Sensible Discussion on Labour Leadership hopefuls MK 2

Cunco I would question the socialism of the unions anyway. They look out for themselves (that's their role after all). They don't seem to be that interested in so many of the other issues, with which the Labour Party engages. They're a minority pressure group.

Grandad Am I correct in thinking that fewer than 30% of Unite's membership is female?

Grandad

Oh dear, whataboutery.

Well if that is addressed to me in the hope it will avoid addressing the point I made, to avoid the truth, all I can say there is no argument from me.

The point you raised has been said on the copious anti Conservative threads and I never argued the matter on them either. . Sometimes facts have to be accepted but this is about the Labour Party and I stick my post.

Yes it was a terrible performance this morning. I want the labour party to stop demonstrating its ineptitude, I so wish this leadership election was over.

POGS Quote [The days of the likes of Corbyn sitting in the back benches voting against their Party / Leaders but being respected for holding a different olinion/view is over.] End Quote.

Yes POGS, the above days ended when Johnson dismissed twenty-one longstanding and well respected Tory MPs from the party for voting against him over Brexit.

They went with no appeal process available to them whatsoever which they most definitely would have been available to them in the Labour movement.

I can't help feeling, Grandad, that, in my fairly limited experience of a union at a local level, what the activists (always the ones willing to put in the work, so the ones in positions in the hierarchy) want may not be what their members want. If they split, it is likely that they won't take their members with them.

I ask you again, are you happy to see the tories in power for a decade or two?

Lisa Nandy had an absolute roasting on GMB by Piers Morgan this morning. The Twittershere are saying she's unelectable now due to her evasive answers.

Long Baily has said those who donate to parties expect something back. Obviously thinking of the unions.

The Broad Church Labour Party is over then.

The days of the likes of Corbyn sitting in the back benches voting against their Party / Leaders but being respected for holding a different olinion/view is over.

Perversely it has come about by those who once enjoyed the freedom to vote as they wanted turning into the complete opposite.

So for example as a woman I find their policies on prostitution and porn utterly horrifying with little analysis on how this would impact on the most vulnerable.

For those that state that the trade unions withdrawing affiliation from the Parliamentary Labour Party would split left of centre politics in Britain, I would respond by stating that left-wing politics in Britain is already split in all probability well beyond restoration.

With numerous grassroots hardworking activists in trade unions feeling that many Labour MPs view them in the same light as they would "a lump of dog sh*t on their shoe", it will take enormous skill in any new Labour Party leader to rebuild and change such widespread and entrenched attitudes between the party and the broader Labour movement. In that, I feel there is no appetite for such a rebuilding process, although there is a widespread view within the broader movement that whoever is elected has to be given a fair chance of securing the above.

However, even during the course of this election process, there are those in the Parliamentary Party that are already expressing that they will not accept this widespread democratic election outcome should it not fit to what they believe the Labour Party should be in their eyes.

Many trade union activists that so often put enormous effort into assisting the Labour Party during election times have just three basic demands that if met would allow them to continue their support for affiliation to the Parliamentary Labour Party I believe. Those demands are:-
The revocation of the most restricting sections of the fifteen anti-trade union acts brought forward and implemented over five decades.

The end of Zero Hour contracts and their replacement with minimum hour contracts.

A complete end to Gig Economy Terms of Employment.

Only during the Corbyn era of leadership has the Labour party ever fully committed to above demands, and Rebbeca Long-Bailey is the only one of the present three candidates for the leadership to have stated she wishes to see that commitment continue.

Therefore with Labour MPs reported as stating they will not accept the result of the leadership election should it not be how they wish, and two of the leadership candidates having made no statement on the above demands, is it any wonder that affiliated grassroots activists see little future in that affiliation.

Certainly the foregoing is the overwhelming opinion within the activists of the two thousand strong road transport sector branch within Unite Union I am a member of, and I believe within many other branches of Unite and other leading unions.

Should that more than one hundred year affiliation be brought an end, then from what has been stated on the WhatsApp groups that have sprung up over the period of this election campaign a very credible outline plan for an alternative political structure seems to be well advanced in planning among those activists.

After all, as they see it, they cannot have gained less from all the support they have given the Labour party over the last twenty-five years, so, why not "cut the ties" and move on whatever the consequences.

I don't understand why you think that Galaxy

I would probably agree with that varian, I am grateful that pupil premium for example came out of that government, a real example of progressive thinking. However I think the liberal democrats have changed considerably since that time, and have become mired in identity politics with little analysis of inequality within society. I could never vote for them now despite being an ardent remainer. I am unsure whether it was their time in coalition that led to their current predicament.

I am well aware that many LibDems were reluctant to enter a coalition with the Tories in 2010. I was one of them, but was persuaded that it should be done for the good of the country and there is no doubt that although mistakes were made, we had a much better government during the coalition years than since then.

Cunco I believe that the Liberal Democrats would be in a much stronger and more popular place if Charles Kennedy had remained the leader.

I would be dissapointed if the Labour Party were to split because small parties don't win power, and if they go into coalition the smaller party gets destroyed. but I don't see how the party can carry on with this level of division within it.
The last leader, Jeremy Corbyn was democratically elected by the membership, but never accepted by the PLP or by the members who didn't vote for him.

If the next democratically elected leader is not the favourite choice of the PLP is the same division going to continue with coups and smears and covert recordings coming from people who did not get their own way.

Neither side of this so called left/right wing divide seem at all able to compromise or to accept defeat with grace.

varian You omitted to mention that, in 2015, Liberal Democrat MPs including Tim Farron, Norman Lamb and Tom Brake voted with David Cameron's government to have the Referendum. If you read the debate, Parliament voted by a huge majority for a simple in-out Referendum with no planning for what may come after. Parliament (including Liberal Democrats) were complacent and unprofessional, treating this major question with all the finesse of a drunk betting the house on the spin of a coin.

You also seem unaware that some Lib Dems thought that joining a coalition with the Conservatives in 2010 was a very bad idea. Former leader Charles Kennedy was the most prominent. While there was agreement on issues of national importance, the deal also included a referendum (subsequently lost) on the voting system, strongly favoured by the Liberal Democrats.

You believe voting Remain puts country first. I believe to opposite but I don't intend to open that debate up yet again, especially on a thread about the Labour leadership.

The worst problem with UK politics, apart from the undemocratic FPTP voting system, is the reluctance of the two dominant parties to split.

When at the last election, I was telling for the LibDems at our local polling station, there were two Tory ladies with me. Although the LibDems had a rota and we only did a shift of one hour, they seemed to have been there all day, presumably because they had a lack of volounteers.

Unusually for our local Tory Party members, they seemed to be quite intelligent.

They were both extremely opposed to David Cameron for having called the referendum in the way that he did and told me they were both ardent Remainers, but went on to say that the referendum had to happen because otherwise there would have been a split in their party.

It was clear to me that they put party before country,exactly the opposite to the LibDems whose willingness to enter a coalition in 2010 has cost us dear.

Who is right?

growstuff It seems the unions believe 'he who pays the piper calls the tune'. That's hardly a socialist idea for a party of the hard left.

When the new method of electing a Labour leader produced Corbyn (who stood 'because John and Dianne had already had a go'), there were no complaints from the hard left. Now the new method threatens to select a candidate perhaps nearer the centre, it's up-sticks and we'll do our own thing.

Ramsey MacDonald once said: 'In youth one believes in democracy, later on, one has to accept it.' Or perhaps not.

Grandad I think you are possibly more deluded than some LibDems before the last election. However, I don't see what this bit of whataboutery has to do with the Labour Party. Personally, I was never happy with how the LibDems were conducting themselves at national level and wasn't the slightest bit surprised they did so badly in the last election.

The fact is that the British electorate will not vote for a union-dominated Labour Party. I think you should do some research on the history of the Labour Party, if you honestly think that the unions "own" the Labour Party or were solely responsibly for its beginnings. You are totally ignoring the role of the non-union socialist societies. You are also ignoring the fact that society and the scope of politics has changed. Unite is not the only, or even the biggest trade union, and must not be allowed to call the tune.

Grandad

It is not for me to produce facts as I have not repeatedly made the statement and I point out if you had not raised this point again so recently I would have dropped asking.

In your link the only named MP's are Neil Coyle, and Wes Streeting who I accept are not on the Corbynista faction of the Party.

When asked to presumably comment on the rumour by Huff Post, who did not provide facts, how the question was formatted to could lead to various answers.

MP Wes Streeting said ' he was sceptical any breakaway would materialise given the failure of the Independent Group, and that MPs saw shadow Brexit secretary Keir Starmer as the most likely winner not Long-Bailey.

MP Neil Coyle, who put the number “closer to a dozen”, told HuffPost UK: “Continuity Corbyn is a death knell for Labour' . told HuffPost “Division, factionalism and introspection will continue. Favouritism and bullying will continue. Anti-Semitism will continue. Failure in elections will continue.'

Coyle is probably correct.

The death knell is too strong a term as Labour will always be a Political Party unless a ' split ' does evolve, such as one you have described the Unions withdrawing funding for the Parliamentary Labour Party, giving rise to neither the PLP or Unions can lay claim to owning the Labour Party name as their sole domain.

' IF ' and again I repeat' IF ' that scenario occurs then it will be because Rebecca Long Bailey becomes Leader and does follow in Corbyns footsteps but that only time will tell. That revolves around who she as Labour Leader chooses to surround her. If the status quo remains e. g Seamus Milne, Walker, Momentum then that will be the time probably to know who, what, when, where the Labour Party moves forward to any kind of a ' split

On a personal note it must be a troubling time and I do appreciate you are busy, it must be hard going'.

Political parties change over time. Look at what's happening in Germany, where the oldest party has almost disappeared, or at what happened to the old Liberal Party at the beginning of the twentieth century. The Labour Party is no different.

If factions within the Labour Party feel they can no longer operate a united front, it's inevitable they will split. It's possibly unstoppable. However, it seems to me, as an outsider, that there are factions within the Labour Party who want it to happen and are deluded enough to think they can win. I'm not sure what kind of battle they think they will win because it won't be a party which can win elections. The British public just isn't prepared to vote for a hard left, ideologically pure socialist government, dominated by the unions.

If those people within the Labour Party really care about the people they claim to represent, they need to look at ways they can defeat this Tory government through pragmatism and forget their ideological battle.

Maybe the Labour Party will split. In which case it will probably be at least a decade before an anti-Tory government wins power, although a force will emerge and it will win eventually. Goodness knows how much damage the Tories will have done by then. McCluskey and Corbyn will have long gone.

This is what I don't understand, Galaxy and Grandad never addresses the issue.

Splitting the LP now would just guarantee decades of tory government. Why do that?

Why do you think this new left leaning party would have more success than Corbyns labour?

Pogs, in regard to your post @22:57 yesterday, here is a report from the Huffington Post that names Bermondsey and Old Southwark MP Neil Coyle as being one of those that is threatening to leave Parliamentary Labour Party if Long-Bailey Is elected as leader.

As the above took me less than five minutes to research, I feel that you should now place more of your own effort into looking up those involved in this threat rather than continually asking others to research your queries for you.

Although, supposedly working from home due to the current health crisis, I have to go into the office early this morning to meet one of our Assignment teams whose work schedule we have had to change due to the Coronavirus situation.

So, perhaps POGS, you will have furnished this forum with the names of other MPs supposedly threatening to quit the Labour party by the time of my return?

Whether this is a genuine threat or a bogus accusation by yet another faction in the Parliamentary Labour Party, I feel it adds to the weight of argument that this Parliamentary Labour Party is not fit for purpose and all support provided to it from affiliated organisations should be withdrawn and a new left-leaning political body brought into being.

A rather long link to the above is provided here:-

m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/amp/entry/mps-could-desert-labour-if-rebecca-long-bailey-wins-leadership_uk_5e3ae5bbc5b6b5fb438b4073/?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9tLWh1ZmZpbmd0b25wb3N0LWNvLXVrLmNkbi5hbXBwcm9qZWN0Lm9yZy92L3MvbS5odWZmaW5ndG9ucG9zdC5jby51ay9hbXAvZW50cnkvbXBzLWNvdWxkLWRlc2VydC1sYWJvdXItaWYtcmViZWNjYS1sb25nLWJhaWxleS13aW5zLWxlYWRlcnNoaXBfdWtfNWUzYWU1YmJjNWI2YjVmYjQzOGI0MDczLz9hbXBfanNfdj1hMyZhbXBfZ3NhPTEmdXNxcD1tcTMzMUFRRktBR3dBU0ElM0Q&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAACz9U8K-cpBkvephucYL8tJJN0BNwCJR_T0d5M8boHAYKAhKSJAreeT8grgxykIkrEZOGI3T_yeClYTWPYwk3WjJxghFQterNBxnj3rFFoj-GVtHp1Ys90HAnezWHVBCL2BrD2e3b1BdAW4rhugNUG10qjr0b0wGPO6DRbRlsz-8