Sensible discussion on Labour Leadership hopefuls

anniebach Up until recently you had been a longstanding member of the Labour Party. Were you unaware that the trades unions were largely responsible for its formation? The "winter of discontent" that you have also referred to in previous posts also occurred while you were a member. Why did you not relinquish your membership and involvement in the party at that time if you felt they were such a malign influence?

I imagine that RLB will soon be having a makeover of those eyebrows ( they are a bit peculiar) and a shallow subject or not, with tv and public appearances, looks matter.
Clothes do too, Boris Johnson has slimmed down a bit and his suits fit better ( Corbyn eventually had a clothes makeover too) it does help the image.

Eyebrows say a lot about people Dinahmo!!

Looking at the way things are going and celebrity culture I've decided there is only one way to sort out the Labour Leadership and win the next election. Firstly there's no hurry. Let the Tories get on with Brexit. As things develop set up a reality TV show. Get about 12 MPs to stand as leader. Over 12 weeks have a live TV competition with challenges, both individual and team, at the end of which the public votes and one candidate is eliminated. The MP left at the end becomes Leader! He/she then embarks on as many guest appearances on TV game shows as they can manage. Result celebrity leader and election in the bag!!!

Two interesting columns in the Guardian yesterday. Rebecca Long Bailey making her pitch for leadership of the LP and Anne McElvoy on the miserableness of the centrists and Johnson's popularity.

In RLB's article she sets out her view of the future and there is little to disagree with.

McElvoy talks about the appeal, particularly to those in the North of Johnson's enthusiasm.

The dilemma is how do we on the centre or the left find a candidate that has popular appeal combined with good policies. RBL doesn't do it for me. I may be small minded and intolerant but I can't get past those eyebrows.

I never mentioned Aberfan nor intended any reference to that tragedy.

The history I referred to was the history of the Labour Party and its evolvement.

The deaths of 144 people is not ‘an incident’. And I will continue to speak of the tragedy whilst another poster continues to praise the unions who covered up the truth of the brutality dished out to the bereaved.

The dismissal of the tragedy with ‘so what’, was the same dismissal we heard from the unions in 1966.

I made historical references.

If you read my post Callistemon, I am not saying that historical references are never relevant. But what relevance does Aberfan, Alf Robens who Annie appears to have issues with but who died in 1999 and Blair, who can do no wrong in her eyes?

I do not want to use Aberefan as a stick to beat those whose policies I dislike with and I do not like seeing it done. I did not bring it up. I believe a great deal was learned from that terribly sad incident but not things that affect how the LP chooses its next leader.

It can't listen to us first though, surely growstuff. If you (or I) want a party that completely reflects our views we need to start one. At this point, it is down to the LP. Yes, it makes good copy for the newspapers and interesting chat for us but the people who decide will be its members.

If you leave a party you most certainly lose the opportunity to influence them. If the LP decides to put together a party that is wholly unelectable that is down to them. We may or may not vote for what they do decide; that is where our influence lies. There is a lot of telling them what to do on here and a lot of people who profess to belong to right-wing parties or have voted for them doing the telling. Why would the LP listen to those who jumped ship when needed or voted another government in? They patently do not want what the core of the party wants. Many of us will not belong to a party. I wonder how many of those who talk about the Conservative Party on here as if they have some ownership are actually members?

Blair May have annoyed traditional labour voters ,1997 ,

Michael Foot 1983, Corbyn 2019 certainly did,

X post with GGMK3
I made historical references.

I believe we do need to learn from past mistakes, from successes and failures. Otherwise we never progress and improve.

They will, growstuff and those voters will not be Labour party members. They will often judge a Government on its performance and vote to get them out and give another party a chance of forming a government.

The Trades Unions are, as Grandad says, the mainstay of the Labour party apart from during the Blair years.
However, it does not follow that all Union members vote Labour.

Unless the LP and Trades Unions together realise that, in the form they are, which looks to the past for its inspiration, they lessen their chances of ever forming a government. The last Labour Government voted in was in 1974.
That is nearly 50 years ago!

Blair may have annoyed traditional Labour voters but must have done something right as far as the electorate was concerned for a while and they are the people who decide.

I do not need you to judge my sensitivity thank you Iam

I went on to explain why I do not think these historical references have little bearing on what we need for the future. I agree that there is a level of "so what" about all historical policies but the closing of large institutions or rather the savaging of the care and mental health budgets reverberate on into what is policy today, which, I believe, is different to the incidents that Annie referred to.

Annie wasn't just talking about Aberfan was she, so I saw no need to reply as if she was. Perhaps a chat with Annie about her own sensitivity to the past events she collects together as evidence is in order.

However, I am sure she is a big girl now and can fight her own battles if that is what this is.

I don't have any say at all in what the Labour Party decides. Nevertheless, the Labour Party does need to win votes to form a government and many of those votes will have to be "new" voters. Well, I'm here, my vote is up for grabs, so the Labour Party would be foolish not to listen to people like me - and millions of others. At the moment, I'm not impressed.

GGm3 - you may dislike the way Annie refers back to Aberfan but to dismiss her by saying "so what" is at best insensitive given Annie's personal connection to that disaster.

Would we say "so what" about the policies that led to for example, large institutions for people in need of care. No, we'd learn from our mistakes. The same goes for so many things. That old cliche, if we don't learn from the past, we're destined to repeat it comes to mind.

Annie, the only answer I can think of to that in reference of where we are today is ... so what?

This is the past and we can all dig up things governments did that we didn't like. It really doesn't tell us anything about today. Yes, we need to know our history - preferably as balanced a view as possible but it is what is ahead of us that we need to think about now. It will be interesting to see who the LP vote for as leader but, as far as I am aware, you are not a member. Neither am I so while I can add thoughts of what they will face and what I might like to see it really is going to be a Labour Party decision and then we can decide if we might vote for them.

You left, I never joined. In my book, that means we don't have anything like the same say as members do.

The union controlled labour government who made the bereaved of Aberfan pay £150,000 towards removal of tips
which had killed their children.

The unions who kept Lord Robens in his job even though
‘He was economical with the truth ‘ at the tribunal.

The Blair government who gave the money back to the village and it was invested to pay for care of the children’s graves after their parents had died.

Hi everybody, I see my name mentioned in several of the recent posts in this thread and in that I apologies for not responding. We are away on Exmoor to see the New year in, so GN or the Labour movement are not at the forefront of my thoughts at present, but good food, wine and great personal friends most definitely are.

However, in the few moments before breakfast, what has to be realised is that the Blair years of the Parliamentary Labour party or anything that remotely resembles those years will without a doubt not be returning to any part of the Labour Movement, in that I am absolutely convinced.

It is the trade union movement that not only largely fund the Labour party but also give that body huge structural support by way of the use of its buildings and the benefit of those unions own internal infrastructures. Union members individually contribute weekly or monthly affiliation subscriptions directly from their wages and salaries to the Labour party and their branches affiliate separately to individual Constituency Labour parties all over the country.

For one hundred years the above structure worked well for the whole Labour movement (of which the Parliamentary Labour party is an integral part). However, Blair on gaining the leadership was allowed to reduce the Labour National Executive down to very few in number all of whom were of his and his cohorts choosing.

How did Blair repay that which was so trustingly given to him? In that, not once did he ever address any major trade union conference or repeal any of the fifteen anti-trade union bills that had been brought in by the Thacher and Major governments. He did however only too gladly continue to readily accept the affiliation subscriptions that came from those often poorly paid trade union members for which in gratitude he allowed then to witness the growth in Zero Hours Employment Contracts and Gig Economy terms of working.

Therefore, and as stated, I firmly believe that the Labour Movement will remain in its present political stance and in all likelihood Rebecca Long-Bailey will be elected to lead the Parliamentary Labour Party for at least the next three years. Long-Bailey has attended many trade union conferences over the last two years and in that has a large grasp and understanding of its structures and workings. She seems to be well liked and received by the grassroots activists and that is what is required to succeed within the Labour movement.

My view for what it is worth would be that Long-Bailey on the election will give priority to getting to grips with those within the Parliamentary Party that are "left-overs" from the Blairite era and have caused huge disruption in the party throughout the Corbyn leadership years. Should Long-Bailey fail in that then the broader Labour movement will I believe "pull the plug" on its existing political wing and start again?

I do find it amusing in this thread that there is one forum member who is continuously contributing advise after having stated he/she is a member of the Liberal Democrat party. I believe that seeing how pathetic the performance of the LibDems was in the Election just held by way of achieving a grand total of eleven seats, that to continually inform on how Labour movement members should be running their party is a "bit rich" to say the least. Perhaps a little more attention to the problems of the LibDems and less to the problems of the Labour party would be more beneficial to that forum member I could well believe.

Anyway, Carol.my wife has once again finished putting her slap on and we are now going down to a "slap-up breakfast" at this lovely hotel.

So, a very happy new year to everyone.

It is not particularly a charge I lay only against GN posters who may at some time or another be seen as changing their opinions it is something that can be witnessed by some in the media and some commentators too.

So basically these people don't actually exist as real people just a figment of a mean and nasty imagination?

go to

Grandad as I mentioned before at least is not a ' fair weather friend' ' and has stood by what he has posted in the past unlike some who argued up hill and down dale Momentum/Corbyn were the future, the bees knees. Of course that was until they lost the Election by getting a drubbing and it seems memories have some what been selectively erased.

Perhaps you would care to name names POGS instead of just sheltering behind spite go which they cannot reply.

GJ

' NO to Blairites.'

' If Labour move towards the centre, they'll lose loyal left wing voters.'
---
Yep.! That's what happened in the 80's and the mirror image is Corbyn has caused Labour to lose loyal centre ground voters since 2016 .

The fact remains however on both occasions the wider public who are Labour voters but not members, kicked the far left Trotskyist Militant and Corbyn/Momentum into touch.

It was the centre /centre right Labour Party that garnered votes and kept Labour in power.

The question is which faction will win power as the Broad Church Labour Party has been lost and the far left holds the nuts and bolts of Labour, thus far.

If there is no chance of someone being acceptable to not only Labour Members but the wider electorate and it remains as divided/factional which cannot be denied then it surely will lead to the Labour Party ' probably splitting'.

No to any Blairites. I won't vote for Tory lite. I don't like Lavery, but MIGHT vote for him.

If Labour move towards the centre, they'll lose loyal left wing voters.

It appears Lavery is running to make Wrong Baily look good.

Sorry you don't like the facts Oopsminty. I made no judgement.

It's an absolute fact that younger people have higher educational qualifications than older people. I made no comment about whether the qualifications are worth anything. I leave that up to you.