Labour party conference, is no-one else interested?

so what is the alternative trisher? Again, you have a simple choice at the moment- left of centre, or far right.

I'll go for left of Centre for sure. And, again, to say that Labour under Starmer is not much different to Cons with Johnson and ERG is utter and dangerous nonsense.

Does Starmer stand for privatisation of the NHS? Really?

Massive tax evasion by the richest? Really?

The running down of good schools and public education? Really?

more privatisation of roads, sell offs of essential untilities and services? Really?

The demonisation of immigration and hatred of foreigners?

the list is endless.

And after a very long time, I am losing all respect for the Labour left, determined to divide- and let them rule and destroy, again and much more.

I say how Corbyn was mistrated, maligned and mis-judged by the Cons and the associated Press. It was shameful. I also agreed he is a good man, sincere, and a great campaigner- but I also saw that he was NOT PM material- and yet, even so, I did vote Labour at last election. But unless the Party unites behind its Leader- then not again. Divided Labour will mean a return of Johnson, well probably someone else- his days are numbered... someone else pushing the extreme Brexit and privatisation, tax evasion and worse, of the ERG.

If this is what you want- then (yes I have said it many times before) I truly despair. I shall blame the Labour Left probably even more than those dreadful Cons - because they could have averted it, and they chose not to.

I simply don't see the point of an opposition that doesn't oppose anything Alegrias1. It effectively makes us a one party state. I can't think of a time when public ownership was more appropriate-£3.5 bn for rail companies £374million for buses. All from the public purse into the pockets of shareholders

I think you are making the assumption trisher that a Labour party has to stand for public ownership. In my mind public ownership is the right thing, but I think I have to accept that this may not be the appropriate thing at this time.

As I understand it, Starmer isn't saying the things you want to hear about public ownership, and other things too, I'm sure, and for that you consider that he isn't "proper" Labour and is taking the party down a route you don't approve of?

Right now, I just want someone to offer an alternative to the Tories, they don't have to be perfect and they don't have to adhere to what I think a "proper" Labour government should be.

I am of course speaking as a non-Labour voter, but mine is the view of a person who is interested in politics but doesn't care if the party I vote for isn't perfect, they just have to be good.

I mean the opportunity to hold this governnment to account, which you can't do if your policies pretty much match theirs.
Votes are won by offering an alternative not by telling people things will stay the same. Why isn't the LP pointing out how much public money has been funnelled into private businesses in order to keep the imaginary competetive market functioning in both the energy and rail sectors? Because they are actually proposing to keep the same system.

Funny how asking a simple question is seen as attacking someone. I must remember even if I am posting quickly on my way out to mind my ps and qs or PippaZ will chastise me (although why it is OK for her to have a go at me but I have to phrase my questions carefully I don't know.)

Complicated doesn’t even begin to cover it! I don’t know who owns what any more. I’m sure that taking anything back into public ownership would be incredibly complicated and would have to be done a bit at a time. A widespread renationalisation of everything would be impossible. Wasn’t one of the arguments against being in the EU was that they prevented us from renationalising the railways even though Frances rail network is whole or partly publicly owned? Something that has puzzled me for years is what happened to the monopolies commission? And whenever a foreign company buys a U.K. one and say no jobs will be lost/no factories will close we know straight away that it’s a lie.

Oh, OK, I think I've got it trisher.

By opportunities lost I'm going to assume that you think Starmer should jump in and confirm that Labour will nationalise the power industries as soon as they get back in?

I do actually think power should be nationalised, as well as water, railways, etc etc. But I'm not going to get my knickers in a twist about the current opposition not having that as a primary policy right at this moment.

When Thatcher's government started selling things off in the eighties, I remember thinking that I hope someone is keeping a list of things we need to take back into public ownership. I now realise that its not just a case of buying them back, that its more complicated than that.

Apologies PippaZ

trisher

So Algerias1 how do you feel about the energy crisis? nd the opportunities being lost?

I don't understand the context of the question trisher. Am I meant to be blaming Starmer, or Corbyn, or the last Labour government?

trisher

So Algerias1 how do you feel about the energy crisis? nd the opportunities being lost?

Yet again you are attacking people you need. Algerias had told you she was not interested in your previous assault on your leader. Why would she want to join in?

Why not ask what she thinks instead of trying to push your views and alienating people? That needs an open question. It's not hard.

So Algerias1 how do you feel about the energy crisis? Do you think opportunities are being lost? Would do.

On the other hand I don't think you or Annie want a discussion. You are both almost in your need for people to agree with your branch of the Labour faith.

So Algerias1 how do you feel about the energy crisis? nd the opportunities being lost?

I said earlier this week on another thread, that I've never voted Labour in my life, which is true. Its strange because I am a sort of "natural Labour voter", I believe in the values that Labour represent over the values the Conservatives do.

But I'm in Scotland, so we have a wider choice of parties to choose from. I can imagine voting Labour in the future because of how they think society should operate. So I guess I could be classed as one of those they have to win over.

Its of no concern to me what their current leader said about nationalisation in an interview, of whether he has charisma or not, whether they all get along or whether a former leader once invited some people to the House of Commons. I'm interested in the policies they put forward, and what their policies are about the big things, and certainly not whether their deputy leader is common as muck.

I think just now because of Starmer's policies the Labour Party have lost the opportunity to be a proper opposition. At a time when many people are in limbo because their chosen energy supplier has gone bust, and know that their costs will increase,when the government will be dishing cash out to the big companies to compensate them for taking on these people a real opposition offering proper change would be using this to promote public ownership and not for profit companies running energy supplies. But nothing is being said because the LP has chosen not to promote public ownership and just offers more of the same.

Anniebach

PippaZ I do not lie

Now that is an underhand comment Annie. I have never said or even inferred you were lying about anything. I simply do not have enough interest in the Labour Party in-fighting to do so.

I don't know how to put it more clearly. I am not interested in internal squabbles. Many are not interested in internal squabbles.

However, the continued attacks from one side on a past leader and from the other side on the current one may affect none party members voting intentions if my thoughts of voting are anything to go by.

It is exceeding boring and, to many people irrelevant. If you fight like cats in a sack internally why on earth would by think you can run a government?

trisher it is not because it was Corbyn, I would say the same of anyone who didn’t consider people were grieving.

foxie48 most MPs now will have had some media training. It's common practice in many organisations, some charities even train volunteers they think will encounter the press.
Mind if Boris had any I can't see what good it did!
The reason the LP can't sell policies to the public just now is because they don't actually have any.

I'm happier to see that all kinds of voices are welcome at a conference, even hecklers, rather than a bunch of hand picked acolytes that will clap and cheer enthusiastically for anything they're told to.

This poll agrees.

news.sky.com/story/voters-think-keir-starmers-speech-was-better-than-boris-johnsons-exclusive-poll-12427715

tbh I don't think most voters are that interested in politics but they remember the "soundbites". I didn't watch much of BJs speech this week but he seemed to be supported by his party. Anyone who knows much about politics knows that's not the case. What most people will remember about Starmer's speech is him being heckled and people raising red cards. It was only a few people but it was enough to make a headline. Rayner's use of language also made a headline. We live in a sound bite world, most people don't care enough to really follow politics. They read the headlines in the Sun, Telegraph, Guardian etc and make up their minds. IMHO the LP needs to work on improving it's image, shut down the dissenters and make sure all the high profile people have media training. I know many on here won't like me saying that (puts on tin hat) but fgs what is the point in having good policies if you can't sell them to the electorate.

Anniebach

trisher I know Catholics were murdered, I have two son in law’s who fathers are from Ireland, Catholic and Protestant.

For me inviting members of the I.R.A to Westminster only two
weeks after the Brighton bombing was wrong

It's just because it was Corbyn. Many politicians met and visited people responsible for killing.Margaret Thatcher was widely criticised when she made an official visit to the UDR whilst a number of its members were being investigated for shooting catholics

Anniebach

ilovecheese why shouldn’t i when others can speak with admiration for him.

I so want a United Labour Party but it will take a miracle

Anniebach
Because if, as you say, you would like a united Labour party, you are not helping that to happen. Saying "why shouldn't I, because other people say something else", is still not helping that to happen.

ilovecheese why shouldn’t i when others can speak with admiration for him.

I so want a United Labour Party but it will take a miracle

Thank you nadateturbe. Regardless of political parties, grief is grief and people were grieving.

But Anniebach repeating the same things over and over again about a previous leader is not doing the current Labour party any favours, it is just putting people off.

I agree Anniebach.

trisher I know Catholics were murdered, I have two son in law’s who fathers are from Ireland, Catholic and Protestant.

For me inviting members of the I.R.A to Westminster only two
weeks after the Brighton bombing was wrong

MayBee70

No one would attack the left wing if they acknowledged the fact that Labour have a new leader and most of us hope and pray (fir the sake of the country)that we will win the next election. I’m the one that’s constantly being attacked on Facebook because I’m just a Tory etc etc. The vitriol from them is frightening. And that the very people the left wing are so concerned about voted Conservative at the last election.

Maybee70 if Starmer would stop behaving as if he has some sort of authority because he is leader of the party to police the thoughts of members and even to dictate the subjects discussed at local level, if he would bring back into the party the people he has dismissed and negotiate with the left of the party then perhaps he would be accepted. If in fact he could keep the promise he made when voted in that the party was a broad church and he would unify it then perhaps the left would be quiet. As it is if you investigate people, suspend people and dismiss them because they are left wing then naturally others get upset and start to shout about it. It's called freedom of speech and its the basis of democracy.