Party leaders

Maizie d

" I'm confused. Angela Raynor isn't a candidate, she's an MP. She isn't being asked to sign a loyalty pledge. It's only prospective candidates."

So if and when there is another General Election is it the case a presently elected MP from any party is a guaranteed 'candidate ' to stand for their constituency or do they have to be chosen to stand as a 'candidate' again?

This is the reason why the Momentum issue is causing concern and here is just one example of the problem:-

www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/dec/02/momentum-let-us-choose-candidates-labour-letters

I would be in support of party candidates signing a loyalty to their leader cause or not being able to stand, and I don't see why doing so would take away their freedom to vote with their conscience.

IMO disloyalty to a party leader is being openly critical and seeking to undermine both their position and authority. Voting with one's conscience even if that means going against the party leader's wishes is not being disloyal, it is an democratic right to vote as you wish.

I suppose it can be argued that abstaining is also a democratic right but I think it's wrong for MP's to do so and they should sign a clause stating that they wont. If they're not prepared to vote, what's the point of them being there?

Momentum rules

RIP Labour Party

Maizie -my post indicated Angela Rayner isn't being asked to sign because she is an MP. There are several links on line to what she said, apologies,, Im a genuine technophobe and have tried but failed to do links.

POGS, I have found out about Momentum by searching Momentum in the search bar.
Quite easy, really. You should try it.
You get a big red page, telling you how to join, and what the criteria are for joining.
I also read about them occasionally on Labourlist, who do not like Momentum. They do like Progress, and Labour First, just like Annie.

But that's all I know about them, not being a member and never having joined.

I'm unclear about the position of sitting LP MPs - I thought that Momentum were campaigning to stop automatic reselection and therefore current MPs such as Angela Raynor would become candidates for selection and therefore be required to sign a loyalty pledge.
And don't Momentum now have a majority on the NEC? So they can introduce such changes?

There is a vote soon for three extra seats in the NEC, arranged by Corbyn, three contenders are supported by Momentum, one is the founder of Momentum, Jon Lansman

The situation for sitting MPs remains as it was before-
At the moment, for every general election, local parties vote for their candidate in what is called a “trigger ballot” – a watered down version of mandatory reselection. This is a system by which each separate branch of a local party, and affiliated organisations, get a simple “yes/no” vote to nominate the candidate. Branches represent the membership of the constituency party (local parties are divided into branches, usually based on the ward boundaries for councillors). Affiliated organisations are groups like trade unions, the Fabians, BAME Labour, Co-op party, etc.

All the local constituency party’s branches and affiliates are entitled to return a vote. The votes of the latter are usually decided by a local official representing that affiliate group, rather than by a ballot of all the local affiliated group’s members. The MP must receive two-thirds of the nominations of all these groups to stay sitting. If the MP is unable to gain two-thirds of the nominations, then they have lost their trigger ballot, and a “full” selection process begins, in which other potential candidates can be nominated.

Thanks for that information Trisher - from what you say it looks as though a handful of activists could swing a vote - I'd guess that there's a lot of apathy particularly amongst members of the affiliates? I remember as a union rep that most members could not be bothered to come to meetings.

The other three contenders are supported by Progress.

Len McClusky has a problem with Progress , wonder why ?

I still see nothing positive in the anti Labour Party posts. They do not suggest any alternative and some just come down to personal attacks. If other socialists or social democrats have something else to offer why don't the tell us about it? This is the Labour Party we have the Labour Party which is closer to it roots than anything we saw when Blair got hold of it. If you fee it's message is not for you don't vote for it; it is not trying to be Tory light. If that is what you want why not vote Tory?

If the posts are obviously saying the alternative is the Tory offering I find them very easy to ignore. They are simply attacking the proposals of one party while backing the chaos the Tories have plunged us in to while showing their inability to run the country for all those who live in it.

That is exactly the problem, a lot of Labour voters are having to either ‘hold their noses’ and vote for Corbyn to be PM or not vote at all. Labour MP’s have had a difficult job trying to persuade voters to vote for their standing MP ( more or less hissing in their ears that Corbyn won’t be there forever.)

Freedom of speech GG, I couldn't see any point in you going on about the politics of Norway, I have no intention of moving there, you were interested in it , your choice.

By the by, Blair won three elections on the trot, no Momentum in the shadows, no Union leaders having desks in Labour H.Q. No prospective MP's signing bits of paper promising loyalty to him.

Just voters across the U.K. voting for a Labour Party without the fear of the far left and union dominance .

I have a very busy day, toodle pip

Blair won 3 elections partly because those who thought him too far to the right behaved like adults and supported him and the party. Had they behaved as the right wingers are now the party would have been split and probably never have recovered. What a pity the right wing now choose to be so destructive.

You actually mean the right and the centre leaning Labour MP’s trisher oh, and the slightly left as well.
They see Corbyn as the destructive force.

Blair won three elections mostly because the majority of the British public liked his policies and saw him as a better option for PM than anyone in the other parties.
Who are all these right wingers choosing to be so destructive? Free speech is just that.

Incorrect, after the wilderness years the majority in the party knew the country feared the far left , it was voters who put Blair in No.10, voters from across the country , memories of the strikes, power cuts, refuge in the streets for weeks, unburied loved ones. he did it without a long list of rainbow promises, no musical instruments for every child, no free school meals for children of parents in professional jobs. N.I. Peace talks not pushing N I out of the U K .

This was reaching the many

So are you saying if the unions, the left wingers and the MPs who had doubts about him had chosen to stand against him Blair would still have won those elections Annie? I don't think so. The party would have been split and Blair would have lost.

lemongrove we have discussed the shift of all politics to the right before. Those whom you now call far-left are no such thing. It amuses me that you regard ordinary people who believe in policies espoused by many in 1945 as far left or communists. It's simply untrue.

Glad that something amuses you trisher

I was, in any case. Talking about mainstream Labour voters, who may or may not be actual Party members, not wanting to put Corbyn into Number 10.There are many of them.

You actually mean the right and the centre leaning Labour MP’s trisher oh, and the slightly left as well.
Hardly mainstream Lbour voters lemon Do you sometimes not read what you post?

.....and the LP dismisses them at it’s peril! Why do you think Labour lost the election this year?
If Corbyn had the support of all Labour voters, he would have won easily, of course the lacklustre campaign run by the Conservatives weakened them, but that should have played into Corbyns hands even more....but it didn’t.

Labour MP’s are distinct from Labour voters trisher

You make the simple mistake of thinking that all in the LP should think as you do and espouse very left wing ideas and policies.
The average Labour voter does not wish to see such as Corbyn as PM, is this so difficult to understand?