Laugh by all means but it's bad for all of us. The link below's to the Economist, front page 'Britain's one party state', the url gives a flavour as to content...
Me and Hora running on a joint ticket would have more chance of getting elected
Please do, I'm guessing your primary policies will be
1) free pasties and pies for all
2) The option to return all frames and forks back to the supplier for an unlimited time after purchase and in any condition.
I'd vote for that 😉
Dicky if standing MPs are deselected I would wager quite a few would stand as Independents
@john agreed, this situation isn't good for democracy. Labour in England might start to resemble Labour in Scotland where it's a lost cause
if plp or other members don't like it they can go jump ship and swim with the lib dems
Spoken like a proper cuckoo - take over the nest and kick to others out!
Corbynistas don't want actually to win as winning meams being in power and that's elitist / bourgeoise.
FFS do you actually believe this bollox? Yes, there are lefty nutters out there, just like there are RW nutters. They are tiny in number and largely irrelevant. Saying all 'Corbynistas' don't want to win because it's bourgeoise is about as valid as saying all tory voters want to bring back slavery, workhouses and child labour. I know you find it very entertaining to patronisingly rant about lefty utopians, and it might make you feel comfortable in your 'realist' comfort blanket, but don't believe for a second that it's true. It's almost like you're revelling in your own ignorance.
Spot on dazh 'revelling in his own ignorance'. Perfect.
As for not having an opposition- bolx. An opposition to me means an opposing view which is what we have now. When did we last have it? Charles Kennedy?
Of all the bad decisions made in the last 20 years how many were opposed by the opposition?
An opposition to means an opposing view which is what we have now.
That's very true, but it's not meant to be within the one party.
An opposition to me means an opposing view which is what we have now.
An opposing view sure, but not just that. Also where relevant putting forward alternative plans. Communicating that opposing view. Scrutinising policy and challenging the government, not just in PMQs but also via PQs, in parliamentary debates, and crucially in committee to amend legislation. It means doing this across the two houses, and across all areas of policy including Brexit, health, social care, local authorities, regions, defence, transport, pensions, the economy, foreign affairs, farming, food, drugs, energy etcetera etcetera et bleedin cetera,
It means doing this in a coordinated way, so that one bit of policy for food say, doesn't contradict another for health, with collective agreement across the opposition.
It also means dealing with the key organisations outside government responsible for all the above, and lobby groups etc.
And it means communicating all this to the public in a coordinated way, and also responding the the public of course.
This is a highly complex task requiring significant organisation and leadership, and some discipline on the part of the opposition.
It's not just disagreeing with whatever May says.
A starting point would be to form a Shadow Cabinet - blimey if you cant sort that out (even with 8 hour meetings) do you deserve any form of executive power?
@5th yep that only happens in the Labour Party.
@johnx2 yep the PLP need to pull their socks up! Maybe if the big hitters didn't throw their toys out of the pram when he was elected first time they could have carried on the fantastic job they were all doing in their respective departments.
This is a highly complex task requiring significant organisation and leadership, and some discipline on the part of the opposition.
When've we had that in recent years?
Seems like the whole of UK politics has a competency issue since.. well.. Blair really. Think what you like about the war, but he knew how to play the game.
Hang on a minute.....
So it's not just railing against absolutely *ing everything then? You have to actually offer alternatives? Suggestions? Ideas? That are costed? And stand up to scrutiny?
* that! I'm off to make some placards, everyone loves a good slogan on a placard. They'll all vote for that. The next election is in the bag
[img] 
[/img]
In an attempt at sensible discussion....
So it's not just railing against absolutely ****ing everything then?
But isn't that what everyone keeps saying? All this talk of 'effective opposition' etc implies 'opposing'. Only a few posts ago johnx2 says..
It means doing this across the two houses, and across all areas of policy including Brexit, health, social care, local authorities, regions, defence, transport, pensions, the economy, foreign affairs, farming, food, drugs, energy etcetera etcetera et bleedin cetera,
So it it 'railing' or 'opposing'? Should they be agreeing with the tories instead (they tried that recently BTW, and it didn't quite work our)? I'm confused.
You have to actually offer alternatives? Suggestions? Ideas?
Come on, they've been overflowing with ideas and alternatives. Universal basic income, re-nationalising the railways, National Education Service, people's quantitative easing, abolition of tuition fees, etc. I'm not saying these are good ideas, but they are still ideas and suggestions, so to claim otherwise is daft.
That are costed? And stand up to scrutiny?
When has a first year opposition of any party ever been required to produce detailed costed policy proposals 4 years in advance of the next election? Are we suddenly changing the rules because labour MPs don't like their leader?
Honestly, I have a fair amount of stamina for talking about this stuff but even I'm becoming a bit jaded with the irrationality on display on this thread. Has anyone actually got anything to say that is actually based on reality? (stupid question I know, we're about 240 pages past that 🙂 )
@5th yep that only happens in the Labour Party.
I don't think we've seen anything on this scale before.
Not strictly true I guess, it's only 40 or so at odds with the rest, but they're the ones on the side of the leader.
It's unprecedented anyway.
ninfan - MemberSo are you saying that The £3 I spent last year was wasted?
Not wasted. Obviously it had no effect whatsover on the outcome, so some [s]practically everyone [/s]would consider that a waste. But don't forget, it also meant you gave a cash donation to a political party that you apparently hate, how could that be a waste?
And it wont be used by Militant so you are ok.....
[quote=teamhurtmore ]And it wont be used by Militant so you are ok.....
<taps nose>
....and winks back
Have we done the 1-hour Ken Loach documentary yet?
Just about to sit down and watch:
Edit: 5mins in and it's not what I expected at all. I thought it was going to be Ken Loach talking with JC 🙁
Alex. Thanks for that, tried to find it the other day withoit success.
Ironic Corbyn is calling for unity tonight, he has spend his whole career opposing and voting against the Labour leadership. Now he's understanding what it really means.
An hour of Ken Loach with added Corbyn?
[img] 
[/img]
Ironic Corbyn is calling for unity tonight, he has spend his whole career opposing and voting against the Labour leadership. Now he's understanding what it really means.
Anything new? We're a whole year into this and this has just occurred to you? What next? I suppose you're going to point out that he's also an IRA sympathiser? Or the fact he has a beard? Did you know he's also quite old, hasn't got the best dress sense, and once had an alleged liaison with Diane Abbot? I look forward to hearing all this again come saturday. Here's to another 300 pages 🙂
JC's pose in AlexSimon's video swung it for me. Makes him look all gangster-like.
A proper thinkerer.
@dazh JC brought it up again, unity that is. He seems not to realise how ridiculous it makes him sound. Another classic example of him "do as I say not as I do"
[url= http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-miliband-savages-jeremy-corbyn-and-his-own-brother-too-a7321531.html ]The Prince Over The Water makes his move.[/url]
The article referenced above, David Milliband in New Statesman. To be honest it says nothing new which wasn't said during the leadership campaign a year ago. You can achieve nothing if you are not a credible or trustworthy government in waiting, Labour has lurched backwards and further away from power while discrediting it's own 13 years in government
[url= http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2016/09/new-times-david-miliband-why-left-needs-move-forward-not-back ]The Left needs to move forward not back[/url]
Could that article not be summed up by the sentence "I told you this would happen, you muppets?"
I'm inclined to the opposite view, I'm finding this whole media attempt to discredit Corbyn is having precisely the opposite effect.
Folk are not stupid, even though we're being treated as a moronic market place fed constant drivel by this and that PR entity by a media that is convinced it should decide who governs.
That Channel 4 Dispatches programme I happened to watch was a prime example and has had a considerable back lash, even from Tory MP's like [url= http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/dispatches-momentum-jeremy-corbyn-zac-goldsmith-channel-4-twitter-criticism-tweets-a7317686.html ]Zak Goldsmith[/url]
The Working poor have been starved of representation here for years, whatever anyone says, New labour was Tory Lite and the rise of UKIP was the result, it was a mistake thinking UKIP was purely right wing, it might have been in some regions but in others it stood in for Labour.
The Brexit vote was precisely because so many of us have become disenfranchised, I think if Corbyn successfully pulls them together, they could become more than just a protest vote, lots of kids love what he's saying.
Could that article not be summed up by the sentence "I told you this would happen, you muppets?"
Yes. However during the leadership election last year Corbynistas made it clear they didn't care.
Folk are not stupid
There's a few hundred thousand that disprove your theory.
The Working poor have been starved of representation here for years, whatever anyone says
So the introduction of the minimum wage, tax credits, massive investment in decaying neglected infrastructure in Labour constituencies, SureStart etc, etc, etc was an assault by Tory-Lite Nu Labour on the working poor?
I'm afraid that thats just yet another example of the selective memory of most Corbyn supporters who only ever want to talk about Iraq, and won't give the Blair government any credit for anything. Which is just juvenile. People on this thread have stated that having a Tory government for the Blair years would have been no different to Nu Labour. Which is frankly one of the most stupid assessments I've ever heard.
The Labour party has lost support in its 'heartlands' for one reason only. Its complete refusal to even engage with the genuine concerns of their core vote about immigration. The Gordon Brown 'bigotted woman' comment being the perfect example of the disconnect. The irony is that the uber-PC Corbyn is even less likely to address this issue than any of his predecessors. So if they think that their present policies will win back that lost support thats gone to UKIP, in places like Middleton, they're in for a pretty harsh reality check.
I think if Corbyn successfully pulls them together, they could become more than just a protest vote, lots of kids love what he's saying.
Filling a room with a few thousand sixth formers, waving placards, isn't going to win you a general election.
Binners I won't I agree with you or that will discredit your Labour credentials, which is exactly the problem the party faces. Anyone who disagrees with Corbyn is a [insert today's term of abuse]
Folk are not stupidThere's a few hundred thousand that disprove your theory.
Damn, beat me to it.
I'm inclined to the opposite view, I'm finding this whole media attempt to discredit Corbyn is having precisely the opposite effect.
Indeed, they should leave him alone - he and Militant dont need help in that regard
lots of kids love what he's saying.
But its adults who vote and they dont -if the polls are to be believed - his colleagues aren't too keen either.
So if they think that their present policies will win back that lost support thats gone to UKIP, in places like Middleton, they're in for a pretty harsh reality check.
We've been here before. Are you saying that labour's only chance of power is to pander to racists? If so then that really isn't worth winning power for and the Corbyn supporters are dead right.
binners - Member
Which is just juvenile
ROFL
The Labour party has lost support in its 'heartlands' for one reason only. Its complete refusal to even engage with the genuine concerns of their core vote about immigration. The Gordon Brown 'bigotted woman' comment being the perfect example of the disconnect.
What would you have Labour's policy be? Now or in the past? Corbyn would have done a better job than Brown or Milliband.
Anyone know what that 'bigotted woman' actually said BTW?
pander to racists
And there's the problem.
Being interested in/concerned about immigration doesn't mean someone is racist. Or bigoted.
Just dismissing the whole issue as "WAYCISTS! EVIL WAYCISTS EVERYWHERE!" really doesn't help.
We've been here before. Are you saying that labour's only chance of power is to pander to racists? If so then that really isn't worth winning power for and the Corbyn supporters are dead right.
You see, you've just done exactly what the labour party has been doing for years.
Being sceptical about the benefits of immigration does not make you a racist. You've just assumed that anyone who's opinion is different to yours is one. They're not. There are genuine issues here. Dismissively labelling everyone who has concerns about mass immigration as racists simply drives them to UKIP. Having casually had that toxic accusation levelled at them, they're hardly then going to vote for you, are they?
If you believe that immigration is a net benefit, then you have to say that. Make your case, and persuade a sceptical electorate that isn't necessarily seeing or feeling any of those benefits. (competition for scarce jobs, rather than a cheaper Polish builder to put in your new conservatory) Labour has always point blank refused to do this, and adopts your tone instead, to shut down debate. Think thats a vote winner? Just dismissing peoples genuine concerns as mere bigotry, from a lofty PC position?
Ed Millibands official policy on this issue when it was brought up on the doorstep was to 'move the conversation on'. To convince people of your policies you actually have to have a conversation in the first place. What message does it send to a public with a ultra-low opinion of politicians when you refuse to even talk about a policy you support? The implication being that if you have concerns with it, thats because you're bigotted/stupid?
Corbyn is even less likely to engage with this issue, as he showed with his disappearance during the EU referendum.
& binners what would you have Labour do?
Which of you is it?
I would have them vocalise the reasons for their support of their policy. As I would with any other policy they advocate. Immigrants are net contributors to the economy. All the stats back that. Not to mention the contribution they make culturally. We have an ageing population that we need mass migration to support.
You see, I've just said that. Why won't anyone in the Labour party? What does it look like when you refuse to even discuss it? It looks like you won't justify it because you can't. Where this simply isn't the case.
Its not hard to make a case for immigration, should you want too. You just have to want too. And that takes more than shouting RACIST! at anyone who questions it. Which has been the Labour parties approach so far
Great I'm glad you support Corbyn on at least that policy.
Alex thanks for link but,not Ken Loach's best work. Sfruggled through 30 mins. Only 11,000 views
Panorama
Dispatches
Whilst you are pretty much on the money Binners, I can't see either Blair the return, or Chuck Umuna charismatically explaining the joys of immigration to certain regions, the place is just too crowded these days and like it or not but not enough English is being spoken in some of these areas.
I tend to agree with you on the need for immigration being part of that huge baby boomer generation that is going to need its health care and pensions funded, but it needed to be more controlled and valued. Immigrants should know the language or learn as soon as possible, at the upper end of the demographic, I'm talking city boys here of which my entire acquired family in law are immigrant workers from various origins, they talk the talk and work the work, but down at the other end of the spectrum, the gang workers often on £2 per hour picking mussells or whatever have not been controlled and as to the black market of casual in the building trade, I'll leave that to your imagination.
So, that's what we have, what can be done about it?
Can you see the Torys acting in the interest of the bottom end of the market?
I can't.
Being sceptical about the benefits of immigration does not make you a racist.
Totally agree. But coming from a town which has an out-and-proud branch of the national front, and knowing what I know about places like Middleton, Rochdale, and villages up in Newcastle where I grew up, I can categorically say that a lot of the interest in immigration from those places is driven by racism. The interesting bit is that fact that this racism is mostly borne of ignorance and desperation, rather than an actual hatred of people based on skin colour or origin. That's what the labour party should be tackling, but you can't do that if you attempt to meet it halfway.
If you believe that immigration is a net benefit, then you have to say that. Make your case, and persuade a sceptical electorate that isn't necessarily seeing or feeling any of those benefits.
Isn't that what the Corbyn policy is?