Party leaders

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.

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.

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

I need something that shows. screaming mad!

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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

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?

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.

Whitewave

"But one would expect as a member of a particular political party that they are loyal to the parties ideology. All political parties have a right to expect that from their members. If they can no longer give that loyalty then they should leave."

This why I see such hypocrisy when it comes to Corbyn followers/Momentum you name it.

So the Labour Party backs Trident (at this moment in time!), Corbyn, Abbott , McDonnell haved voted against their party time and again.

Corbyn is known as a fairly prolific backbench rebel, has been for years. He has voted against numerous Labour Leaders for years.

Why has'nt he/ they left their party? If you believe what you post why do you not call for them to resign from the party.

The truth is for those who are Corbyn followers they are smelling a take over, a change of policies for the Labour Party and are not giving a hoot as to how it comes about, or which MP's , councillors that have served the Labour Party for years are treated in the process.




.

That's because it isn't a simple yes or no question lemongrove much as some people would like it to be. There are too many variables, which is why I posted the questions to those who had said they wanted MPs to vote according to their principles. How far would they take that belief?
If I was a member of Momentum (and I am not, much as some like to imagine I am) I can see that asking a candidate to make a commitment in order to gain my support and for me to campaign for them would be desirable.
And please read the article- it is candidates not MPs who are being asked to sign. There is a difference you know.
This is a typical example of people arguing about something that hasn't been proposed and is in fact purely a figment of someone's imagination. As a purely academic discussion it may be quite interesting but it has little basis in fact.

The point is Momentum has now become so dominate a force in the eyes of the Labour Leadership it has successfully taken over the Labour Party.

Some of us said this would happen and it has.

Momentum is no longer is in the shadows it has become the norm . Who is in charge of the Labour Party , Momentum and they are so powerful they can get away with dictating the terms out in the open. At least now the public and those who said they know nothing of momentum cannot hide behind that nativity any longer.

I have asked these questions several times on GN and never received a reply , hopefully I will this time.:-

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 ?

I think that the op is wrong in the assumption that MPs may or may not sign a loyalty clause to the leader.

No! That can and never should happen.

But one would expect as a member of a particular political party that they are loyal to the parties ideology. All political parties have a right to expect that from their members. If they can no longer give that loyalty then they should leave.

It isn’t the leader that matters but the political party. I’m sure you know that annie

Yes, you are talking around this subject trisher and haven’t said a simple yes or no that you think it is acceptable.
Neither has anybody else who usually is very talkative about the LP and likes Corbyn.I wonder why?They are ignoring this thread as too difficult to comment on.

trisher

Your post 10.05 is interesting . I am reading your words as you consider it perfectly acceptable , a non negotiable position for MP's to be forced to adhere at 'ALL' times to the Party Line, never have a conscientious vote.

How would Corbyn have fared under such a Stasi state I wonder when he is known to have voted against his party leader time and again?

I am wondering if there is a fag paper between hypocrisy and control when talking of this move.

I would imagine anyone who campaigned for Corbyn was fully aware of his beliefs. It's not something he has ever hidden.

If it's ok for the leader of the Labour Party then you think it's ok so why ask?

So what if you have campaigned for a party and an MP then votes against an issue you used in that campaign? Would you find that acceptable?

Or what if you voted for an MP and their party, and that party is in government, but with a tiny minority, and your MP voted with the opposition because of their principles and brought down the government. Is that OK?

I agree Annie Well said.

Who ever defends this dishonest deed cannot speak of democracy or freedom of speech

I would never ever vote for a candidate who has signed any sort 'loyalty agreement'. Not even if they were from the party I support in a closely contested constituency.

In fact I would resign from the party I have belonged to for many years, if there was even a suggestion that such an agreement might be worth considering.

I expect my MP to be independent and vote according to their principles. While I would be somewhat surprised if they made a habit of not supporting the party, (say, in 300 or 400 votes) they were recognised as belonging to. I would be equally worried if they followed their leader slavishly whether they had signed a 'loyalty agreement' or not.

No.
Loyalty to the party should be expected, without having to sign a guarantee to win support.
Leaders change, their policies and beliefs also, as do those of elected and prospective MPs.
A very dangerous step indeed.