Jeremy Corbyn Elected

3000,000 labour voters are the public

Yes I know that. But he was elected according to Labour Party rules, that is what I am on about. I am cross that the MPs seem to think that the rules should not apply to them.
I agree it seems touch and go, but at the very least the reaction from the party members should be respected, and the proposed po!licies treated with some integrity. People seem to be fed up with the total lack of integrity, honesty and strong opposition, and behaving like children whose sweets have been taken away is not what we expect from our mps

Whitewave

Thank you.

I read your post agreeing with trisher and saying that is what you have just written to your MP as meaning the content of your letter said similar to her post.

"If he is 'forced' to change those ideas which appealed to the public the MP's who 'force' him to do so will find themselves unelectable ".

When that is spoken or written in a general context it is totally rational. When it is written to a person for their eyes only it seems slightly threatening.

Being a bit naughty but can I just say this , It was not the 'public' who Corbyn appealed to but 300.000 labour voters . We will know what the 'public' think of him in 2015 if he is still leader of the LP.

pogs sorry I didn't make myself clear, I didn't complain about his vote I soooo wouldn't do that , what I complained about was the lack of support being given to a democratically elected leader. I went on to say that I have stuck with and supported the Labour Party athough it had leaders I would not have voted for and policies I abhored, but I respect the democratic principle, hope that clears it up

Thank you for the link bags. Good analysis I think.

The Labour MP Simon Danczuk has said Activists are trying to 'oust' him out saying he was 'undermining' Corbyn.

Will he be the first and last ?

You can just feel the tension mounting in the Labour Party and I think a lot of it will come from those who have had little or no interest in Labour for years but feel they are in the driving seat at the moment. Not particularly pleasant people at times and I think a few MP's are going to find themselves in difficult positions sooner rather than later.

Corbyn was voted Leader by approximately 300.000 votes. That is chicken feed numbers in relation to the general election. The MP's in their constituencies were voted in by labour supporters, obviously, why do you assume they think like you trisher/White wave/Others.?

By the time the next election comes around those who voted Green/Another in the last election who are obviously Corbyn admirers will vote Labour if Corbyn is still leader, that's what I presume given the posts we have all read.

Labour voters who do not believe in Corbyns policies, IF he has managed to get any of them through, will possibly vote for other parties. I say possibly because there is still the thought that I have always voted - so I will still vote for ---- brigade come hell or high water. The silent majority, the free thinking floating voter will also possibly change their vote in the next election .

I have to say Whitwave I didn't think after all you have posted you voted Labour in the last general election I thought you were a Green for some reason.

As for the fact you are obviously annoyed your MP voted for a candidate 'You' didn't like is called democracy. He had every right as a Labour voter to make his own decision .

Roseq, does it matter if it happens in other countries?
djen I think it does with increased globalisation.

That is the message I have sent to my Labour MP, who voted for Kendall. He has not yet replied, I shall send a reminder in a couple of days.

I think that there will be a problem for the Labour party and MPs in particular if Corbyn makes too many compromises. His election was a democratic process and involved many people who had been disillusioned with politics. If he is forced to change those ideas which appealed to the public the MPs who force him to do so will find themselves unelectable.

All I see is cabinet member after cabinet member being interviewed and Corbyn has a challenge on his hands as apart from re nationalising the railways I see hardly any agreement with Corbyns known views.

Any amount of words can be used to show Corbyn, indeed anyone, in the manner of being a listener wanting to engage with his party and achieving a consensus to decide policies. Democracy at work . At the end of the day somebody has to take charge and lead and that is what Corbyn will have to do.

The problem with that is somebody will alway have to forgo their principles to abide by that process. The problem Corbyn will have he will always have those who forgive him for shedding his principles and others who will be horrified he has given in.

I think it was on the other thread I said it could prove to be Corbyns Nick Cleggs tuition fee moment .

I thought the Charlie Falconer interview on the Sunday Politics show was no eye opener but was reflective of the problem Corbyn has. McDonnell and maybe one or two others will agree with Corbyn but who will give in to who.

Words like concensus and democracy are fine but they are theoretic by nature when agreement cannot be found and Corbyn will , as he said to (I think ) Laura Kuenssberg , make /take the final decision as he has 'been given the mandate' by the party.

Can he/will he be able to remain the 'principled politician' expected of him by his fervent admirers if and when he has to put in policies he and they have spent years challenging?

Lord knows he is loosing his 'rebellious back bench MP' title pretty quickly and I firmly believe that he would have been more at ease with himself had he stayed on the back benches as he will no longer have the opportunity to be a rebellious voice . Some will call that pragmatism, democratic . Others will call it weak, a sham. The truth is both groups would be right , unless of course he takes his cabinet and MP's with him but it isn't looking too good at this moment in time but there is a long way to go, he could pull it off!

Wilmakfit you are so right about industry- and again, a good example as to where more for money and research + planning would really pay dividends. But it is being done in Northern Europe and also here- industries linking processes to the waste or heat of one can be used for another, and then for the community (as in heating fuel). As in the case of the incineration plant for rubbish (NO landfill here allowed)- the heat produced being used to heat a whole estate. It can be done, and done well- but the will ABOVE needs to be there, and the finance.

However, insulating our older housing stock, with grants properly controlled, + solar panel grants again- would also help- as would street lighting, etc. As said, also silly but costly examples of shops being hugely overheated- and then all doors left open all winter, and those gas heaters for pubs, etc. Plain daft- and illegal in many countries. In the USA and hot countries, there are lots of measures that could be taken to avoid heat being trapped, and requiring massive use of air con systems. The list is endless- and we are talking here aobut going forwards, not back to the middle ages, au contraire. But the will and money has to be there- and as long as too many people make money from fossil fuels and old antiquated systems- it won't happen unless WE push for it- with our vote.

I think it is EU rules that prevent the Government from subsidising British Steel and other industries, jen. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

A balanced view of Corbyn's win: The Politics of Disenchantment, by Kenan Malik.

jen these days all I can think of is the number of people who are affected. The ripple from each job...

Labour costs is one of the areas where savings will be made through the Chinese investment. I wonder how many local people will be employed during the build compared to when it's running.

Re the national v local initiatives, I don't see this government making it a priority any time soon to have new effective minimum standards of efficiency when building new homes. It would be left to the developers to decide how much it costs to build. There will be standards, but how effective they are is another matter.

Just had to switch the news off. Can't stand to see Osborne's face anymore talking about giving China money, when at the same time the steelworks on Teesside has had to close down. Last week they were telling everyone to buy British steel. No £2 billion guarantees for that factory.

But that's only by councils. If it's a national programme to improve the housing stock, they would not have to spend by the end of the tax year.

This would be Corbynomics in action.

Doh - should be initiatives

It still needs industry to get on board to make a big difference though. We can all do what we can, but if industry doesn't have the incentive to commit, it's like having one hand tied behind your back.

I'd like to see the results of the efforts made properly analysed, so it's less piecemeal and we know what are the good choices. Too often one initiative is copied elsewhere before the results have been properly examined because it looks like a good idea. So many local government projects work like that, where in particular too much emphasis is placed on anecdotal evidence. The financial restrictions on how money is spent can often be the reason something is done. Often money must be spent by the end of the tax year and can't be carried forward, so it gets spent on iniatives that may be largely untested or even unproven.

Lots of new parts of cities here have common heating provided by natural produce/waste. In this rural area, it is not really possible generally, but the new central heating system for the triple cluster of village hall, primary school and town hall/council offices is now using locally produced sustainable wood- and the 3 building has been well insulated + triple galzed windows. It is not rocket science.

Yes, Durham Council is doing that with all the street lights now.

Back in the 70s we lived on an estate that had district heating. They changed it in the 90s as everyone wanted their own boilers. I bet they are regretting it now.

Insulation for buildings would be a great start. na more research, etc, for alternative energies, and to reduce consumption in private, State and industrial installations- better link-ups between all of them- and appliances and industrial machinery which use less energy.

At a simple level, a few examples from top of head. Think of washing machines and appliances 20 years ago- they used much much more energy than mordern ones. Our vilalge is changing street lighting for a modern version that uses a fraction of the energy compared to old ones, and lights will be dimmed by 40% between 11pm and 6am. The local composting plant creates enough heat for a whole estate of highly insulated, low energy use homes- and gas is created by cow manure being collected. Much much more could be done if emphasis and MONEY was spent on how to use energy better, rather than more and more. It does NOT mean going back to candles and horse and cart. BTW, look at modern cars and the change in technology too. Very proud too of our Bertrand Picard and his research into solar planes and machinery via Solar Impulse, etc.

When I also think of all the vastly over heated shops with the doors wide opened all winter- and all the outdoor gas heaters in pubs, etc- it's cryzy- and illegal in many European countries too.

Household insulation is the easiest and cheapest way. Restart the grant system for older houses which has just been stopped. Improving the housing stock is a good way to reduce energy consumption.

Build more zero energy houses. Affordable council housing, of course.

Use it for solar panels. A whole council estate near here has been given solar panels, and the residents are really pleased. I know solar panels do not reduce actual consumption, but they do reduce the reliance on fossil fuels and make people more aware of what they are using.

Research into groundsource heat pumps.

rosequartz I didn't mean to imply it was just here in the UK. My comment was part of my reply to jen about having heard of Cheung Kong through Private Eye.

jane lots of people would like to see the money spent on researching alternatives to managing certain types of energy consumption through more efficient methods. I think we're talking about industry though, not consumer consumption.

I read today the Hinkley Point power station will use out of date technology and will cost more to build than more up to date options.

djen how would you actually use £2billion to reduce energy consumption? I have no idea what you mean.