At last a fully functioning opposition

trisher, on the doorsteps and on the phone lines in this northern constituency, almost always, the first reason given for people not voting Labour this time, was the leader. They spoke about not trusting him, about defence, finances, disregard for the working classes. Brexit was an issue of course but it wasn't the reason the LP got hammered and we ended up with another five years of Tories in charge.

Grandad is right about the continuing splits, as demonstrated on this thread. No surprise that I'm with Whitewave and Sir Chenjin here

trisher it’s really very obvious, he’s saying that he’s going to do things his own way as any new leader/boss does. Past direction or approaches won’t define his approach, it’s time for change.

Yes Iam64, exactly the same in this northern constituency. But it's not one answer, that's too simplistic, yes partly Brexit, partly Corbyn, and god knows why partly Johnson's appeal.

Iam64, in regard to your above post, we are all now becoming aware of the reasons the British electorate never gained any regard or respect Jeremy Corbyn. That reason was because the entire right wing of the parliamentary Party along with employees at Central office were in league with the extreme right-wing media in working against Corbyn throughout his the entire period as leader.

The allegations contained within the leaked antisemitism report state that the above action included ensuring that all efforts by both Corbyn and Formby to deal with antisemitism in the party were thwarted. Those responsible for that action had also astonishingly even carried out a campaign to ensure the Labour Party did not win the 2017 General Election.

Should the above allegations be upheld by the now set up inquiry, I cannot see how the Parliamentary Labour Party can survive in its present form, or indeed any reason why it should survive.

Corbyn was a know it all, patronising bore who sat on the fence over Brexit and who had a fling with Diane Abbott <shudder>. He was never popular with the electorate and they’re the ones that matter. I’m delighted he’s gone.

SirChenjin Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it Starmer may think he is not to be compared with other leaders but people will do it anyway. Which is why it is a ridiculous statement. No one can remove themselves from the time and place they inhabit. And the people who preceded us always influence us and the way we are regarded. I wasn't particularly keen on him but I did think he was clever, apparently he isn't.

SirChenjin could you explain the result of the 2017 election then? Corbyn was leader and it was very close, arguably if the right of the LP had properly supported marginal seats rather than right wing candidates things could have been very different.

And yet the electorate has somehow managed not to compare Boris with Theresa or any of the recent Tory leaders - 24 hours is a long time in politics, the electorate will either vote for him or they won’t, but he’s certainly coming across well at the moment and the balance to the madness on the right. It’s time for the party to unite behind him and focus on the end goal.

Corbyn may have done well in 2017 but his popularity fell dramatically - it became apparent he just wasn’t leadership material.

And on that note I’m off to bed - a full day at work tomorrow. Night all

I believe Boris has been much compared with Churchill especially on GN. He was a Conservative leader wasn't he?

MSM and the right of the LP decided he wasn't leadership material. Possibly because the MSM is owned by multi millionaires didn't want to pay their fair share of tax and support the people who are currently keeping our country running.

I believe that SirChenjin very much makes my point by way of her above post in regard to the right in the party carrying out a campaign of disinformation against Jeremy Corbyn.

In that, Corbyn did not sit on the fence in regard to Brexit. He followed the policy set out by the Labour Party Annual Delegate Conference three years in succession, which being that conference is the supreme policy making body in the Labour movement Corbyn was under obligation to follow.

In regard to him being in a relationship with Diane Abbott many years ago, that is part of their private lives and in no way should be brought in as part of his or her political lives.

So, SirChenjin very well demonstrates all the total cr*p publicity brought against Corbyn from within the Parliamentary Labour Party throughout his period as Labour Party leader and gives good reason why that organisation should have the support and financial plug pulled on it by the wider Labour movement.

I agree Grandad1943 you know the workings of the Parliamentary Labour Party, well said. It is very important to investigate thoroughly those traitors in the leaked report. And remove them from the L Party. So many joined Labour because of Jeremy Corbyn including me became a member for the first time, now wondering to cancel my membership, a few thousand already have. So many people wanted a Corbyn led government. The NHS would have been properly funded.

Now there is the environment climate crisis that needs to be dealt with urgently. The Tories only care about big business corporations. We now have Starmer it remains to be seen how he will turn out as leader. Let's see how he brings the party together.
But as there is factions left right maybe another party needs to emerge.

Well said Grandad. I can’t believe so many posters cannot see (or choose not to see) the seriousness of the alleged actions within this leaked report. The so called ‘far left’ of the party have been vilified for so long for supposedly not caring whether labour could gain power, caring only for their own power within the organisation. And now it is alleged that the right of the party are actually the ones who followed this line, using electoral funds to actively prevent a labour victory, and posters are describing it as ‘political infighting’ and saying we should keep quiet about it in order not to alienate the electorate. You honestly could not make it up.

Well Said nightowl

I am so pleased there are others who realise what Corbyn did for the party. I really doubt if Keir Starmer will pursue the same policies. As for Brexit I wish there had been more publicity around what Ian Lavery said about it "The Labour Party is not a Brexit party or a remain party. It is a socialist party!" I hope there will be action against those on the right who behaved so badly, if there isn't I think many people will leave. (And yes I am pre-judging-there's no smoke without fire)

I agree trisher. I have actually seen the report and it’s difficult to see how the actions/ words can be denied. It’s a new level of shameful in the history of politics in my opinion. I await the outcome of the investigation with interest. If it’s a whitewash I’m afraid the Labour Party is no longer a party with which I want to be associated. What a sad day it will be for democracy.

In line with what many are expressing on the Unite Union WhatsApp group sites, the fact that Starmer has refused to suspend those cited for "misdeed" in the leaked antisemitism report does not bode well for the inquiry.

Leaving those persons active in their present positions allows them to remove document evidence from the Labour IT system that those carrying out the enquiry may wish to cease as corroborating evidence to what is in the report. Also, those same cited persons can place pressure on others who may be called to give further verbal or written statements to the inquiry in regard to what they may say.

In all other organisations, employees are suspended on full pay while such an investigation is carried out. That action in no way is taken as any notion of guilt, but only to ensure that the above cannot be brought about.

However, Starmer in refusing to carry out the suspension of the employees and others cited in the report has placed the Parliamentary Labour Party above what is standard practise by organisations in Britain and also the legislation that surrounds such circumstances.

Some posters really don’t get it do they? Corbyn was a massive turn off for Labour voters.....end of!
Why? Marxist past ( and probably present too) no patriotism or loyalty to his own country (think of the Salisbury poisonings) his affinity for the Palestine cause which linked to his apparently weak control over the rantings of antiSemites within the Party, his general weakness as a leader and the ridiculous manifesto ( which also contained massive amounts of fudge on Brexit.)
Keir Starmer has a chance to unite the LP now, which won’t happen by getting rid of moderate MP’s.If you genuinely want him to succeed and the LP to win the next GE then you have to ‘move on’ from the Corbyn years ( which were a disaster for Labour) and get behind Starmer who will be much more popular ( with almost everybody).

lemon I don't want a Labour Party which is a watered down Tory party. I don't think most people do.
Grandad1943 I must admit I'm not entirely clear on the workings of this but is the suspension of the accused individuals the entire responsibility of Starmer or are there others involved, or possibly people working behind the scenes?

trisher I realise that isn’t what you or some others want, but look at the success in political terms of the Tony Blair years.
I think he and his cabinet got some things wrong, but other things right, and he managed to stay in power for years.
Which Labour PM’s have you been happy with over the years?
A far left PLP will never be popular with voters, so you have to be pragmatic.

lemongrove I think we’re talking about completely different things. This is not about who is a more appealing leader, it’s about alleged fraud, dishonesty, outright lies and illegal actions within a political party. And these alleged actions were not carried out by those on the left of the party but people employed by the party who supported the right.

And about the new leaders ability, or willingness, to grasp the nettle and deal with the allegations assertively. As grandad says above, I’m afraid he has failed at the first step, by not following standard practice and the law that covers these situations.

What I am wondering is this.

Once the investigation is complete and the results known, and anyone found guilty dealt with appropriately.

What then?

nightowl......well, yes and no.
There are two things in play here, true, but allow the allegations of fraud etc to be investigated and the results to be known, first of all.Don’t assume ahead of it that Starmer will either do a whitewash or condemn out if hand, he was a lawyer after all, and he will follow legal proceedings to the letter, I would imagine.
The second thing is that he is the most appealing leader, and that could make all the difference to the future voting
public.This fact is of utmost importance.

Isn’t there anyone who has anything to say about what they want to see post the investigation?