Party leaders

Ok POGS point by point
Why should Momentum make a decision full stop about candidates.?
They are not taking any decisions- selection of candidates will remain entirely unchanged. If the selected candidate wants the resources and personal of Momentum to back them they will be asked to sign an agreement.
Any candidate can refuse to do so.

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

Momentum is a group of activists with certain beliefs. The Labour Party has always been broad in accommodating people with similar aims if different ways of implementing these. It remains so.

Would the Labour Party allow any other group to request such a thing ?
Arguably Blair etc were a group within the Labour Party and operated much more clandestinely to acheive their aims.

Let's consider the wording of the OP.

'No matter the Party you support or are considering supporting would you be content for your party candidates to sign a loyalty to the leader clause or not being allowed to stand ,do you see it as taking away freedom to vote with one's conscience?'h

Gracesgran you say:-

"The opening post is incorrect. No party has asked it's MPs to sign the suggested document.'

You are simply incorrect in your statement. The OP does not mention anything other than 'candidates'. Of course the 'candidates' are potentially future MP's but that is not stated in the OP .

You would be correct in saying 'No party has asked for it's MP's to sign' if we change the word correctly to 'candidate' not ' MP ', although the question of MP's is debateable as previous posts have spoke to this happening in a manner akin.

Why do I say you are right? Because Momentum is not a party in the sense of the Labour Party/Tory Party/Lib Dems etc to whom the 'candidates' for potential councillors and MP's will belong to are the ones doing the asking.

If I am mistaken I will be happy to be corrected on the following point.

Momentum is not ' at this moment in time but watch this space' anything more than a ' lobby group ', 'think tank' . It is I grant you more powerful then say the Fabian Society , Progress etc. etc. because it is for the man Corbyn and the Labour Party second. This will change if Corbyn goes but until then it is getting it's feet tucked under the table by using Corbyn to gain purpose and people are backing Corbyn not the Labour Party because they are hoping he will transform, take Labour in a different direction. An example of this would be the 'return' to Labour voters who were telling us not to vote Labour until Corbyn became Labour Leader!

I have asked this question before of the Momentum :-

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?

Would the Labour Party allow any other group to request such a thing ?

I have absolutely no doubt in my mind if other Labour groups such as Progress were doing as Momentum those who cannot see this for what it is 'control of the Labour Party ' they would not be sitting back without comment. As for 'whataboutary' that is in the eye of the beholder!

And none so blind as those who will not see

Unfortunately some seem to be aware of what Momentum are actually asking for and have read into the reality any number of falsehoods based on their own prejudices and pre-conceptions. In fact this whole thing is a bit like a giant Chinese whisper with the origin lost somewhere and certain posters eager to jump in with all sorts of fantasies.
GGMK2 It isn't worth banging your head against this wall. I've given up. There are none so deaf as those who will not hear.

Personal derogatory comment.

The opening post is incorrect. No party has asked it's MPs to sign the suggested document.

I think we're all aware that this thread is about the Momentum loyalty test. Really - pretending to be unaware of political news just insults your own awareness and pedantry is the dotage of knowledge.

The opening post is incorrect. No party has asked it's MPs to sign the suggested document.

It doesn't. I can be as hypothetical as you, though.
I said "Why would any party ask...."

So sorry, didn't know you were uncomfortable with terms of endearment . Do give up twisting the O/P, admit you have made a mistake, it is quite easy to do I promise, never been a problem for me, I have never thought I wasn't capable of errors.

Where in the O/P does it say a party HAS ASKED ?

Why would any party ask its candidates to sign a loyalty to the leader clause?
Leaders change, some more often than others.
Nobody would be a candidate for a particular party if they did not agree with the party manifesto. That's what matters.
Unfortunately, some parties ditch their manifestos as often as they ditch their leaders.

The OP is a hypothetical and highly leading question with strong undertones of a personal agenda. I can't think why people bothered to answer it.

Could you stop calling me dear? I do not know you and I find it quite insulting.

The opening post is incorrect. No party has asked it's MPs to sign the suggested document.

And it does not say any party has asked , do give up dear,

No matter the Party you support or are considering supporting would you be content for your party candidates to sign a loyalty to the leader clause

The opening post is incorrect. No party has asked it's MPs to sign the suggested document.

Oh dear, yet again over excited GG, read the O/P it does not say any party had stated it was to ask prospective candidates to sign a loyalty clause , how can it be fake news, very of the moment dear, when it has not been claimed it was to happen.

“Whataboutery” is so tedious

The opening post is incorrect. No party has asked it's MPs to sign the suggested document.

whitewave, I was asked a questioned and answered it , it it's my concern for my grandchildren which causes me to fear the end of the Labour Party and the reawaking of the communist party .

Just unpick the point that is being made and don't bow to it whitewave and keep repeating the actual truth.

The opening post is incorrect. No party has asked it's MPs to sign the suggested document.

There s so much “whataboutery” on GN. It gets very tedious.

I have seen the Whataboutery whitewave and will no longer get sucked in.

The opening post is incorrect. No party has asked it's MPs to sign the suggested document.

You are rightgg and everyone knows you are right. It simply suits some to continue with the nonsense in order (whatever they say to the contrary) to undermine the LP.

It is simply an ongoing effort to prevent Labour becoming the next government.

What any Gnetter feels or thinks is irrelevant whitewave if what they are using as their premise is simply not true. Either Parties are or are not asking "party candidates to sign a loyalty to the leader clause". I cannot find any information supporting that. Nothing offered on this thread that is factual supports this.

It is spin, an untruth, fake news, whatever you want to call it. No Party is asking its candidates to sign any such thing.

There is very little point in discussing something that isn't true and isn't happening.

annie you constantly cite as your credentials your past loyalty and your families support of the LP over 3 generations.

There are many of us on GN I am sure who could say the same. But we understand it counts for nothing if we no longer stand together to fight the widening injustices in our society.

But what matters is not what we or our families have supported in the past, what matters for our children and grandchildren is what we do now. Past loyalty means nothing, if you consistently try to undermine the good that the current LP is trying to achieve.

Your loyalty to the LP has clearly gone. Everything you say sings that out as clear as a bell.

The OP asks ... would you be content for your party candidates to sign a loyalty to the leader clause ... The OP also asks us to answer the question regardless of party so I must assume the OP believes this applies to all parties in some way.

Firstly could I ask for some clarification from the OP and for some facts on this. As far as I am aware all MPs have to pledge allegiance to the Queen. I have seen no change to add Party leader's to this. What authority is asking all the Parties to do this? If so, which of the parties is compliant? What is happening to people standing as independents?

I have to say, in these days of fake news and false truth I do wonder if, in fact, any Party is asking this of their MPs. I am sure most people would agree that after the lies we heard during the referendum and seeing what is happening in America, where their leader's supporters can declare that it doesn't matter if a video is real or false as long as it gives the message they want to put out, we should all be assiduous in tracking down and identifying such fake news, false truth and pure propaganda.

I would want factual chapter and verse - a copy of what they have to sign and which Party is making their MPs do this before I even start to answer the OP.