The Nasty Labour Party - what they really stand for.

May I remind you Day6- that many of us remainers and concerned about the NHS, are NOT Labour members- or supporters.

'What we must do is holler very loudly and at every turn that value for money is provided, wherever services come from, and any corruption, inefficiency, mismanagement and squandering of funds is rooted out'

and I for one would agree with this. And yet- it has been shown very clearly that once services are outsourced, profits for suppliers and shareholders- become the new rulers. Services are sold to the lowest bidders, for the highest
profits - and often very low quality. See the thread on NHS waste being dumped, as just one small example.

Often too, private services will give good value for money and quality at first, to undermine the state service - until the state service has been destroyed- and then they can raise prices as they like- having got rid of competition.

Chomsky is so right - the theory and tacticts are always the same- and still, after so so long, people still fall for it.

Do you think the NHS, and the tax payer, got good value into the outsourcing of IT systems - the lowest bidder got the contract- without the knowledge or expertise to do the job- at the cost to NHS, and tax payer, of billions.- as as one example, again.

Always extremes - see - saw - marjory doh bl**dy doh. Why can't we have sensible discussion, sensible solutions- that work for the benefit of most?

As said, perfect, for shareholders for sure:

"That’s the standard technique of privatization: defund, make sure things don’t work, people get angry, you hand it over to private capital"

The 'catastrophic' privatisation of Britain’s railways has cost the taxpayer £5bn per year and driven up fares by 20 per cent, Labour has claimed.

Analysis released to mark the 25th anniversary of the legislation that privatised British Rail suggests government subsidies of the railways have increased fourfold since 1993.

And since 1995, shortly after British Rail began to be sold off, fares have increased by an average of 20 per cent in real terms, while some routes have seen a much bigger rise.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/trains-railways-fares-privatisation-labour-5bn-john-major-nationalisation-a8617321.html

What a change to see Jeremy Corbin slated on GN. I have felt the few times I come on, that it is a very Lefty site. As usual, I have friends like this, left wing people have no toleration for anyone else's opinion only there own. This is what they call Democracy. MP's are elected by the constituents and should not follow everything the Leader says, they are there to serve. Unfortunately, I live in a Labour area, they would vote Labour even if the candidate was a Money on a stick.

Nothing wrong with 'lefties', Marieeliz. They just have a different vision of how our country should be run. For the many, not the few, you know

I think there are many posters on here Marieeliz who would vote Labour if the present leader, most of his team and that group that backs him were removed and sensible moderates were in charge.

However, moderate views are rarely expressed on GN because those who support Corbyn accuse posters of being right-wing extremists, so moderates tend to keep quiet.

However, moderate views are rarely expressed on GN because those who support Corbyn accuse posters of being right-wing extremists, so moderates tend to keep quiet.

Equally, Jalima, many people posting even vaguely leftwing views are 'accused' of being Corbyn supporters which seems to automatically ensure that their views are ignored.

P.S That makes it very difficult to discuss ideas as people are more interested in the Corbyn hate-fest than in ideas.

vaguely leftwing could describe moderates, centre, slightly left of centre who are not keen on Corbyn et al.
Who must apparently be extreme right wingers.

Perhaps I have the wrong impression from threads.

Marieeliz you can't post much on GN, Corbyn is regularly slated as are any with left wing views. Of course some on here pretend to be left-wing, but finding out what policies they actually support is difficult and in some cases impossible. And as MaizieD said those with left wing views are called Corbynistas and communists.

Who would you support for Labour leadership then trisher?

vaguely leftwing could describe moderates, centre, slightly left of centre who are not keen on Corbyn et al.

Problem for me, Jalima is that I've never thought of myself as particularly left wing but on here I appear to be thought positively communist! It's that Overton Window effect, I think I'm sure nobody really considers themselves to be extreme.

That's why my plea is for discussion of ideas, not categorising and personalities

I critcise Corbyn because he is a hypocrite and don’t bother with the policies from the Corbyn/Momentum/McClusky Party .

As for leader , seems the fight is on, Corbyn v McDonald

Absolutely not true that it is rare to find critisism of Jeremy Corbyn on Gransnet. Numerous threads have been started with the express intention of criticising him and the present supporters of the new direction of the Labour Party.

And yes, it is hard to find what policies are supported by those who say they are left wing, but don't say what they do want, just that they don't like Jeremy Corbyn.

Just note the title of this thread.

It should be possible to discuss policy and ideas even if you don't agree with the particular direction that a political party is taking.

It is also possible to give credit to a party that you don't agree with if you think they have done something right. e.g. I don't support the Conservatives but I do give them credit for saying there will be no more PFIs.

I agree with you Ilove cheese about abolishing PFIs, which were introduced under John Major's government, then massively increased by Tony Blair. When I first heard of PFI, I thought that it was just wrong - short-termism at its worst.

Jalima1108 I don't know because I don't know who will stand in the next leader election. I would like to see a woman leader but not sure who will put themselves forward. As it is Corbyn is the elected leader and as such should be allowed to lead.
I have posted about policies I believe in before but anyway I believe in
Taking the railways back into public ownership
Public utilities owned and run by not-for-profit organisations
Properly funding the NHS and stopping privatisation
A programme of building social housing
Rent regulation
Abolition of zero hours contracts unless asked for by the employee.
Halting Universal Credit programme until it can be introduced without anyone being disadvantaged.
Higher taxes for the rich
Anyone want to comment?

I like your list, trisher and would add a National Investment Bank

And stress that I firmly believe a mixed economy is the best way to go.

The Term terrorist is subjective – depending on what side you view it from.
They never supported the IRA – they did agree to enter into discussion with them and helped to broker peach
Hamas are fighting to retain their own land – and are in no way worse than the Israelis that are occupying it. Again – they have been brokering for peace.
The rest is just hysterical media rubbish.
I don’t think they are against Private Schools – they just want a decent education for those who can’t afford to pay. If you can afford to – it is leaving more resources for those who can’t.
As for the ‘other’ side? You surely aren’t saying they are better? Vested interests in the arms trade to Saudi, Private Healthcare and property ownership. Selling Arms, Selling of the NHS to line their own pockets, refusing to pass the bill to make rented housing pass a reasonable standard. Mudslinging at every opportunity. Causing the deaths of so many sick and disabled people. Creating a culture of me first to unprecedented levels. Outrageous rise in food banks. Hate crime against the sick and disabled rising sky high. Very shallow arguments against Labour to be honest.

Trisher - Spot on!

I would add to Trishers list, an end to the gig economy. One in five now find themselves in this so-called self-employment where they are contracted to one employer, receive no basic pay, no basic hours, no paid holidays, no sick pay and no employer liability insurance protection.

The above effects businesses that wish to offer reasonable terms and conditions to their workforce, but then find themselves at a competitive disadvantage to companies that use gig employment.

trisher seems like a good list to me. It's sad the level of any debate here really.

Why don’t you approve of the level of debate here niggly? With one exception every poster is agreeing

Never mind. I'm just tired and worried so not in the right place for the cut and thrust of politics.

With one exception every poster is agreeing

Agreeing something about ideas/policies, yes. For probably the first time in 600+posts

It wasn't niggly who approved the level of debate, Annie; it was oldbatty

Hey, no problem. I don't want to argue.