What is left about Labour now?

Yes, Vintagenonna they are trying their best to get the Conservative vote while taking longstanding Labour voters for granted.

I am waiting to hear that Streeting has ordered Starmer to appoint Boris Johnson to a safe labour seat.

About the only logical step left to appeal to unhappy Conservative voters looking for a new political home and finally sever all ties with old-fashioned labour voters like myself of working class origin, mixed race and a union member.

DaisyAnneReturns

I expect he loves you too Glorianny.

It's obvious your campaign for the left to undermine their own leader and, by extention, their Party only has one, or possibly two supporters on GN. I wonder why you think posts such as the above will get you more?

Well I do at least know that there are ways of speaking and voicing an opinion which are more appealing (and apparently he doesn't)

I'm not undermining a party. I'm undermining a duplicitous and untrustworthy leader. The party would do much better without him.

About the bedroom tax and whether it is far left:

Unless you are willing to force owner occupiers to downsize that argument does not hold water. Social tenants should be able to feel secure in their homes just as much as people who are lucky enough to own a property. Social tenants' feelings matter just as much as owner occupiers, if we are talking about sentiment.
Social tenants want to have their families to stay just as much as owner occupiers do, and why not. It is not their fault that successive Governments have sold off social housing as cut prices, without building replacements. I bet most people that voted for Tony Blair thought Labour would stop the right to buy, or at least start a big programme of building social housing again.

Apart from that, there are other reasons why people need a spare room. Dialysis machines, and special fridges for medicines should be kept in a separate room. Overnight carers or nurses should be able to have a bedroom of their own.

Separated and divorced parents need a room for their children to sleep in. They don't love their children any less than owner occupiers do.

Financially, because there are so few social homes for single people, those who are forced out of their social homes have to find properties on the private rental market, which apart from the lack of security actually cost more in rent that the social houses, so are costing more in housing benefit from the state,

I expect he loves you too Glorianny.

It's obvious your campaign for the left to undermine their own leader and, by extention, their Party only has one, or possibly two supporters on GN. I wonder why you think posts such as the above will get you more?

DAR those are exactly the sort of waffle and misinformation that really annoy people.

No1. Really doesn't set out any clear objectives. It's the 5 missions scenario-missions are not necessarily achieved.

No2 Spends half the time telling us how bad things are- we know! Then sets out a series of fines and penalties with no clear indication of who will monitor the water companies, how responsibility will be proved or how the fines and not putting up prices will be administered.
Water should not be a profit making business

No 3 Is talking rubbish. There is an NHS long term plan on staffing www.england.nhs.uk/long-read/accessible-nhs-long-term-workforce-plan/

Apart from that he has the most irritating voice and manner.

These are being added to once a week and I will put them up as they arrive.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=rz7WjAEMs6U

Labour policies on NHS staffing

www.youtube.com/watch?v=TT2wDbQa7jU

What are Labour's Policies on Water Services.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENDP0r4aavc

Workers' Rights: How Will a Labour Government Strengthen Your Rights?

labour.org.uk/page/a-new-deal-for-working-people/

No, what I’m alleging is that the wording of surveys and polls impacts on the results obtained, which is quite a different thing. Ask any Sociology student, it’s not my personal theory.

Casdon

Glorianny

Casdon

Sorry, either I wasn’t clear or you’ve misinterpreted, what I meant when I suggested you were being evasive wasn’t about your policy stance, which as you said you have relayed a number of times. it was how you see the Labour Party achieving what you want and remaining in touch with the views of the electorate. You will know from the many political threads that a lot of the policies you’d like to see aren’t by any means the main priorities for other people.
What exactly do you hope will be achieved by attempting to destroy Starmer? The reality is that if he was knocked down by the proverbial bus tomorrow, the stance of the party wouldn’t change to meet your priorities anyway.

But I have posted the percentages of people who agree with public ownership of the utilities and trains.
Over 50% of the population opposed the bedroom tax in 2014.
No figures on third child benefit.

I simply think accepting Starmer is much like accepting Boris who I posted many things about including how he behaved as Mayor of London and his lying.
Is it wrong to criticise a Labour liar?

Sorry, I was writing my previous response so didn’t incorporate what you said here. Your literal reading of survey results is an issue. If people are asked simple questions they answer from the gut without thinking through the consequences. Politicians who are worth their salt do that for them, and present them with solutions which improve outcomes. We all believe in motherhood and apple pie until told exactly what we have to do to get it.

So what you are alleging is that the population don't understand so their opinion doesn't matter.
Isn't that what democracy is really about? Trusting that people actually are able to judge issues and vote on them?
Unfortunately politicians in some cases are influenced by people with vested interests

Good post casdon I agree with iam64

Casdon - thank you for expressing my views so much more clearly than I have, or could

Glorianny

Casdon

Sorry, either I wasn’t clear or you’ve misinterpreted, what I meant when I suggested you were being evasive wasn’t about your policy stance, which as you said you have relayed a number of times. it was how you see the Labour Party achieving what you want and remaining in touch with the views of the electorate. You will know from the many political threads that a lot of the policies you’d like to see aren’t by any means the main priorities for other people.
What exactly do you hope will be achieved by attempting to destroy Starmer? The reality is that if he was knocked down by the proverbial bus tomorrow, the stance of the party wouldn’t change to meet your priorities anyway.

But I have posted the percentages of people who agree with public ownership of the utilities and trains.
Over 50% of the population opposed the bedroom tax in 2014.
No figures on third child benefit.

I simply think accepting Starmer is much like accepting Boris who I posted many things about including how he behaved as Mayor of London and his lying.
Is it wrong to criticise a Labour liar?

Sorry, I was writing my previous response so didn’t incorporate what you said here. Your literal reading of survey results is an issue. If people are asked simple questions they answer from the gut without thinking through the consequences. Politicians who are worth their salt do that for them, and present them with solutions which improve outcomes. We all believe in motherhood and apple pie until told exactly what we have to do to get it.

To answer the specific issues you raised Glorianny, as I don’t want to be seen as evasive myself.

Is asking that water, energy and trains are publicly owned far left?

The far left element of this is the naivety of wanting public ownership in the short term, regardless of economic consequences. I also think there should be a weighting between the different utilities, and a recognition that to put them right will take many years of additional investment by the government - it’s not possible to do everything at once.

Is wanting the bedroom tax abolished far left?

Yes, I’m sorry as I’ve got a lot of sympathy for people who were given little notice before the rules changed, but in principle I do think that people who live in state housing should not remain in family homes when their children have grown up because other people with families then can’t access that housing when they need it. I’m in favour of much more Council housing being built, with suitable homes (not flats) for single people.

Is wanting privatisation of the NHS stopped far left?

No, but there is a far left crusading element which without any apparent understanding of the reality, wants no private procedures even in the short term, which I vehemently disagree with as a stance because millions of people who need operations will continue to suffer.
Is wanting the third child legislation abolished far left?
I’m on the fence, because I think that circumstances of individuals vary so much so I think the legislation should be amended to reflect circumstance rather than being a hard and fast rule.

Is wanting proper protection for employees and zero hours contracts abolished far left?

Your most loaded question, cloaked in innocence. It’s like walking a tightrope to afford proper protection to employees whilst avoiding the gamers finding ways of playing the system. I dealt with this a lot in my work. As with most things, the left rightly stand up for the workers, but go to far in that they don’t balance the demands with the interests of the employer in getting the job done.

I’d imagine there will be different responses to every one of your questions from different people, but for me the main issue with the left is, as we’ve discussed before, the failure to compromise or be pragmatic about the need to be in power to deliver anything at all. For as long as you think you are right and are ‘the true Labour’ compromise will be impossible, and I really understand why Starmer has taken a strong line in dealing with issues head on.

Casdon

Sorry, either I wasn’t clear or you’ve misinterpreted, what I meant when I suggested you were being evasive wasn’t about your policy stance, which as you said you have relayed a number of times. it was how you see the Labour Party achieving what you want and remaining in touch with the views of the electorate. You will know from the many political threads that a lot of the policies you’d like to see aren’t by any means the main priorities for other people.
What exactly do you hope will be achieved by attempting to destroy Starmer? The reality is that if he was knocked down by the proverbial bus tomorrow, the stance of the party wouldn’t change to meet your priorities anyway.

But I have posted the percentages of people who agree with public ownership of the utilities and trains.
Over 50% of the population opposed the bedroom tax in 2014.
No figures on third child benefit.

I simply think accepting Starmer is much like accepting Boris who I posted many things about including how he behaved as Mayor of London and his lying.
Is it wrong to criticise a Labour liar?

Glorianny

DaisyAnneReturns

So you have defined a negative, rather than a positive outcome. You don't want Starmer as leader of the Labour Party. That seems to be the specific outcome you hope to achieve. Have I got that right? Nothing else is more important to you?

Don't you get tired of trying to push people into corners and twist things DAR? Lots of things are important to me. Iveposted them many times. The trouble is they aren't important to Starmer.

I wonder why you are being so defensive Glorianny? I am just trying to ensure I have properly understood.

The trouble is they aren't important to Starmer. So what does that mean. You will undermine him but vote Labour? Or try and get him removed? Or vote for another another party - but who will give you what is important to you?

Apologies, that was for Glorianny.

Sorry, either I wasn’t clear or you’ve misinterpreted, what I meant when I suggested you were being evasive wasn’t about your policy stance, which as you said you have relayed a number of times. it was how you see the Labour Party achieving what you want and remaining in touch with the views of the electorate. You will know from the many political threads that a lot of the policies you’d like to see aren’t by any means the main priorities for other people.
What exactly do you hope will be achieved by attempting to destroy Starmer? The reality is that if he was knocked down by the proverbial bus tomorrow, the stance of the party wouldn’t change to meet your priorities anyway.

Just if left wingers are being asked what we do want, I thought I would add my twopennorth.
Doesn't look like I'll get it from Starmer and Reeves though.

What policies of theirs do I support? Well none so far. I just keep hoping they will come up with something.

I also don't see how there can possibly be growth without investment. Each incoming Government seems to think that "reform" is the answer without any investment.

Reeves doesn’t say these two dreadful things will definitely stay. She’s reminding us what a mess they’re going to face. Even in the face of the disastrous Tory week, they’re repeating the mantra that Labour can’t manage money- pointing to Birmingham city council.

I wish Labour would attack the Tory myth about them being good with money and Labour wasting it.

Ilovecheese

My most pressing concerns, which are entirely personal are:

Removing the 2 child benefit cap, and returning to a needs based system so that the current iniquitous level of child poverty can be reduced.

Cleaning up the waterways preferable taking water back into public ownership.

Getting rid of the bedroom tax, which just wastes money on private rentals and causes a lot of unnecessary worry and stress.

and now, of course making sure that all our schools and public building are actually safe to enter,

But Starmer has said he won't change the child benefit or get rid of the bedroom tax.
www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jul/18/keir-starmer-defends-decision-not-to-scrap-two-child-benefit-cap
and Rachel Reeves says the bedroom tax will stay
www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jul/19/rachel-reeves-labour-bedroom-tax-child-benefit-cap

So what policies do Labour really have that you support?

Glorianny

Casdon

Glorianny

Casdon

MaizieD

Grantanow

Attlee's government was not Far Left. He declined to abolish the public schools having been at Haileybury himself and stopped short of nationalising industries that were not specified in the manifesto. The initiative for the NHS did not originate with Attlee but from Beverage and the other major reform, free secondary education, originated with Butler in the National government. Labour introduced bread rationing after WW2 and maintained an austerity policy for several years.

Well, TBH, Grantanow, we've never managed to extract a definition of 'far left' from those who use the term. So one can only guess at how they would define that Attlee government. I just used it in a speculative fashion.

It's difficult to discuss politics without a shared understanding of how terms are used.

To me the far left are perhaps better described as the radical left. They are idealists and purists, not realists or pragmatists, and believe that the pursuit of a socialist agenda can only be achieved through radical policy making, not through an incremental approach. To achieve the ultimate aim of an equal society they disregard the impact on individuals in pursuit of equality. That’s my personal take on it though, I haven’t used somebody else’s words.
I’d be interested to see how other people interpret this too. Do you want to start by giving us yours?

"an incremental approach"
Isn't that the trickle-down policy we have seen for the last 13 years? Look how successful that's been
"The rich get rich and the poor get poorer"

So is it far left to think that the bedroom tax should be abolished?
That the third child restriction should be lifted?

Rather than attempt to deflect or distract again, or critique somebody else’s views Glorianny why not say what you think the ‘far left’ stand for, as MaizieD asked?

I've posted myviews many times Casdon I don't consider them far left I consider them true to the LP aims. You and others are the people who consider me far left, so explain it to me, because be blowed if I understand.
I've asked many times but I will try again

Is asking that water, energy and trains are publicly owned far left?
Is wanting the bedroom tax abolished far left?
Is wanting privatisation of the NHS stopped far left?
Is wanting the third child legislation abolished far left?
Is wanting proper protection for employees and zero hours contracts abolished far left?
I don't think any of these things are. I think they are basic Labour policies, but I don't think Starmer does.

Pehaps you can explain to me exactly what is "evasive" about this? I do ntice that you never replied So who is being evasive?