Could Labour 'split'. Tom Watson calls off talks.

Then I hope it works

Just watching channel 4 news and they were interviewing Thangam Debbonaire. You couldn't make up the way Jeramy Corbyn treated her. If it wasn't so bad it would be laughable.

I saw the interview on Channel 4 news as well petra. Thangam Debbonaire was very balanced, clear and fair imo in her comments. She was indeed treated badly. What happened to her is either an indication of carelessness and disorganisation/chaos amongst JC and his team or a real disregard for people.

In fairness to JC I don't think he is doing the bullying and intimidation. He always comes across as polite, considerate and principled. So either he is a very good actor, inept or someone else is pulling his strings. In the case of the said lady, if what is reported is true, he seems to be inept and not in control of the system.

Aw I missed it so cannot offer an opinion .

I hope a Corbyn supporter can explain the following please

When Corbyn was elected leader the so called blairites should have supported him.p yes?

Today, he went against the party and spoke against trident even though his MP's had discussed and decided to support it.

So not getting behind him is a plot, him going against his party - which he did over 500 times when a back bencher- is a plot of his yes?

I have just read her statement, what appalling treatment, poor woman and he isn't prioritising a labour win? That is sodding obvious , if still the leader he will,probably take a holiday during the election campaign, and I voted for this excuse for a leader

Watched all the debate on Trident today.The SNP voting against it 'en bloc' ( they do everything that way, probably all visit the loo together) so not a surprise.
What then unfolded was amazing, Jeremy Corbyn spoke at length about HIS OWN views on nuclear weapons and not the Labour
Party's views on renewing Trident.His own MP's shouting out, shaking heads and muttering darkly about him.This man has to go.

It was a disgrace Rosesarered , this is why asked for an explanation for those who didn't support him are called plotters but he as leader didn't support the party line .

Any wonder there was no queue to support him , they must have been aware they couldn't expect support from him

He is such a hypocrite, shares a platform with Hamas because he believes in talking to the enemy but refused to share a platform with Cameron because of what he had done.

Does he not see that he is pulling the Labour Party apart?I rather think that he does see, but doesn't care, as his own agenda is more important to him.

Yes he knows, seems this is his plan/plot

117 voted against. Some of them must have thought Corbyn was right.
Did the tories have a free vote?

Half of those were the SNP!

Not many Jen, take the SNP 54, Green 1, Plaid 4, from 117 and I don't know how the 4 independent or Libs or the Ireland parties voted

But at least he wasn't on his own, as was suggested. In fact the same number of labour MPs abstained as voted with Corbyn. They abstained because they knew it did not mean anything.

The whole of the debate was political, rather than about defence.
Corbyn could not say that he would vote for Trident, could he? That would really have been hypocritical.
You have said you do not want Trident, Annie. Have you changed your mind?

No Jen, I haven't changed my mind but if I we're leader I would stand down rather than go against party policy, he doesn't deserve loyalty of the labour MP's

How can this man expect support when he does this to the party he leads

I'm a Labour Party member and I wasn't e-mailed by Saving Labour.

Just heard on the news support for Corbyn is again rising, expected really , the young love Rebels regardless of what they are rebelling against

I was emailed by saving labour , has my support

There was a free vote. Given Corbyn's longstanding commitment to opposing nuclear weapons, it was perfectly understandable that he could not, in all conscience, vote for Trident. He was aware that his vote would count for nothing since the overwhelming majority of MPs would be voting in favour - and indeed have done.

Are you saying then anniebach that the only person who can stand as a leader of the Labour party must be one who will be prepared to vote against their longstanding and deeply held personal beliefs - even though his/her MPs are also at liberty to vote in accordance with their own, different, beliefs?

Is there no principle whatsoever that you would not be prepared to jettison in order to acquire power? Or are you saying that only people who will be willing to drop even their most deeply held beliefs are appropriate leadership candidates?

Corbyn did vote many times against the Labour Party and up until recently this almost guaranteed he would never achieve high office, with its attendant status and perks. He is, though, very popular with his own constituents and is seen by many as an honourable man.

What I found appalling yesterday was the number of labour MPs who used the debate to attack Corbyn. It was unnecessary. They were like a pack of hyenas circling a stricken prey.
Corbyn did not lose Labour the last election. He wasn't leader then. He was chosen as leader much to his surprise because of those very principles that the PLP seem to despise now.

voxpoliticalonline.com/2016/07/18/information-commissioner-acts-to-shut-down-illegal-hackinglabour-data-harvesting/

Saving labour were acting illegally. They haven't got your details yet, Eloethan, from #hackinglabour.

I also found it very disheartening that all those labour MPs could vote to spend all that money on something that will never be used, as we have signed up to treaties to reduce our nuclear arsenal within the next ten years.
I can think of better things to spend it on, and so should they.

Just read Thangman Debbonaire's account of events surrounding her resignation in which she says...

"The reason I then voted no confidence in him as leader is because I have no confidence in him as leader.

"...he has stated publicly that he isn't prioritising winning elections.

"How can I support a Labour leader who doesn't want to form a Labour government above everything? When working people, the old, the young, the poor, the country, need a Labour government above everything?

Read more at www.bristolpost.co.uk/bristol-west-mp-thangam-debbonaire-sets-the-record-straight-on-why-she-quit-ministerial-role/story-29521822-detail/story.html#ofzT6M3f02HquYry.99

Such reports from people working with him day-to-day and witnessing this style of 'leadership', which the rank and file members have no knowledge of, may explain the huge divide in views of his leadership.

voxpoliticalonline.com/2016/07/18/the-next-scheme-to-knock-corbyn-stories-about-the-shadow-cabinet-resignations/

Ginny42 is right to point out that the concerns from Labour MPs are from people who worked with him over many, many years and have now had time to observe his 'leadership' in action. These MP's are experienced Labour politicians who want to be part of a strong, effective opposition that has a fighting chance of winning the next election. They are right, this won't happen with Jeremy as leader.

I understand his life long opposition to nuclear/trident and his right to vote against it. As leader of the party though, he has a responsibility to respect party policy. He made some comment about the policy being open to review. Yes it is but currently, that hasn't happened and the policy to support the renewal of trident remains the LP position. I begin to believe he doesn't care whether Labour splits, whether it is an effective opposition or ever wins an election again.