Deselection issue in Labour Party with respect to Luciana Berger

Thank you

My MP was on maternity leave during the last parliament. It didn't seem to make much difference. Her office handled things I think. She probably set up a voting arrangement with one of the opposition (which has always happened). It does make you think that actually the MP is a bit surplus to requirements and things work out very well without them!

Just put 'MP Maternity leave' into Google and you will get all the information you want and more:-)

There is a nursery at the H of C, fees payable and not reclaimable under expenses apparently, although duck houses, servicing lawn mowers, silk cushions, fixing wonky toilet seats, sat navs, biccies etc etc are all permissible.

Can I just ask a neutral question?

When an MP is on maternity leave, who is the MP? Do they have a locum or a deputy?

I'm all for it personally but the arrogant Tories do keep wanting to tell us it their way or the highway.
So does Labour GracesGran

Finding it difficult to follow this discussion. What point are you and dd not agreeing about, GG?

Me too!
Is it this:

So what would be the correct word for any group wanting to de-select an MP for not following their way and having to take the highway.

Is there an alternative word to arrogant?

This debate has its roots in the basic dilemma - what is a political party for, or indeed, what is democracy for?

Is the party a tool for like-minded people to join together to work for what the electorate want (those "ordinary people" who are the cause for which all the parties say they are working), or is the electorate a tool for getting the party what it wants?

Is a free election a way for a constituency to get the representative it wants? Or is party endorsement of a candidate a way for the party to limit the choice of the electorate and get the representative that they want?

I'm going to brush my teeth very carefully as I have a dental appt too.

And you??????

I've changed the bed today as well, sheets on the line!!!

I think that neither of us has really understood what the other is driving at, ww. At least, I haven't, given what you've just said, because I thought you said early on that you couldn't find any evidence of the things I'd said I'd read about in news media.

At this point, I don't actually care. It has been very entertaining while it lasted though, so thanks for all the fish.

The burning question for me right now is whether to eat a little something (more) before my dental appointment. Oh, and I have just changed a bed without hurting my broken wrist. Pleased about that, I am.

Have a nice day! ?

So where are with with this debate bags I'm sort of a bit lost.

We started off looking I thought at whether Momentum was democratic, you then stated that no you weren't interested in in "personalising" the debate, so I replied looking at democracy and how the parties selected and de selected their candidates. You then decided it was probably more fun to look at momentum so I think that is probably where we are at.

I have looked at Momentum in more depth on another thread as I think it was worthwhile.

I have read the article. So what that tells me is that this is a reaction to much of what has been reported in the media. I can only reiterate what I have found out about Momentum and its constitution.

In my opinion this argument is about the fight for the hearts and minds of the Labour supporter. The Blairite faction, has seen its influence waning with the country at large whereas the Corbynite faction and its influence is apparently on the rise.

This type of in party in fighting has always gone on in political parties as you are no doubt aware. I won't bore you with what is going on in the Tory party as you are almost certainly painfully aware!

Haha! I mean care, not dare, but you can dare too if you like.

I hope that bee hasn't gone and stung you, ww! Take dare now.

Specially sifted from the Guardian using Baggs's magic story inventing wand for Whitewave
www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/09/lets-not-fight-each-other-angela-rayner-tells-labour-mps

“Anyone who talks about deselecting any of my colleagues, quite frankly, they need to think about who are the real enemy here,” she told the BBC.

'She' being Angela Rayner.

Like what I said earlier.

Oh dear!

ww, my last post that you call an assertion of mine is something in the news that I read about. What Angela Rayner is reported to have said was said, the report said, on the Andrew Marr show. If you want to challenge the quote it's to the BBC or Angela Rayner you must go, not to me.

If you feel the need to challenge as rumour stuff that is easily verifiable, I think perhaps you need to clean out the bees' nest in your bonnet because one particular bee is getting really silly. Your posts give the impression you are under some weird delusion about fantastical storytelling on my part. It's actually quite flattering and I doubt you want to do that

Finding it difficult to follow this discussion. What point are you and dd not agreeing about, GG?

You may think so Daphne. At this point I do not agree.

I don't think he will whitewave. They have voted with where they agree and against where they don't and I imagine that will continue.

I think TM is still showing the arrogance she started with in her attempt to spread the blame for the situation the Tories have got us in to. Can you imagine how people will talk about this period in our history - how the Tories sleep-walked us into all these problems because of their overblown sense of entitlement?

So does Labour GracesGran.

I can think of no more appropriate word than "gobshite" for some of the people who post left-wing comments on Twitter and Facebook. Whether or not the posters are members of Momentum or not, I don't know. (Extreme right-wingers are something else.) The definition in one online dictionary is "A person of very poor judgment and unpleasant character". Another definition might be online bullies. Luciana Berger posted some screenshots of some of the vile comments she's had over the last few days.

I think it would be suicidal for Corbyn to have anything to do with the Tories.

Why on earth should he prop up a failing government which has brought nothing but untold misery to millions of families?

I think everyone will work on an issue by issue basis Daphne. But isn't that democracy? I'm all for it personally but the arrogant Tories do keep wanting to tell us it their way or the highway.

Labour would be daft to come to any "agreement" with the Conservatives, because some unpopular decisions will need to be made about Brexit, social care, the NHS, etc.

It looks as though the LibDems have already been approached and they've said they'll work on an issue by issue basis, if the Conservatives and LibDems already agree. Mental health might be such an issue. I think they've probably learnt their lesson.

As far as Brexit is concerned, let the Conservatives sort out the mess they've created. I have serious reservations about Labour's approach to Brexit. They risk losing votes if they're too enthusiastic to co-operate with the Conservatives.

May asked explicitly for a bigger mandate for the Brexit she describe and was told in no uncertain terms NO - not your Brexit.

There are, as I am sure even you are aware AB, no Momentum MPs so your comments are spurious and childish. I am aware you will defend May even if she tells us unicorns will save us, but if this oh so wonderful Tory wants to get bills through parliament she needs the Labour Party.