New Labour LEADER

Urmstongran, if Kier Starmer wishes a return to "New Labour" I would hope he has plenty of new people to fund the party lined up before he states anything.

Plus the fact that half his own MPs would be heading for the door before he came to the end of the sentence. ?

That’s true Anniebach - but I wouldn’t want it back.

granddad43 you know 121 labour mp’s would leave the party
if Starmer was to move to the centre ? surely you must work in
The House.

So 122 are far left , amazing

That sounds like blackmail Grandad. By my calculation, unions representing at least a third (probably more) of the total union membership supported Starmer. Nandy and Long-Bailey have both been given important cabinet roles and Rayner is supported by the left. What's the problem? Together they might actually come up with a shadow cabinet and future manifesto more than 14 million people would vote for.

So if these MPs head for the door, will they resign? I'm not sure who they are, but I can't actually see their constituencies voting against Labour in a by-election.

‘Head for the door’ can only mean resign from the party,

growstuff any attempt to move the parliamentary Labour Party back towards a "New Labour" stance would undoubtedly see many on the left of the party resigning the Labour whip but reaming in parliament as MPs.

That would be similar to how many on the right of the party acted throughout the years when Jeremy Corbyn was leader.....Remember?

Surely it's impossible to have not learned the lesson? New Labour again? No thanks!

Hetty58 exactly. New Labour tried to turn it's back on its roots and traditional funding and in that turned to such as Fred Godwin of RBS and others from the banking and financial world.

In doing that they sold the sole of the Labour Party and brought about the British end of the banking crisis for which we all paid for.

A Blair like party again, no thank you.

oh for pity's sake. I'm only repeating views I've expressed previously but -the LP let down its supporters in my town in a way that will take a long time to rebuild trust. Additionally it didn't appeal in any way to 'ordinary' people. That's why good MP's lost their seats in many places. Imagine, being a life long labour voter, from a family of life long labour voters and voting conservative. they preferred Boris Johnson as PM to Jeremy Corbyn
but, I keep forgetting, JC won the argument.....

I'm not claiming New Labour is the right solution, but the last four elections have been a disaster for Labour. Somehow or other, it needs to bring voters back and pick up some new ones on the way. I doubt very much whether the average voter gives a flying fig for union or NEC squabbles and meetings. That's why I asked what a Labour Party would promise to voters (not just union apparatchiks).

Exactly, Iam64.

Not only have the last four elections been a disaster for Labour, but more importantly for the people whom Labour should be championing.

I am not sure they actually care about those people. Many of those championing Corbyn did not need a labour party.

Is there not a middle ground between New Labour and Momentum controlled Labour?

One that may regain lost popularity?

They need to win back seats in Scotland too.

And I think I've said it previously- not all members of Trades Unions are far left.

I hope Starmer might be that, he's not what I would class as a Blairite, not that I would care if he was, he has a balancing act to do, but I would imagine he has the intellect and experience for that. Time will tell.

The Parliamentary Labour party belongs to its member both direct and affiliate. Those members have funded the Parliamentary Labour party for well over one hundred years but in the last forty years have received exactly nothing from that endeavour both financial and on the ground.

The next General Election is in all probability at least four years away, so is it any wonder that the wider Labour movement and all those who lead that affiliate membership wish to know what the Parliamentary Labour Party will consist of by way of policies before anyone moves on any further.

growstuff The reason Labour has lost the last two elections is because the people they think they should be championing have actively decided against voting for them because they didn't like their policies or trust them. This is something the party has yet to recognise.

What Labour needs to do is actually talk to the ordinary man/woman in the street, listen to them and find out what they want instead of just telling them what the Labour party activists have told them they want.

Sorry, should be 4 elections lost, not 2.

Let’s go back to the 60’s and 70’s , strikes, strikes, strikes, which
brought us to the 1983 election and tories in power until
1997.

The way to win is to appeal to voters across the country not
just the north and London.

M0nica I suspect Labour talk to more people that anyone on GN.
The inflluence of Brexit on those elections shouldn't be forgotten. Combined with the distrust Blair left behind him it is a toxic mixture. Add some MSM bias and it is understandable.

Voters didn’t trust Corbyn

It may have escaped many people's notice that trade union membership is climbing again after many years of declining membership figures.

That turnaround has been brought about by the actions the leading unions have taken in the courts against companies using Gig Economy terms of employment against its workers, and by way of that action, recruitment is high in that category of employees.

The above has been achieved without any political help from the Parliamentary Labour Party whatsoever with only Corbyn and McDonald speaking out privately in congratulation of the achievement.

So now there are many in the wider Labour movement who are wondering if the Labour Party really needs to be included in its future strategy and the millions of pounds that could be saved by not including it in that strategy.

And still never ever take responsibility for those lost elections. Would rather blame someone who was in power 14 years ago.