Party leaders

trisher

" it is candidates not MPs who are being asked to sign."

At election times what do 'candidates' become if not councillors and MP's.

How do you answer the question of Corbyn being a prolific back bench rebel?

Like others you are giving your backing to something that on another day you would fight against.

Hypocrisy.

Bu POGS Corbyn has never made a secret of his beliefs and their are many posts saying people want MPs with principles. Are you saying those people shouldn't be allowed to choose an MP with principles?

Claiming to be a pacifist but supporting those who blow fellow countrymen to bits is a principle?

trisher

I believe in a democracy our MP's should be treated as human beings not a commodity to be dictated to.

If we want our MP's to be the latter then we become North Korean/China. Dare I say it's Communist State.

On one hand some posters are saying MP's should follow the Party Line, if not leave/resign but give their blessing to Corbyn who has broken that 'rule' time over.

Hypocrisy.

Why is Corbyn being seen as 'pricipled' when he voted against his Labour Leaders time and again and yet now he is Labour Leader and a Labour MP votes against him they are not viewed as being 'principled'?

I would have thought a 'principled' person would allow for others to have the same right as themselves , if not are they totally 'unprincipled'?

I doubt Corbyn would have ever 'signed ' the Momentum dictat and would at one time of viewed it with horror but of course this is about him and power. Politics is a funny game.

pogs what an extraordinary post!

Undoubtedly Corbyn was a pain in the ass to the Labour Party in the past, but for whatever reason the LP chose not to demand his resignation. Why do you think that was? I suspect that Corbyn and others represented one wing of the LP, which can be characterised in people like Tony Benn etc.
Corbyns social democratic agenda which many in the Scandinavian countries along with others in Europe would immediately recognise, is now in the ascendency, so you could argue if you follow your argument with any logic now be looking at those on the right of the LP as the rebels. Of course no one would be so silly would they? The LP has always been a very broad church.

Hyperbole and personal attacks are rife as can be seen both in the press and posts in GN, but it matters not. It is seen for what it is and largely ignored as being just that -hyperbole.

NOTHING TO DO WITH MPS. IT'S CANDIDATES
MPs who do not want Momentum's support can still be elected.

trisher is your head sore from that’s brick wall?

I need something that shows. screaming mad!

But why is it OK for candidates to pledge loyalty to a company owned by Jon Lansman?

Just as I thought....trisher and * whitewave* are talking around this subject, and yes, it can be a simple yes or no answer, of course it can be!
We all know that it’s for candidates btw and not current MP’s, but candidates know that Momentum is powerful now and that Corbyn is the Leader, so, would they really feel able to not sign? It would take a very strong minded person
not to,and why should they have to even consider it?
I can just imagine the shock/horror if the right wing Tory support group were demanding the same thing from prospective Tory candidates.Hypocracy on GN abound.

Diversion. The O/P does state clearly candidates not MP's, we know what happens to Labour MP's who dare not to agree with everything the mini God decrees.

fgs Annie, can't you find another drum to bang? this one must be almost worn out by now.

I gave a clear and unequivocal answer lemon - you are posting what you would like to be true rather than what is true.

Have looked at your posts whitewave and not clear at all, it seems that you are giving a rather muted response of yes that’s ok for it to happen, so is it? Should prospective Labour candidates feel that they must sign this pledge if they are to have a good chance of getting in? If they refuse to sign, we all know it means far more than Momentum not giving their backing, it will mean in effect that they are blackballed by Momentum and they may as well forget politics.

lemon do you deliberately or genuinely misunderstand?

On second thoughts don’t bother to reply, as I have no intention of getting involved in such a silly debate.

Enjoy your day.

So, no clear answer then, as expected.
We should really forget party politics on this matter and say exactly what we think is right, surely?
IMHO it is wrong of any Party or support group backing a Party to do this.

Of course all local political parties have until now have a say in which party candidate is to be chosen. It is democracy at work and both main political parties have jealously guarded this act of democracy.

However! Lo and behold!

Politicshome are reporting that Maybot is facing a grass roots revolt if she insists on pushing ahead with stripping the local parties this ability to choose their candidate.
One top Tory said that this direction of travel is entirely wrong. Tory party members are furious at this decision, and threatening revolt.

It isn't a company POGS it's members of a political party who have formed a pressure group. Are you saying these members have no right to choose which cadidates they support?

Trisher, sorry but it is a limited company registered at Companies House. You can check it out on the Momentum website, which is "operated by Jeremy for Labour Ltd."
I think you're confused.
Momentum is a brand.
The company who owns the brand is Jeremy for Labour Ltd.

No humpty, no different to the Corbynites who bang their drums daily

No it isn't Primrose65. www.peoplesmomentum.com/company_structures

The companies help with organisation

Momentum is an unincorporated association of individual members. It uses two incorporated companies in order to help manage its operations, Momentum Campaign (Services) Ltd ("the service company") and Jeremy for Labour Ltd ("the data company"), both of which have operated under different names in the past. These companies were set up at the beginning of Jeremy Corbyn's first leadership election and thus predate the establishment of Momentum.

Who controls the money?
Who owns the data?
Who's the chairman?
Who's pushed himself onto the NEC?
You're totally naive to think this is not the machine of Jon Lansman.

Why should Momentum make a decision full stop about candidates.?

What is the point of the Labour Party if it is run by, dictated to by Momentum?

Momentum is now out of the shadows and in charge of Labour , certainly the Labour Leader.

I see there is still no answer to my question :-

To those of you who are Momentum Members/Labour Members , return or new, who have done so because of /purely to follow Corbyn as Leader what will you do if Corbyn is no longer Leader?

Would you still vote Labour ?

Would Momentum still have a reason to exist?

What would Momentum become if there was no Corbyn as the purpose , the mantra was to promote Corbyn the man not the Labour Party ?

whitewave
"pogs what an extraordinary post!

Undoubtedly Corbyn was a pain in the ass to the Labour Party in the past, but for whatever reason the LP chose not to demand his resignation. Why do you think that was?

Perhaps the Labour Party were more tolerant than Momentum and perhaps the Labour Party did not have a 'party within the party" such as Momentum that unashamedly are for ' the individual called Corbyn' and not the Labour Party .

I will stick with my view of who/what constitutes being 'principled' or 'unprincipled' .