Forum menu
With Corbyn, Abbot, Long-Bailey, Butler and others voting against minimal public health measures now common across the continent, at a crucial moment in this pandemic
So voted for the main bill but not for vaccine passport/compulsory vaccines for NHS staff? Not quite "voting against minimal public health measures"
Former has unclear gains especially in the UK form. If you are going to do a job do it properly or not at all.
NHS compulsory vaccination also has some substantial pros and cons
Yep once again Corbyn voted in a measured and considered way.
As above vaccine passport as proposed sounds like a complete bodge.
Mandatory vaccines for NHS staff doesn't sit right with me either.
Yep once again Corbyn voted in a measured and considered way.
He voted with the most swivel eyed hard right of the Tories
So no, not considered at all
And NHS staff already have to have Hep B vaccinations, I did, I didn't cry about it
Labour voted to help try & slow the spread of a disease that will leave millions isolating over xmas, it was the right move and its something the vast majority of the public support
https://twitter.com/SavantaComRes/status/1470372889744617474?t=cZY_1bXC8TeTs1ljvVPEFQ&s=19
So voted for the main bill but not for vaccine passport/compulsory vaccines for NHS staff?
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1470822969010184192
TBH, I get why he voted that way, It's entirely consistent with his beliefs and that's fair enough, and he is after all, an Independent MP and can vote the way his conscious dictates.
So voted for the main bill but not for vaccine passport/compulsory vaccines for NHS staff? Not quite “voting against minimal public health measures”
Sorry, but vaccinated care and health service staff, and green passes with vaccination and/or test status for entertainment venues *is* minimal public health measures at this stage of the pandemic, and common across comparable countries. We should have introduced them before the summer to be ready for this wave (upon wave).
He voted with the most swivel eyed hard right of the Tories
Even swivel eyed loons can occasionally be correct if just for the wrong reasons.
I am not really sure of the value of that poll. In case you havent noticed the general public can vote for moronic things.
Its the normal halfarsed rubbish from Johnson to try and avoid doing anything actually effective.
As for vaccination. I guess I could go and look up a poll of the general public or I could pay attention to the RCGP, RCN etc all of whom whilst strongly in favour of vaccination arent in favour of it being compulsory. Still I am sure you are better informed.
Sorry, but vaccinated care and health service staff, and green passes with vaccination and/or test status for entertainment venues *is* minimal public health measures at this stage of the pandemic
Absolutely
NHS is already overwhelmed with regular winter + covid backlog
Any MPs pandering to the conspiracy theorists right now will be looking daft if we have to impose stricter measures
We already have vax passports/-ve lft for flying, did corbyn & the hard right object to that?
I am still trying to digest a position where person/entity A is a racist, yet person/entity B who accuses them of such is at fault for any fall-out from the racism? Unless I read that wrong, and to be clear I have no idea who is all in what faction just wanted to applaud the logical gymnastics achieved there.
Any MPs pandering to the conspiracy theorists right now will be looking daft if we have to impose stricter measures
Again its not just the conspiracy theorists but as far as I am aware every medical professional body who are dubious about compulsory vaccination not least because of their concerns about staff shortages. I would tend to listen to the experts here.
Its the normal halfarsed rubbish from Johnson to try and avoid doing anything actually effective.
And if Corbyn and his far right chums won't even support that, then they're certainly not going to support anything more comprehensive are they?
Cut it whichever way you like to try and excuse it, but Dianne Abbott and Jezza are absolutely aligned with Bill Cash and co on this
but as far as I am aware every medical professional body who are dubious about compulsory vaccination
I think that while on the face of it, the public statements tend to urge no compulsion, don't think for a minute that Docs and Nurses are united on this subject, they're as divided as the rest of the population. I can see that in their role as "union" the RCN and the BMA are making sure that their members aren't forced into anything by employers passing the buck, and that's entirely what they should be doing, but whether that's the right path in the middle of a public health disaster remains to be argued over.
but whether that’s the right path in the middle of a public health disaster remains to be argued over.
of course but its just a tad more complicated than the simple minded stuff being trotted out currently. The obvious starter for ten is if you are getting all panicky about the NHS and winter then what use are compulsory vaccinations by April?
Or for these vaccine passports. Cool how are they going to work in reality and how do you stop idiots gaming them? At which point does a vaccine get counted as no longer useful without the booster. Currently it looks like security theatre rather than something which actually helps.
Currently it looks like security theatre rather than something which actually helps.
Yeah there's always that, and I agree that folks will game it, but if enough folks do take it seriously and take up vaccines so that they feel secure to go to pubs and restaurants and nightclubs, then there's a benefit to that to everyone. It's not going to be perfect, but then it doesn't have to be, it just needs to be good enough.
Are you seriously suggesting that Labour could have voted against an issue which they consider to be of vital public health importance?
Of course not. I'm suggesting they should have put pressure on the govt to bolster the public health measures by sorting out sick pay and support for the hospitality industry, which are two of the major issues which prevent people from isolating.
Your wing of the Labour party have had two stabs at it, failed once
My wing of the party? I'm not even in the party. When I was I voted for Starmer on the basis of a bunch of lies. And to correct you, 'my' wing didn't fail, they were f***** over by your wing resulting in a tory govt lead by Boris. Everything that's happening now is a direct result of people on the right of the labour party doing everything in their power to prevent a Corbyn govt. The tories didn't defeat labour, the labour right wing did.
what use are compulsory vaccinations by April?
If you know you have to have it before April to continue in your NHS position, then why not come forward and get your first jab now? It can't be compulsory immediately, you have to give people time. Yes, this should have been sorted while things were relatively quiet when we removed restrictions before the summer... but we can't keep putting it off. Late? Yes. Vote against it because it's late? Makes little sense. Vote against it because of concerns about vaccination in the last hold outs in the health service? Protest vote by someone unprepared to be involved in the hard decisions.
If you know you have to have it before April to continue in your NHS position, then why not come forward and get your first jab now?
There is a rather obvious answer to that.
So what do you see as the gains here as compared to investing in the right ppe or ensuring the hospital air systems are properly filtrate or having proper staffing levels to allow for segregation of wards effectively?
Protest vote by someone unprepared to be involved in the hard decisions.
Sounds almost Johnsonist. I am not sure I would count it as a hard decision as opposed to a simplistic one.
as compared to investing in the right ppe or ensuring the hospital air systems are properly filtrate or having proper staffing levels to allow for segregation of wards effectively?
Er... what? Why does ensuring health staff are vaccinated prevent any of those things? Why is it either or? I really don't get your point there at all.
Er… what? Why does ensuring health staff are vaccinated prevent any of those things?
Lets put it a different way. Where was Johnsons speech about getting that done? We have hard solutions to the problem or we have a simplistic solution.
There are large discrepancies between regions and engaging properly with those areas with lower uptake and understanding and talking them round would have the obvious advantage that it can then be deployed on a wider scale.
Its worth considering why the Welsh and Scottish authorities havent followed Johnsons lead?
There was a good article in PE about it which showed it was anything but the obvious win claimed by some.
a simplistic solution
What simplistic solution? We had multiple new measures being voted on yesterday, as well as many existing measures put in place over the last year, and I suspect more measures will be required before this is all done with. There is no silver bullet. Having health care staff vaccinated (and mandating that) is just one part of the response, and is already being implemented across Europe and North America.
If you know you have to have it before April to continue in your NHS position, then why not come forward and get your first jab now? It can’t be compulsory immediately, you have to give people time.
First jab deadline is Feb 3rd to meet April deadline
I’m suggesting they should have put pressure on the govt to bolster the public health measures by sorting out sick pay and support for the hospitality industry, which are two of the major issues which prevent people from isolating.
Labour have been talking that up all week, its not getting much coverage in the press, think it was in Starmers address to the nation, and several Labour MPs mentioned it on the debate.
What simplistic solution?
The one we have been discussing perhaps? Again the proper solution would be understand why and counteracting the propaganda.
There is no silver bullet.
Well spotted. Anymore great insights?
Having health care staff vaccinated (and mandating that) is just one part of the response, and is already being implemented across Europe and North America.
In parts of Europe several countries have decided against that approach.
However you win. It clearly is protest politics as opposed to a rather complex issue without an easy answer.
So are the MPs voting based on their own personal views, or those of their constituents?
Do constituents expect their MPs to make the correct decision on their behalf, or expect their MPs to reflect their constituent's thoughts.
The poll above suggests the 100 MPs that voted against / abstained are not voting in their constituent's interests.
Another wonder of English politics.
So are the MPs voting based on their own personal views, or those of their constituents?
Its a representational democracy so the former. Although once you throw parties into the mix it becomes more confusing.
The poll above suggests the 100 MPs that voted against / abstained are not voting in their constituent’s interests.
No it shows they might not be voting the same way their constituents would. That doesnt necessarily mean it would be against their interests.
Another wonder of English politics.
Or more accurately pretty much any modern democratic political system. The only real alternative of direct democracy doesnt really scale well.
So are the MPs voting based on their own personal views, or those of their constituents?
I’d say last nights commons votes are right up there with the most wildly unrepresentative of constituents views ever.
The vast majority of the population are fully behind what they view as necessary and proportionate measures. The anti-vacation mob are a very vocal but small minority. I very much doubt they scale up to 100+ MPs
What was going on last night (if we discount the usual ‘useful’ clowns like Corbyn and Abbott) was the far right wing of the Tory party stamping their feet and chucking their toys out of the collective pram because they’ve had enough of all this.
They think Boris is a socialist and they want to live in a world of small government that lets everybody get on with doing whatever the hell they like.
Well… letting a certain section of society do whatever the hell they like, at least. People who look very much like them. Rules are for little people. They’ve never had any rules or restrictions placed on them and they don’t like it. Ironically, that attitude chimes very much with Boris’s own similarly entitled view on life
In parts of Europe several countries have decided against that approach.
There are several exceptions, yes, but mandating health workers are vaccinated is one of the basic measures being taken in many countries, and we should not be one of the exceptions (and the rebels know that we won't be, so can happily make whatever point they think they're making without actually negatively effecting policy in England)...
https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1471429024597610496?t=Eldki0yYdhcxLrt7QF-E1Q&s=19
Be interesting to see what the next few polls do.
Yes there's the headline but given Starmer is trying to pull the centre. This is shambolic for Labour too.
https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1471696617950568452?t=a_pCNfm3mXO_q8iTf2BFYQ&s=19
12,495 votes down from 2019 under Corbyn.
Tactical voting you might say - well given Starmer is trying to court the right then what's the point?
This is shambolic for Labour too.
And yet allowing the LibDems to win appears to have been Starmer's deliberate tactic. My understanding is that not one single shadow cabinet member, including Starmer himself, bothered to go to North Shropshire to campaign or support their abandoned token candidate. I believe that the LibDem leader went several times.
All the national opinion polls show the LibDems at the very best on 10-11%, half of what they were receiving over ten years ago and about what they received last general election when they ended up with 11 seats, they lost their deposit in a by-election a couple of.weeks ago. So whilst this might provide them with a welcome boost there is no proof of a LibDem revival.
And I can't see how Labour can derive any satisfaction from a result which saw their vote collapse.
The real winners imo are the Thatcherite Tories..... the Tories still have a huge majority, "Corbyn-lite" Johnson is weaken even more, Labour don't appear to be a serious threat, and those suckas the LibDems can bask in the limelight in a seat that the Tories will regain in a couple of years time. Liz Truss must be feeling quite smug this morning.
This is shambolic for Labour too.
Youre echoing the official line from the government!
Lib dem candidate even thanked Labour voters for lending her their vote
Starmer will be pleased, Johnson is weakened and Starmer is brs positioned to take advantage
Also of note the greens beat refuk
This is a good day for progressive politics
Lol Labour had the second biggest vote here in 2019.
And yet this Brexitty neighbourhood chose to go with the remainers!
This is a good day for progressive politics
Austerity fueled parties getting in bed together ...
What on earth is progressive about that?
Starmer will be pleased, Johnson is weakened and Starmer is brs positioned to take advantage
So long as you dont mention the Old Bexley byelection and the failure of Labour there with the dramatic drop in votes only beaten by the even more dramatic drop in tory votes.
Here's the thing the they could've chosen to vote for Labour and then you would have cause for celebration.
This is a rejection of Labour as a centrist party, given it was previously the second largest option.
Youre echoing the official line from the government!
There are only so many narratives.
Starmer will be pleased, Johnson is weakened and Starmer is brs positioned to take advantage
By losing several thousand votes? Jeez.
That's off the scale nonsense.
My understanding is that not one single shadow cabinet member, including Starmer himself, bothered to go to North Shropshire to campaign or support their abandoned token candidate
Angela Rayner visited.
Well, as someone who wants a Labour PM as soon as possible, this is a great result. If these rural seats in the west can be switched to LibDem at the next election, then Conservatives on the opposition benches looks far more achievable.
We still have FPTP. Labour getting loads of votes in a seat only for it to return a Tory MP is of no use to anyone.
Well, as someone who wants a Labour PM as soon as possible, this is a great result
Maybe that would make sense if Labour had won this seat or increased their vote share?
We still have FPTP. Labour getting loads of votes in a seat only for it to return a Tory MP is of no use to anyone.
Exactly the same could be said about it being a Libdem seat.
Maybe that would make sense if Labour had won this seat or increased their vote share?
Not necessarily. The lib dem collapse helped the Tories get a big majority. The lib Dems doing well helped Blair get in back in the day.
KS has an approval rating of 56% - general election tomorrow? Labour would more than likely win. But they'd need seats like n Shropshire to go to lib Dems etc to do it still.
Not necessarily. The lib dem collapse helped the Tories get a big majority. The lib Dems doing well helped Blair get in back in the day.
Sure, but Labour lost votes to the Lib Dems too. I'm wary of reading too much into a single result, but it wasn't great for Labour.
well I'm happy
Sure, but Labour lost votes to the Lib Dems too. I’m wary of reading too much into a single result, but it wasn’t great for Labour.
I expect there was a lot of tactical voting, but yes Starmer will have to up his game at the next election.
That said, labour won't win by taking safe Tory seats. They need to win back the marginals and have lib Dems take a few 'safe' Tory seats
The narrative in NS has all been about the Lib Dem’s, so naturally the anti-Tory vote gravitated to them.
Lol Labour had the second biggest vote here in 2019.
The Tory candidate got 35,000 to Labour's 12,500 in 2019. That's not a contest in any normal sense of the word.
Maybe that would make sense if Labour had won this seat or increased their vote share?
Labour don't campaign in rural Tory seats, and there's little to no point in getting into a spending war with the Lib-Dems for a seat that will turn back to the Tories at the next general election in a couple of years. It's not a good return on investment. I don't think the Unions would think that was a wise way of spending their members' money.
This is a rejection of Labour as a centrist party, given it was previously the second largest option.
Given that this seat has in the last 200 years returned Tory MPs in all but 2 years. I think it's fair to say these constituents have always rejected Labour.
but it wasn’t great for Labour.
Your not going to get Tory voters to vote for labour - no matter how badly the Tory's are doing currently. It's easier to get them to the libdem middle ground.
This is a rejection of Labour as a centrist party
Someone doesn’t know Shropshire. If you want the Labour Party to position itself to win lots of seats there (and Herefordshire and Glouscestershire), it will not be the party you want it to be. If want Labour to not be “centrist”, you can forget about these seats. Leave it to others to fight the Tories there. I don’t want Labour to become a bigger LibDem party… leave them to it.
There is no way you can spin Shropshire as anything other than as Starmer led disaster for the Labour party, and hopefully a Macron moment for the Lib Dems.
Labour down to 9% and losing half its voters says they have a tiny number of core voters. Labour voters have lost faith, they've seen a national election lost that was an open goal and swapped to the Lib Dems. Over half of them are remainers yet Starmer is a Brexit apologist. Blair sticks his head up now and then and reminds voters of lies and wars. Then there are the 1974 strike committee to deal with. Labour under Starmer is irrelevant and voters have understood that.
It’s easier to get them to the libdem middle ground.
Well that screws up starmers strategy of heading rightwards and alienating the left then doesnt it? Why bother voting for him and not those guaranteed vote winners in the centre the lib dems?
However looking at the numbers for the election it doesnt really support the case for tories switching to the lib dems given the libdem vote is close to the labour vote in 2017 and the labour/libdem vote in 2019.
Seems pretty obvious to me what’s happened with labour. They’re screwed financially and couldn’t afford the campaign. Also despite protestations to the opposite I suspect back channel discussions are going on between the libdems and labour on the subject of how they might collaborate to get rid of the tories and this could be the first test of that.
At least that’s what I hope. If they’re not talking to the libdems it means they don’t have the resources or the confidence to beat the tories when they’re there for the taking, and that even they don’t think they can win the next election.
I suspect back channel discussions are going on between the libdems and labour on the subject of how they might collaborate to get rid of the tories
Here's hoping, though I think of Johnson more as a front channel.
Labour down to 9% and losing half its voters says they have a tiny number of core voters.
In this area. Yes. And lots of them got wise. Hopefully people will play FPTP more than FPTP plays them, at the next general election.
I suspect back channel discussions are going on between the libdems and labour on the subject of how they might collaborate
Beth rigby reported this was the case a few weeks ago
Your not going to get Tory voters to vote for labour – no matter how badly the Tory’s are doing currently. It’s easier to get them to the libdem middle ground.
Is the pragmatic view. Was a good result for the country,not for any party.
It won't stop the Labour Party tearing itself apart blaming different factions and giving the Tories loads of "unfit to govern" ammunition of course.
Labour don’t campaign in rural Tory seats
They did campaign at least to some extent. The result would've been easily explicable if they'd just run a paper candidate, but they sent Rayner up there last week.
As I said, it's unwise to read too much into a single result, but Labour sure as hell isn't going to regain power if the left stays at home and centrists vote Lib Dem.
With Corbyn, Abbot, Long-Bailey, Butler and others voting against minimal public health measures now common across the continent, at a crucial moment in this pandemic… labelling them as looking like they want to lead a protest group, rather than people ready to govern, looks fair right now. Depressing.
The in-bed support of the right that the rest of Labour gave the Tories earlier in the week will very much come back to bite them in the arse.
Also I can't see a progressive alliance forming in the way that is being suggested.
If there is leader like Truss I can see the Libdems getting into bed with her - if it came to that.
But to be fair so many scenarios these days. So much will happen in the next couple of years that I can't see the wood for the trees.
The in-bed support of the right that the rest of Labour gave the Tories earlier in the week will very much come back to bite them in the arse.
With another huge wave of covid about to crash on the already exhausted NHS front line staff
I'm not sure it won't be those that sided with the covid denying hard right of the Tories that look daft
I NE of my colleagues travelling back to parents today as she was called in to work last Xmas and never got to see them, and is worried its all happening again
Don't let those nasty anti-semites lie, even if they happen to be jewish and not anti-semitic.
With another huge wave of covid about to crash on the already exhausted NHS front line staff
I’m not sure it won’t be those that sided with the covid denying hard right of the Tories that look daft
You know as well as I do those measures were nowhere near enough or correctly targeted.
From the article:
Neslen is a member of Jewish Voice for Labour, which says it knows of 42 Jewish members of the Labour party, two of whom have since died, who have faced or are facing disciplinary charges relating to allegations of antisemitism. The group estimates that more than five times more Jewish than non-Jewish Labour members have faced actioned complaints of antisemitism.
Those Jewish members who are 5 times more likely to be sanctioned for antisemitism are mostly members of JVL, some of who believe that Israel is by definition; racist, and are being sanctioned because Labour has adopted the IHRA definitions. It's a pretty good tactic to keep your campaign in the spot light.
It’s a pretty good tactic to keep your campaign in the spot light.
I think they'd probably prefer not to be persecuted for their legitimate beliefs and be repeatedly accused of anti-semitism despite being practising Jews. I can only imagine how upsetting/disturbing that must be. Why are Jewish Labour members being persecuted for not being zionists? I think I know...
Those Jewish members who are 5 times more likely to be sanctioned for antisemitism are mostly members of JVL
Labour's adoption of the IHRA definition (which is controversial anyway due to the late addition of examples which mainly relate to criticising Israel) is especially problematic when Israel is a racist state, as defined by groups like HRW. 'Support a racist state or you're a racist (against your own race)'. Seems legit.
Labour’s adoption of the IHRA definition is problematic when Israel is a racist state, as defined by groups like HRW. ‘Support a racist state or you’re a racist (against your own race)’.
Shall we have a fight about Israel? Or alternatively, given its a bad situation whatever your analysis but not one on which we have more than marginal influence, we could always not?
I think they’d probably prefer not to be persecuted for their legitimate beliefs
There's a dislocation though, you can't hold those beliefs and be a Labour member. Chose the one that's more important to you really. I suspect the optics of banning a Jewish group is the only reason that JVL haven't been proscribed by Labour thus far, but it's only going to end one way.
Shall we have a fight about Israel?
I don't see why not? Theres not much else going on at the moment. And we all know that a bunfight between the various Jewish sections attached to the labour party is usually at the forefront of everyones minds
It's SKS' Labour Party who is picking the fight about Israel, not me, or even JVL.
But yes we've established that many people don't care if the Labour Party is ruthlessly silencing any criticism of an apartheid state and persecuting elderly Jews in the name of 'rooting out anti-semitism'.
There’s a dislocation though, you can’t hold those beliefs and be a Labour member.
They are protected beliefs. You can't make up a new rule for the Labour Party that proscribes protected beliefs. The idea that you now have to be pro-zionist to be a Labour Party member is mind-boggling.
Shall we have a fight about Israel?
That is certainly Keir Starmer's position. He is determined to stamp out any criticism of Israel. In fact it is so hugely important to him that he will have Labour Party members expelled for criticising Israel.
I don’t see why not? Theres not much else going on at the moment
Indeed. What else could Starmer be doing other than organising attacks on members of his own party?
You can’t make up a new rule for the Labour Party that proscribes protected beliefs.
So we're catch 22, the organisation that JVL are part of, has adopted the definitions that prohibits calling Israel a racist state, and are bound to take action against those that do. JVL believe that Israeli is a racist state, why would then want to continue your membership of the larger organisation?
Personally I think partly, because doing so amplifies their protest, which is fair enough, It's what I'd do as well. All's fair... and all that jazz.
The idea that you now have to be pro-zionist to be a Labour Party member is mind-boggling.
You need to come and have a chat with the Rabbi, There's probably not a congregation in the country that would agree on this. In fact I don't think if you gathered together a room full of Jews, they could agree, I can't begin to imagine how a political party makes a decision on it frankly. I'm glad I don't have to.
Has anyone noticed Starmers call this morning for leadership from the government in a time of national crisis rather than Tory party infighting, or were we too busy infighting about Israel again?
I was more concerned about what his stance is on trans rights
He's been very quiet about that
Makes you think....
or were we too busy infighting about Israel again?
Given that issues around anti Semitism was a pretty much constant drag on Corbyn's leadership, Starmer pledged to end anti-Semitism, and clearly it's still grinding on, and this is a thread about Starmer, I think @grum's post was legit. I don't see any issue raising it as a topic for discussion.
Given that th issues around anti semitism in the labour party were blown out of all proportion to damage corbyn and that anti zuionism is seen as anitsemitism by far too many folk?
Welsh Labour doing well
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1472942653792784387
a few post N shoropshire polls out soon too, interesting to see what a LD win there means for Labour nationally
-personally I think were seeing the anti-tory vote willing to lend their votes to any party that opposes them & starmer etc is fine with that- he was in n shropshire