Ken isn’t an MP so its interesting he’s been sent on the media rounds. Can Corbyn find no MPs willing to back him on TV or radio?

Yes the leader can appoint the folk around them who share their view and then try to influence party policy from this platform

Why is this surprising you both?
Why do you think is something special about Corbyn?

What aspect of him doing what all leaders do will you get outraged about next?

@ ninfan I would expect to argue the position I believed in and if it did not match the leaders I would expect to get the sack[ whatever party i was in]

you?

Hang on, hang on you mean because you support the published and agreed labour policy on defence you can in fact be sacked for not following the leaders views that are not in fact the policy of his party?

Has that happened? To whom?

would expect to argue the position I believed in and if it did not match the leaders I would expect to get the sack[ whatever party i was in]

“I want open debate, I will listen to everyone, I firmly believe leadership is listening.”
“I am not imposing leadership lines. I don’t believe anyone has a monopoly on wisdom – we all have ideas and a vision of how things can be better”

Corbyn won’t make it to the EU referendum, he’ll be long gone even if the referendum is this autumn

#Jambyfact

or accurately quoted

I am not leader who wants to impose leadership lines all the time.

I don’t believe anyone of us has a monopoly on wisdom and ideas – we all have ideas and a vision of how things can be better.

I want open debate in our party and our movement.

I will listen to everyone.

http://press.labour.org.uk/post/130135691169/speech-by-jeremy-corbyn-to-labour-party-annual

I actually asked what you think would happen. DO you think a person can openly oppose the leader and remain in position in any party. Is it just Corbyn who gets rid of these types? Its not is it and the attack is just tories going i dont like him.

I will listen to everyone.

And if I don’t like what they say, I’ll sack them!

Sorry junky, couldn’t help myself! 😀

no problem with it as it is what he has done and it is is just politics/leadership. To get shocked that a politician has behaved like a politician is pointless
to do it only about the other side is even more pointless

he confusion began on Sunday when Mr Cameron was asked if he has “absolutely closed your mind to allowing ministers a free vote”.
He said: “I’ve been very clear. If you want to be part of the government, you have to take the view that we are engaged in an exercise of renegotiation, to have a referendum and that will lead to a successful outcome.”
When asked if anyone “in Government who opposes that will have to resign”, the Prime Minister said: “Everyone in Government has signed up to the programme set out in the Conservative manifesto.”
Downing Street sources later confirmed that Mr Cameron was “very clear” that he would expect any minister who plans to campaign for Britain to leave the EU to resign.

this week he announced they coudl openly campaign against them

Its just politics

I would argue daves is worse [ well I would wouldn’t I] as it has undermined his leadership
Corbyn clearly has loyalty issues with a PLP who are at best indifferent and usually openly hostile.
Everything else is us just playing political point scoring.

Corbyn hasn’t sacked people for disagreeing on policy. (yes Eagle git moved) he sacked people for questioning his leadership and the party’s direction. Benn disagreed over policy still in job.

DrJ

Mr Corbyn replaced pro-nuclear weapons MP Maria Eagle with Emily Thornberry, who favours unilateral nuclear disarmament.

The stated labour policy on Trident is? And after appointing Ken, a non MP to be co chair of the defence committee review. Who has expanded the role to include our possible withdrawal from NATO.

Sacking yes if you don’t support the party line but this isn’t

Moved, sacked…..

The issue is one of credibility for the whole party. Do we vote for their published policies or what the leader says and non elected members?

DrJ

Mr Corbyn replaced pro-nuclear weapons MP Maria Eagle with Emily Thornberry, who favours unilateral nuclear disarmament.

Correct, but you have no evidence that that was WHY she was replaced. I suspect that it had more to do with her public siding with General Whotsit about his statement about Corbyn being dangerous if elected. At that point it was clear she had to go.

Do we vote for their published policies or what the leader says and non elected members?

We vote for their published policies of course. Is there an election? Are we voting? Did I miss something?

Clearly Coryn is trying to change labour party policy and as he has just been elected as leader on a platform that included this policy on trident its not unreasonable to argue he has a mandate for it. Its pretty hard to argue that a leader trying to change party policy is somehow undemocratic. Every labour leader has done it be it clause 4 or union block voting. Its what leaders try to do.

All this is is tory using whatever he does as a method to beat him JHad they stayed in position no one would be condemning him for having an open party they would be claiming he has weak leadership. Its getting really boring having to constantly counter tories just using whatever happens as a means to moan about Corbyn he is just doing what all leaders of political parties do.

As for ken he is the co chair with the shadow defence minister being in charge.

Jeremy Corbyn has risked causing further splits in the Labour party by appointing Ken Livingstone as co-chair of the party’s policy review on Trident.

The former Mayor of London is a strong opponent of renewing Britain’s nuclear deterrent and shadow defence secretary Maria Eagle, who is in charge of Labour’s defence review, was said to be “furious” at the decision after hearing about it on Twitter.

His appointment is part of Mr Corbyn’s determination to push through an anti-Trident policy as the party’s official stance in time for when MPs are asked to vote on the renewal of Britain’s fleet of four Trident ballistic missile submarines next summer.

Don’t you think that Corbyn would infinitely prefer to be presenting his ideas for the economy, rather than responding to the endless back-stabbing from Blairites and their pals in the press?

This.

If the cry-baby entitled Blairites could just shut up for a few moments, or alternatively join the party they like trying to out do, i.e. the Tories, then Labour would be much better off. 60-odd percent of their supporters voted for a significant change in direction. If you count Burham’s votes too then that’s well over 3/4 of the people who voted in the leadership election wanting policy considerably to the left of NuLab. It’s about time they listened.

JY, all I am doing is posting links or references to statements made by Labour Party MPs and Shadow cabinet members, past and present.

The Labour Party came out almost immediately to counter Livingstone’s idiotic statement on NATO. It’s Labour Party policy to vote in favour of Trident renewal and if Cobyn wanted to something different he could have debated at the party conference. As it was he dodged the issue as he got wind he would lose the vote.

@zokes – nope its the leftish Corbyn-ites who need to leave and form their own party which will be just as unelectable as Labour would be under Corbyn. Blair got Labour 13 years in Government, thats the key fact.

Surely the point is that regardless of the labour membership, the UK do not vote for hard-left policy. Are the hard leftists happy to remain in opposition and watch the tories do what tories do for the next X years?
Because I don’t think it’s too much of a stretch to suggest that Labour under JC or any other hard left won’t win.
Leaves me hoping that the lib dems can get their act together.

all I am doing is posting links or references to statements made by Labour Party MPs and Shadow cabinet members, past and present.

Aye you have no agenda here at all personally do you

Can you not be honest with yourself? No else is struggling to understand why you will quote anyone anywhere criticising him .

nope its the leftish Corbyn-ites who need to leave and form their own party

Indeed the only response to winning the leadership race, and overwhelmingly winning it, is to leave and form your own party. Clearly the party you now lead belongs to the losers who just failed to get elected. 😯
WTF jamby WTF
Best jambyfact for ages that one.

JY video below here is a good example. Labour kicked put militant tendancy, it was Kinnock’s greatest achievement and paved the way for a Labour government. Corbyn and his suporters need to do the same if they want to get elected. As you know from my perspective the longer Corbyn remains around the better.

[video]http://youtu.be/HqiBd4CBU5U[/video]

The Labour Party abandoned all its morals and values to attract right wing voters when ‘new Labour’ came along, they just turned into a Tory plan B and offered nothing as an alternative to the Tory party,
Lots of people see Corbin as a genuine alternative to the ‘same old same old’ political circus that we seem to be stuck with now,
The more they howl about Corbin and try to character assassinate him the more a lot of people think he might be onto something and offer a genuine alternative to the tossers we’re stuck with now..

the UK do not vote for hard-left policy.

It all depends on what one means by hard left. I think any opposition party would have beaten the tories as they were unelectable. I dont think Labour won ONLY because Blair was so right wing/soft left whihc is what the right wing would have us believe.

Are the hard leftists happy to remain in opposition and watch the tories do what tories do for the next X years?

You know the answer to this leading question

Because I don’t think it’s too much of a stretch to suggest that Labour under JC or any other hard left won’t win

I think this may well prove to be the case but hey lets give it a go and see what happens

IMHO he needs to persuade those who do not vote to turn up and persuade folk that voting can make a difference and change things

TBH the tories imploding over the EU is probably the best hope Labour have

@kahni – middle ground voters, not rigjt wing. Blair brought in the minimum wage, if youndon’t win elections you can’t do anything except get a bit shouty and go on prptest marches

Jamby have you considered addressing what I say rather than just repeating what you do?

Switches blocker on had enough of your biased partisan drivel for a while.

Surely the middle grounders are the deciders?
So it should (and mostly does) come down to who is more middle ground, lab or tory.
From my POV, neither are an appetising prospect at present.
Oh for un-entrenched, neutral, un-indoctrinated political parties.

Junkyard – lazarus

All this is is tory using whatever he does as a method to beat him JHad they stayed in position no one would be condemning him for having an open party they would be claiming he has weak leadership

In fact they’ve done both- he’s simultaneously a dictator crushing all dissent, and weak for not crushing Benn for dissent

TBH I don’t think he’s chosen the best strategy; it’s a sensible tactic, he opened the door to people and gave them a chance to work with him, then acted when they chose not to. But that’s been spun twice, once as weak leadership and once as hypocrisy and authoritarianism. If he’d just picked his favourite cabinet first time he’d have still got the second line but not the first. It seems like he’s chosen the reasonable course of action in an unreasonable world and maybe not understood how it would be painted. (OTOH maybe I underestimate how things will be spun regardless of what he does; but here I think he’s not played the game well)

I think he also underestimates the labour party’s willingness to score own goals- he’s brought people onto the team who want to see the party fail so that they can blame him, rather than trying to make the party succeed. The blairites would rather have 10 years in the wilderness as long as it’s them that leads them back out- basically they’re playing a different game entirely where the object is to win the party not elections.

(though, I had an interesting chat with some old blairite mates last week who’re basically bricking it- they’d formed a lot of opinions based on the idea that Cameron was going to be basically a Blair 2 and that having him win wasn’t that big a deal. And now they’re finding out what it really means and asking what sort of country will be left in another 5 or 10 years, and realising that all their ideas about moving to the centre have enabled the tories to move massively to the right. Mind you they’re still all thinking about who to blame rather than what to do, but it’s progress)

Though a bit of an elephant in the room is that the labour party is just low on quality right now. You saw it in the leadership election- Corbyn succeeded largely because of the low quality competition. And now you see it in the weak field of cabinet candidates. He can only **** with the dick he’s got.

nope its the leftish Corbyn-ites who need to leave and form their own party which will be just as unelectable as Labour would be under Corbyn.

You see the trouble with this is that Corbyn won the biggest ever landslide in the leadership election, in all 3 sections of the vote. When are the blairites going to accept that they lost? I’ve said it before plenty times, but they have a simple choice, either accept that they lost and do whatever they can to support the new leader, or leave.

I think that has certainly been the case but as so many dont vote I am not sure it is the ONLY way to win.

I also find it strange that both parties have to flip flop around trying to win over the unprincipled wavering voters who could flop either way based on who has the nicest haircut 😉

I think only time will tell whether this approach works or not- I do suspect some “hard left” polices – no nukes possibly being one [ even though i do , weakly, support such a position]- are sufficiently off the wall to , alone, render the party unelectable.

They still have to give some thought to not being always “far left”

@zokes – nope its the leftish Corbyn-ites who need to leave and form their own party which will be just as unelectable as Labour would be under Corbyn.

So, as per my post, over three quarters of them then? Why don’t the 25% who secretly want to **** pigs with Cameron go and do so instead? Or maybe they could form a new party – they could call it New Tories

Blair got Labour 13 years in Government, thats the key fact.

Mainly (with the odd exception, such as the minimum wage) by out Torying the Tories. I’m 32. There hasn’t been a left wing government in the UK in my lifetime.

basically they’re playing a different game entirely where the object is to win the party not elections.

Are the blairites the equivalent of militant tendencies these days then?

Oh and another excellent balanced post with an amusing ending

I also find it strange that both parties have to flip flop around trying to win over the unprincipled wavering voters who could flop either way based on who has the nicest haircut

😀
I don’t like parties to have long terms, and favour coalitions. My reasoning is just to limit the amount of damage any single party can do.
With too many terms, they get mandate pissed and think that they can do whatever they like and single party govts go a bit too far (as we see with the current one, and did previously with NL).

There is plently I agree with from both the tories and labour (even now) but if I have to choose…….

Though a bit of an elephant in the room is that the labour party is just low on quality right now.

And why is that? Could it be that Blair and Brown packed the parliamentary party with PPE drones straight out of Oxford and gave jobs to those who were best at greasing their way up the pole, instead of the using the tried and tested local constituency/trade union route where prospective MPs had to cut their teeth on the coalface by working their way up through local government or trade unions?

I think the lib dems ruined coalition they were so keen on being seen to be in power that they forgot to have principles and use their position to further their agenda – they did seem to have the hang by the end to be fair but the damage was done as election night proved.

They just looked like unprincipled spineless turncoats

If you are a middle ground [ not an insult] voter then you will prefer middle of the road politics and a coalition certainly delivers that.

I do prefer PR and this will lead to coalitions so perhaps the “best” [ least worst] option is to have bland middle of the road policies that enthuse very few of us but anger very few of us?

dazh – you’re right, he did get voted in but there’s a huge gap of people between him and the people who voted him in..

It is comical really. He’s nothing special but his values really get people’s knickers in a twist.

Essentially he believes in trying to change the power relations within the UK to make it a fairer society…but god do people hate that.

“What..you mean we can’t wave our dicks around by going to war and showing how tough we are”….”what, you mean give some money to some deserving people…i mean i know they were born without arms but still, they should try harder”…”what, pay taxes…god no, that’s so below me”…”i deserve my place at the top and the rest of you can get lost you bunch of disabled (or insert other unfortunate life circumstances people here if you wish) scroungers”….

I think the lib dems ruined coalition they were so keen on being seen to be in power that they forgot to have principles and use their position to further their agenda – they did seem to have the hang by the end to be fair but the damage was done as election night proved.

I reckon Clegg got taken to the cleaners by some slick bastards. I agree that they just wanted to see their name on the tin though, and to be fair to them it wasn’t a rough as it has been under the tories unabashed.
To be honest, I don’t think it’s rocket science. Make everyone pay their dues, don’t spend too much and just make the UK a nice place to live and work. We don’t need to be world leaders, we don’t need to be seen as benefactors.

You see the trouble with this is that Corbyn won the biggest ever landslide in the leadership election, in all 3 sections of the vote. When are the blairites going to accept that they lost?

The illusion is that the Labour Party ‘leader’ is anything more than the head of the PLP. Conference and NEC run the party, and while Corbyn has considerable clout and the backing of much of the ‘machine’, conference sets policy and it could be argued that Corbyn should accept that he’s lost over Trident and stick to its line.

Corbyn’s mandate is important, but until that works it way through to conference and NEC, he is not yet the ultimate authority in the party.

Does Corbyn have a sufficient majority among full members to start loading conference with delegates who would back him?

You see the trouble with this is that Corbyn won the biggest ever landslide in the leadership election, in all 3 sections of the vote. When are the blairites going to accept that they lost? I’ve said it before plenty times, but they have a simple choice, either accept that they lost and do whatever they can to support the new leader, or leave.

You’ll never win an election by appealing to the party membership, particuarly not when setting policies.

They are, by their very nature, the hardcore.

You only need to look at Cameron – to most of the party membership many of his policies are weak willed and/or a complete anathema (Europe, immigration, gay marriage etc). While most of the other ones don’t go far enough. (Benefits etc).
In fact you can see the mistakes that they have made by pandering to the membership, then backed away from because they utterley isolate them from the voters (eg. Tax credits) that’s not to say they haven’t been thrown the occasional bone to keep them happy, but ultimately, Tory policies and decisions have remained far closer to the centre ground than their party membership (well, those who hadn’t abandoned it and gone to UKIP)- and thus they won the election.

Blair did much the same, rule from the centre whilst throwing occasional bones to the membership (minimum wage, hunting) and won elections by doing so. Even the Lib Dems couldn’t satisfy the party membership, ’cause they were mainly nutters.

Corbyns ‘appeal’ to the membership and Labour Party supporters (rather than the voters at large) and the sudden upsurge of new party members from the ‘random nut jobs’ on the left is the equivalent of a new Tory leaders policies bringing the UKIP members flocking back home to the Tories – electoral suicide.

sunnydaze310 – Member

Essentially he believes in trying to change the power relations within the UK to make it a fairer society…but god do people hate that.

The number of times you hear about how he’s “far left” or “extreme left” really says a lot. He’s no such thing, the UK doesn’t really have much of a far left, but it’s the standard description. It’s a well proven trick tbh,a lot of people seem convinced that Cameron/Osborne/May are centrists in much the same way.

I don’t think you can dismiss everyone who backed Corbyn as a random nut jobs. Many were younger people making their first foray into politics, which is a good thing for the Labour Party in the longer term, especially when you look at the ageing nature of both the Conservative and LibDem membership. Look how young membership has energised the SNP.

My reading is that JC was elected not for broad electoral appeal, but to shake up the party and make it fit for future purpose after a decade of decline.

The problem for him is that that his core support are not yet represented in party structures, and may never be. And that he’ll get removed pretty quickly (would he even get on the ballot in another leadership election?)

The number of times you hear about how he’s “far left” or “extreme left” really says a lot. He’s no such thing, the UK doesn’t really have much of a far left, but it’s the standard description. It’s a well proven trick tbh,a lot of people seem convinced that Cameron/Osborne/May are centrists in much the same way.

Well you have to admire the Tories’ spin machine for making sensible things like state-owned railways seem like the beginning of a Stalinist tyranny, while you marvel at the stupidity of the British electorate who routinely vote for things which are directly opposed to their own interests, apparently stuck in a time warp of forelock-tugging and blindly doing the bidding of the gentry.

from the middle, Corbyn is hard left. As as far left as Farage is right.