general election Labour must support all options remaining on the table, including campaigning for a public vote.”
Now that is not what McDonnel wanted - but as a democrat he is bound by that
See the difference? McDonnel and Corbyn are not able to dictate policy. They are democrats and will be bound by conference
Should we all email out labour candidates and say we will vote for them if the party goes pro Eu?
Already contacted mine Zippy. And I voted for him (my Labour candidate) at the last election, despite the leadership's position on Brexit at the time, because I thought it might change as things progressed. Others still think that it might. It seems clear to me now that it will not.
<div class="bbp-reply-content">
Should we all email out labour candidates and say we will vote for them if the party goes pro Eu?
</div>
I actually spoke to ours, she was canvassing at the last local elections
All she could say was that Labour would mittigate the effects of Brexit
All I could say was that in that case I couldnt vote for them
i thought this was a good analysis of Labour's current position.
It tends to agree more with Kelvin than TJ but is definitely worth a read:
http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2018/09/24/labour-s-people-s-vote-stitch-up
Labour leaders cannot dictate to their membership. Its a democratic party.
A wee steer now and again would be handy! Instead of sitting on the fence, looking at his worn out hush puppies.
Corbyn has shown utter incompetence and a complete lack of backbone throughout this whole farce.
tj,
I was actually listening to him as he spoke. Intentions quite clear, no misrepresentation there.
A wee steer now and again would be handy! Instead of sitting on the fence, looking at his worn out hush puppies.
Corbyn has shown utter incompetence and a complete lack of backbone throughout this whole farce.
Exactly this. When I heard that he was going to wait to see which way the Brexit wind was blowing during the party conference to determine what to do next, I was wondering where is his leadership? I am all for listening to your party members, but there are times when he needs to take charge, which never seems to happen.
All she could say was that Labour would mittigate the effects of Brexit
Ahh so they do have the blueprints for the magical unicorn tree... knew someone had them...
[edit] smartarse forum substitution stuff [/edit] so apologies if it's bin dun - this might appeal to some
shock horror micheal o'leary was right!
I am all for listening to your party members, but there are times when he needs to take charge, which never seems to happen.
He took charge when changing the party rules didn't he?
John McDonnell has sort of clarified his second Brexit vote comments. He said: "Keir is right. We are keeping all the options on the table."Asked if that included Remain: "...we are saying respect the past referendum and I just tell you we have to be careful what we wish for."
I understand his reservations about a second referendum but I think he is wrong. The wording of the composite motion is clear. Remain is on the table.
Also missed in all this is as stated by him and others many times Labour wish to remain in the single market. Looks like they are heading for EEA status as an aim
The wording of the composite motion is clear
I'm amazed you're persisting with this, it's very deliberately not clear at all. You're projecting what you want onto it, which is exactly what it was designed to let you do.
I hope I'm wrong but after seeing how long it took Labour to sort out their policy on antisemitism,I doubt they could get themselves in a position to do something constructive about Brexit before the deadline.
johnners - no I am not. Its clear in its aims and limitations. The party cannot be tied to a single tightly defined position at this point but a needed they need to have a direction to head in and this provides it.
You need to read a fair amount to get thru the obvious bias in the reporting and look at what the players are actually saying.
Edit - remeber they have to keep a badly divided party from breaking out into civil war. You have the full range - from Hoey who wants a hard leave to ardent pro europeans who want the UK to regain its central place in the EU
They also have to protect against being labelled as "ignoring the will of the people" and I understand the reservations about another referendum ( shared by the SNP) even tho I think it wrong
The panic is obvious in the Tory Party, all sides of the conservatives are backed into a corner regardless of which side of the Brexit fence they sit on.
May has already folded (a busted flush maybe) the collective Tory view has been that the EU in some shape or form would "adjust" the four freedoms.....
The Tory mistake has been that they believe that they are the only political organisation that has dogma.
The EU risk of compromise on the four freedoms far outweighs the loss of the UK, they have stuck to their position from day one.
So all that remains (no pun intended) is the March outcome, there is really only one option left to all the Tories- Hard Brexit.
So what do us mere mortals do.... dig for victory, share bath water, max out the plastic? Looks like we are going to see.
The jobs ****ed, this is kharma on a national scale maybe global. Time to sit on the porch with a shotgun and a cigar. At least it will be interesting.
“The meeting was very careful not to define the question, because we don’t know if we’re dealing with a deal or no deal – but equally, it was not ruling anything out, and the words ‘on the deal’ were removed, to emphasise the openness of that question,” he said. ( Starmer)
“Certainly, there was no ruling out of anything, and no ruling out of remain as an option. That was clearly the mood of the room, and in fact that’s reflected in the motion.”
McDonnell later sought to clarify his remarks, saying: “Keir is right. We are keeping all the options on the table.” But he has repeatedly stressed the risks of a new vote, saying it could embolden the far right.
So thats pretty clear to me.
1:we want an election
2: If we don't get one we want a second referendum and nothing is ruled in or out for that vote.
3) McDonnell has reservations about a referendum for a variety of reasons. Thats his personal view not party policy.
They cannot say what that vote will be exactly because they don't know when it will be and what the state of the negotiations will be at that point.
The panic is obvious in the Tory Party
That's how we got here in the first place.
tj your idea of clarity is a woolly piece of obfuscation which is trying to be all things to all men while committing to nothing. It is a good example of a composite motion but clear it is certainly not nor was it ever intended to be.
1 We might do a thing, sometime,
2 F*** knows what it might be, We don't. And we're not saying what it might be under any particular circumstance.
3 We're solidly behind "honouring" the result of the referendum but won't say what that means.
It calls to mind "An undertaking of great advantage and no one to know what it is"
I expect you'll continue claiming it's clear but that won't make it so and neither will accusing everyone who's arrived at a different conclusion to you of being a ****less dupe to "obvious bias in the reporting".
FFS We were planning a road/ferry trip to southern Spain next year so we could take the mutt... Now he might never meet his grandad..
Pet passports will ceace to exist requiring more time, cost and administration if you want to take a pet out of the country.
Thanks for that brexiters. >:(
johnners - what would you have them do instead? Specifics please.
they are already under attack from the tories and the tory press as antidemocratic ignoring the will of the people.
So what would you have them do?
Even shifting this far has got the attack dogs out - and remember the party is split badly
The Conservatives seized on Labour’s potential support for a people’s vote, with the prime minister tweeting that the party wanted to “take Britain back to square one – betraying all those who voted in the 2016 EU referendum”.
and I bet that is seized on in the tory press tomorrow.
So please - I really would like to know what you would have them do?
So what would you have them do?
I appreciate labour making it policy that remain is still on the table would destroy them politically.
But if I vote Labour, what am I supposed to do, trust to hope that they might keep the option open with no guarantee?
That's not enough to persuade me to vote Labour tactically instead of Liberal Democrats in good faith. It might be a wasted vote but it's the only vote I can cast in good conscience.
betraying all those who voted in the 2016 EU referendum”.
No, about half of them.
I really would like to know what you would have them do?
I would have them set out a policy, complete with some details as to how it would be implemented, and damn the press. That's what serious political parties do. They hope there will be a GE soon - but are not willing, even at this point - to lay out their stall for scrutiny. **** them. **** them all.
I’m always amazed that the Corbyn fan-boys can’t see the glaringly obvious. He wants Brexit just as much as Rees Mogg and IDS.
He’s supposedly about ‘democratising the party’ until the pesky members disagree with him
Then.... not so keen
If it’d been left to that half-wit he’d have had article 50 triggered the day after the referendum and he’d have galloped off an economic cliff by now in search of some mythical socialist utopia.
i don’t think his attitude has changed one single bit since then. There’s no way on earth he’ll instigate anything that might imperil his precious Brexit, whatever the hell ‘the membership’ decide.
And if you think any different then you’re hopelessly naive.
When what’s looking like a terrifyingly inevitable hard Brexit arrives, he’ll go down in history as the labour leader who helped facilitate turning this country into a far-right neoliberal sweatshop tax-haven by his sheer stupidity, pig-headedness and rank incompetence
Hes as bad as any of the hardline lunatics on the benches opposite him because he’s spent the last two and a half years being their useful idiot
+1 to that
so no one actually has any specifics of what they think labour should do. Its easy to criticise, its very difficult to be constructive
I really cannot think of anywhere else they can go on this. BTW scotroutes - you know sturgeon is reluctant to have a second referendum on brexit - for somewhat similar reasons to those McDonnel has stated.
I really would like some of you that criticise labour for this to actually propose something concrete they could do
Binners - why do you say that when everything Corbyn has said opposes that.
He’s supposedly about ‘democratising the party’ until the pesky members disagree with him
Then…. not so keen
That is just utter nonsense. He has already made changes that reduce the leaders power and has said he will be bound by conference. He has already had decisions taken at conference that he will be bound by that he argued against.
I appreciate labour making it policy that remain is still on the table would destroy them politically.
they have already made it clear remain is on the table.
they have already made it clear remain is on the table.
No, labour have not, they are still ambiguous.
They have simply alluded that they might think about it.
That's not good enough.
What should Corbyn have done?
He should have strongly supported a Remain vote 3 years ago and done all he could to have secured that result as a strong leader.
He sluggishly said that Labour would campaign for remain, which meant his party were keen but he wasn't. As he is a keen Brexiter he now has absolutely no authority in my eyes to attempt to undermine the shambles on the benches opposite. His MP's should be rightly furious. He is as much a Lame duck as May.
Regardless of the protagonists views, in terms of Labour's chances of winning elections, they picked the wrong Milliband and should have selected Burnham over Corbyn.
Apologies if this has already been done before but 2 days ago on his 'Leave Means Leave' Facebook profile, Farage asked the following:
"IF THE UK WERE TO DECIDE TO HOLD A SECOND REFERENDUM ON OUR MEMBERSHIP OF THE EU. HOW WOULD YOU VOTE NOW KNOWING WHAT YOU KNOW?"
After 530,600 votes the results stand at 37% to leave, 63% to remain.
And of course, the comments underneath feature Brexshiteers going apoplectic with rage! The oh so delicious irony...