Jeremy Corbyn suspended from Labour Party

Nanfer5g, explain to me why the Whip is so important to JC. Is he prevented from doing his job or voting with Labour because he doesn't have it?

Anniebach

ilovecheese a light hearted post, how dare I !

Nanfer5 There are threads on the tory Party, can we not stay
on topic ? The Labour Party.

Well Anniebach, if Starmer is forced to stand down as leader of the Labour Party over the Corbyn crisis, I have no doubts he will easily find a political home in the Conservative Party. There he would be, snug as a bug in a rug. ??

There’s something very frighteningly cult’ish about Corbyn and his supporters. And, imo Keir’s background is far more Labour than Corbyn’s.

Absolutely. Which is why he understands the importance of electability.

Mmm who would run his campaign? the CLPs? Aren't most of them in open revolt against him?

The Conservatives were just amused by Corbyn in parliament. I can remember hearing one sniggering the he’d ‘lost his notes’ one day. Johnson et al are terrified of Starmer. We need someone with a background in law at the moment because the Tories are sidestepping the law wherever they can.

MayBee70

The Conservatives were just amused by Corbyn in parliament. I can remember hearing one sniggering the he’d ‘lost his notes’ one day. Johnson et al are terrified of Starmer. We need someone with a background in law at the moment because the Tories are sidestepping the law wherever they can.

Well, in regards to the law Starmer clearly does not respect any legislation on freedom of speech. ??

Devorgilla

Nanfer5g, explain to me why the Whip is so important to JC. Is he prevented from doing his job or voting with Labour because he doesn't have it?

I do not know if Jeremy Corbyn feels that having the Labour whip in the house of commons is important to him but it seems to be very important to Starmer.

The Labour leader has now escalated what should have been a "non-issue out of all proportion which now involves the future of numerous long standing Consistency Chairman and Secretaries along with their entire parties. The stupidity of the situation has become ridiculous.

Had Starmer let the Race & Equality Commission report be released and also let Corbyn say what he did which was very mild, the whole matter would have been over now and press attention would have been back on Johnson and his government's problems with Covid-19, Brexit and the bullying Home Secretary. Instead, now the media are concentrating once again on an ever growing crisis in the Labour Party, enabled by the ridicules and stupid actions of one person, the Labour leader.

For that he should lose his job and even if he does retain that he will be seen as a lame duck, leading a totally fractured party with no respect from anyone.

Yet more unfounded threats.

Of course Starmer couldn't "let Corbyn say what he did which was very mild".
The amusement some Corbyn supporters show at the stresses within the party caused and maintained by C and his supporters, is disgusting.
Meanwhile back in the real world, we need a Labour Party that is attractive to more than the CLP activists.

this situation is reminding me of the Miners Strike. I collected money for the miners, the birth of one of my children was announced at a fund raiser to explain why I wasn't there that night. Compromise may be a dirty word to some, who would prefer civil unrest to JC just going quietly to the back benches like other failed leaders so.

Neatly put, Iam64. The time has come to move on from this which JC could facilitate very easily by appealing to his supporters to start supporting the new leader. JC doesn't need the Whip to operate as an effective MP and he should make clear that he does not want KS's decision to hold Labour back from the important and massive task of becoming electable. He should now do as you suggest and head to the backbenches.

Meanwhile back in the real world, we need a Labour Party that is attractive to more than the CLP activists.

Perhaps the more militant left wing of the party don't want the country to be stable with a more centrist government.
I'm not sure why but I could think of some reasons. Whatever they are, they would not benefit the country as a whole nor its relationships with the rest of the world.

We all have to compromise in some way for the good of the country and the future of all.

So now we've moved on from the Momentum activists to the CLP activists all of whom apparently are "militant left wing". As far as the CLP goes I can state categorically that they are not, that some supported Corbyn, that some predicted the loss of the 2019 election and didn't support Corbyn, that some are far left and some are centrist. What they all are is committed to due process because the LP is a party built on democracy and fairness and only through due process can that be achieved. It is not a party where one man can take decisions and imagine those decisions will not be challenged.
We need a LP with a leader who respects the grassroots workers, because without them there won't be any possibility of even taking part in an election. If he chooses to ignore the CLPs his days are numbered.

I was thinkng about what would have been said on GN had Corbyn been leader and Starmer be the one denied the whip. I can imagine how lauded the CLPs would be for speaking out against Corbyn.
It's not about personality (although I realise some people can't move on from that) it's about proper and open processes.

As trisher has stated, this has now moved far beyond just being about Corbyn. It is about fairness and due process under the rules of the Labour Party. Even further than that, it is also now about freedom of speech in the party. No one should try to instruct any person in a free democracy that they cannot speak on any subject unless that matter attains to the courts or is subject to national security restriction.

In telling Constituency Parties that they were not free to discuss the Corbyn suspension and removal of the whip was totally ridiculous, and to then suspend the membership of longstanding branch officers for doing so is just beyond belief. Those actions demonstrate a party leader that lacks any perception of peoples reactions and someone who is completely out of touch with the grassroots of the organisation he is supposed to be leading.

Nanfer5g. Out of interest, do you post on any other threads on gransnet or are you on here purely to bad mouth Keir Starmer and, if so what are your motives?

MayBee70 if all you can take from these posts is bad mouthing Starmer I think it is your problem. Had someone posted that same comment about Corbyn when he was leader of the LP there would have been loud outcries of "Corbynista". Can you really not see the damage Starmer is doing to the LP? (Although it doesn't matter if you can't he'll soon be yesterrday's news)

MayBee70

Nanfer5g. Out of interest, do you post on any other threads on gransnet or are you on here purely to bad mouth Keir Starmer and, if so what are your motives?

My motives being on this forum is to engage in respectful debate with others. Regarding Kier Starmer, I will call it as I perceive it in the realisation that others may not agree with what I say. In that, I always hope they will answer in the spirit of that debate rather than straying into the character of any person engaged in any discussion.

Nope that's not what happening.

Nanfer5g

MayBee70

Nanfer5g. Out of interest, do you post on any other threads on gransnet or are you on here purely to bad mouth Keir Starmer and, if so what are your motives?

My motives being on this forum is to engage in respectful debate with others. Regarding Kier Starmer, I will call it as I perceive it in the realisation that others may not agree with what I say. In that, I always hope they will answer in the spirit of that debate rather than straying into the character of any person engaged in any discussion.

Well, if you’re so knowledgeable spell his name right then.

Galaxy

Nope that's not what happening.

So, what is happening then Galaxy as It would seem that some have run out defensive argument of their political hero Starmer and therefore engage in personal remarks and distraction.

I have felt this has been a good respectful debate, why not all engaged in the thread keep it that way. I note this thread has been spoken on in other parts of the forum for the way the discussion has been conducted, which is all the more reason to keep it that way.

We just have different views on good respectful debate.

I don’t think it’s as you suggest at all Nanfer5g. There’s no need for defensive argument, as it’s obvious that the dyed in the wool Tories on the site are now running scared, and many of us are fed up with the same old arguments being trotted out to the extent where some of you have convinced yourselves that your rhetoric has won the day. Jeremy Corbyn is yesterday’s man, Boris is today’s man, and Keir Starmer is tomorrow’s man.

Galaxy

Being elected isnt part of the mantra. They are even admitting now. I cant think of anything more fundamentally selfish.

Really? How about voting for a party that we KNEW were incapable, with a Rasputin at the helm?

I vote with my principles. I seem to recall after the election, that was what all the Tory voters claimed to have done. Other than those that supported Labour but 'Just couldn't vote for Corbyn '.

I'm a socialist. My belief system is based on putting the needs of the vulnerable first. If you think that's selfish, your morals are a little wonky.

MayBee70

There’s something very frighteningly cult’ish about Corbyn and his supporters. And, imo Keir’s background is far more Labour than Corbyn’s.

Not about Corbyn. About the left wing party staying left wing.

I wish there was an eye roll emoji.