Sensible discussion on Labour Leadership hopefuls

you should have

Excuse me, but you have no right to tell anyone what they should or should not do, Grandad.

I hope you will be able to reconcile yourself to the changes that are about to happen, but you have already spoken about a breakaway party.
Should they not remain and fight?

I am asking, not ordering, btw.
There is a difference

Don't hold your breath for answers to awkward questions, Grandad ignored all of mine to him while complaining I hadn't answered his to me. When I asked for him to tell me where that question was because I couldn't find it, answer came there none (not surprising since it didn't exist). I have disagreed with Anniebach on occasion and even called her out for the deliberate misspelling of Meghan's name, but she doesn't deserve the pompous criticism to which she is being subjected.

Anybody has a right to leave any political party the problem is it is sometimes very difficult to tell exactly what policies some people believe in. They constantly post things they are against but never what they actually support. When the things they reject are the basis and the policies of the party they left is it any wonder some of us become confused about which party the person supports?

What questions were those janipat? I do genuinely try to answer many questions asked of me in regard to the Labour movement organisation and structures both on the forum and by way of personal messages.

Anniebach

Grandad I'm not going to search back, and can't remember which thread it was now to be honest. I remember you accusing me of not answering a question you'd put to me twice. I scrolled back at the time and found where I had answered you, referenced it and asked for a timestamp for your second time because I genuinely could not find it. You never answered but did reply to people in posts either side of mine. I wouldn't have been asking about the Labour movement organisation or structures, maybe asking you to justify or explain some other viewpoint of yours? I just remember you didn't address my questions just accused me of not answering yours. Water under the bridge now.

Jess Phillips will announce today if she will stand for the leadership.

Would you like Jess Phillips to be leader Anniebach ? What policies would you like to hear being proposed by a potential leader?

POGS, I'll simply listen to what they say, and weigh this up before making my decision. I don't think you can put too much emphasis on what people have said in the past as our dear Prime Minister has indicated. Much as I rather wanted a left wing government,and was very impressed by John McDonnell in particular, if we want to see injustices ended and employment rights protected we need to be lead by someone who stands some chance of being elected.
The two I will be looking at in particular are Keir Starmer and Jess Phillips. There is something about Rebecca Long Baileys manner and her support of Corbyn which in my view indicates she could never command enough respect.

A little point on the union vote. My DH has a vote in the leadership election as he is a member of a union. He is not however a labour supporter and usually votes for someone totally unsuitable as a Spoiler. The system needs reform.

I don’t think Jess Phillips will win the leadership.

I have doubts about Starmer but he seems to be the one tipped to win.

Policies ? I will wait to hear what the candidates say.

I am so against Long Bailey , she would be a spokesperson for
Corbyn and MacDonald.

I think unions will give block vote to Rebecca Long Bailey. She represents a northern constituency and is female andcendorced by McDonnell. I think momentum will back her too. Remember Milibands', Labour still ruled by momentum and unions so Kier unlikely to prevail in my view. Also he orchestrated Labour disasterous Brexit policy of negotiating a policy with EU then campaign against it. That policy lost so many Labour heartland seats to Boris.

I think so to newnanny , Momentum and the Unions will
decide the next leader and Long Bailey has the support of both and the far left.

Grandad

" I do genuinely try to answer many questions asked of me '
-

I am interested in hearing your answer to my previous question if you have a moment.

' However, those which resign their membership and then decide to return to the movement when "things are more to their liking" command no respect in my experience.'
----

I asked:-

"Does that apply to those posters /returned Labour Members/ who also resigned and ' returned ' to Labour because Corbyn brought them back to the fold?"

PernillaVania

"POGS, I'll simply listen to what they say, and weigh this up before making my decision. I don't think you can put too much emphasis on what people have said in the past as our dear Prime Minister has indicated."
-

Thank you for replying.

I agree whole heartedly about listening to make one's decision.
However the reason I asked re Starmer’s statement was because he only said it after the General Election and Labour's resounding losses, so hardly ' in the past'

I genuinely find Keir Starmer a bit of a player, says different things to suit the occasion.

Interesting times for Labour.

I have doubts about Starmer

I just can’t imagine Jess Phillips as a PM. Really can’t.

I believe Jess Phillips has done some good work about domestic violence but I would like to hear her strategic vision for the country.

Apologies for my delay in replying to the two forum members who have posted questions to me on this thread in the last twenty four hours. The reason for the delay was that I went into the office this morning to see whether all I had arranged in regard to my own work for next week was still as such prior to our holiday. Walking through the door for what was to be a few minutes, turned out to be an all day event.

Anyway to deal with those two questions:-
Callistemon you asked:- you have already spoken about a breakaway party. Should they not remain and fight?

Callistemon what I was referring to was the very real possibility, I believe, of the whole broader Labour movement deciding to terminate the funding of its political wing (the present Parliamentary Labour Party) and begin again.

There is strong evidence of widespread grassroots feeling among activists in the trade unions that the present Parliamentary Labour Party is so split ideologically that the bridging of that divide is now impossible. I feel that the above was very well brought forward at a special meeting of my Unite Union branch in the week following the general election which I attended having not been present at such meetings for many years.

At that meeting, an on site union rep from a large distribution centre stated "there are many MPs in the Parliamentary Labour Party who view us activists in the Trades Union movement in the same manner as they would view a lump of Dog Sh*t on their shoe.

The above very much summed up the mood of the meeting and a resolution was passed and forwarded to the Reginal Committee stating that the political Levy funding of the present Parliamentary Labour party should be brought to an end. Of course, that does not mean that the funding will cease as that is the view of only one large branch. However, there is strong evidence that similar resolutions have been and are being passed by many other branches within all trades unions.

POGS you asked:- "Does that apply to those posters /returned Labour Members/ who also resigned and ' returned ' to Labour because Corbyn brought them back to the fold?"

POGS I believe that over four hundred thousand "new members" took up direct membership of the Labour Party around the time that Jeremy Corbyn became leader when prior to that influx the membership of the party was approximately one hundred and fifty thousand. The Last audited membership figures I have seen advised that Labour Party membership was still above four hundred thousand. So POGS, where is the problem in that?

In regards to all the speculation as to who has or may "throw their hat" into the leadership ring, I feel it is well worth waiting to see if the Labour Party National Executive actually do call a leadership contest when they meet on Monday. There is growing media speculation they may not, and in that, there is some very good reasoning.

I don’t think Jess Phillips is right for a PM but she is certainly
needed on the front bench.

I don’t trust Starmer .

Definitely not Long Bailey.

Not Thornberry.

Hope more will come forward to stand.

Wbo would you like to lead the Labour Party Annie?

Well, I hope this doesn't see the demise of the Labour Party Grandad.

We need a LP fit for modern times and at least fit to provide a strong Opposition for the next few years.

United we stand, divided we fall comes to mind.

None of those I have named varian, I so want a centre left leader but momentum and the unions will stop that.

I admire Jess Phillips, she would be great at PMQ facing Johnson

Callistemon, just to add to your post @19:54 today, I would agree that it is essential for the body politic in Britain that a strong left wing presence is available to the electorate as counterbalance the very strong and well funded right wing.

However, since the Blair era, the ideological divisions within the Labour Party have steadily grown and many feel they are now unbridgeable.

Therefore and sadly I believe that as the Conservative party will be in power for the next four years, now is a good time for the left wing in British politics to divide with the Broader Labour movement in the country funding and setting up a fresh political wing.

Those of the centre left politicians who obviously have not been happy with the present structures will then be free to make their own way in the political field.

For the broad Labour movement to set up a new political wing will not be easy, but they now have three to four years to bring that about.

Grandad

"However, those which resign their membership and then decide to return to the movement when "things are more to their liking" command no respect in my experience.'
----

POGS

' Does that apply to those posters /returned Labour Members/ who also resigned and ' returned ' to Labour because Corbyn brought them back to the fold?'
-

Grandad

' POGS I believe that over four hundred thousand "new members" took up direct membership of the Labour Party around the time that Jeremy Corbyn became leader when prior to that influx the membership of the party was approximately one hundred and fifty thousand. The Last audited membership figures I have seen advised that Labour Party membership was still above four hundred thousand. So POGS, where is the problem in that?'
---

What is the problem with that, for one you didn' t answer the question and two I view it as hypocrisy to be frank.

So a Gransnet poster and others resigned from the Labour Party because of Corbyns Leadership but will most likely 'return ' when the Leadership changes from Corbyn.

Gransnet posters and others ' returned ' to the Labour Party because of Corbyns Leadership and may well resign again under a new Leader.

The former you elude ' command no respect ' because they resigned, the latter you see no problem with although the principle for resigning and returning is the same on both counts ' things were more to their liking' as you put it.

The two scenarios are simply a mirror image, they all resigned and returned and didn't stick with the Party but dependent on which ' side ' a person favours it appears can be deemed as ''commanding no respect'.

If a principled application applied then it would be the case to a person who considers somebody resigning from the Party and returning when they feel things are more to their liking is just cause to say they ' command no respect ' then whether it was enacted under Blair/Brown or Corbyn Leaderships, IF it is a principled opinion it would matter not a jot. That person would believe the ALL ' command no respect'.

I personally do not think it is a case of ' commanding no respect' , on the contrary I think it is a principled move to make. That is probably why there are so many floating voters, they do not feel the need to stick through thick and thin with a Political Party they do not agree with from time to time.

POGS ???