to ask why several prominent members seem to have vanished?!?

1944 education act implemented by a Labour Gov 1947- educated me-
Housed in council housing built by Labour council 1930s and 1950s
Cared for by NHS introduced 1948 by Labour Gov.

1944 Education Act.
NHS.
Free milk at school
Maternity grant of £25
Free pint of milk when expecting my third child (bit different to today!)
Free dental care when pregnant and with a child under one year old
Child benefit for all my children.

"1944 education act implemented by a Labour Gov 1947- educated me-
Housed in council housing built by Labour council 1930s and 1950s
Cared for by NHS introduced 1948 by Labour Gov."

No one has rule out the influence the Labour party had 75 years ago. From those wonderful initiatives a truly caring party was born and one my family supported.

The Labour Party of today is a mockery, a distortion of those old ideals. It's a bit like comparing the closing of the coal mines almost 40 years ago and still blaming Thatcher for the world moving on. Those times have gone.

Labour as we knew it is redundant - so now far left activists jump on all manner of social ills, which have always existed, and claim to be the saviours of mankind. Labour knows how to spend taxpayers money and little about the economy and building a future for everyone - and that seems to be its modern legacy.

The principles of the Labour party are closer now to those of the 1945 government than they have ever been. Of course some people, having reaped the benefit of their policies themselves, now decry them as impossible and too expensive. The truth is of course exactly the same allegations were made about things in 1945. And yet the country survived and prospered. It is of course true that people move to the right as they age, but some of us continue to believe that those in need today should have the same support as we did.

And the country voted them out five years later

And yet the country survived and prospered

Instead of the situation in 1945 when the world was so very different and less enlightened, say the same about the Labour Government of 1997 to 2010.

We survived and prospered only because that disastrous government was ousted.

And, sadly, since then the Labour Party has totally transformed, bringing in a Marxist leader who is surrounded by hard left MPs, as if this is the answer to it's demise!

So our generation benefitted from council housing programmes, full employment (or near as possible), free university places and education grants, the best health service in the world (generally acknowledged), the opportunity for most people to own their own home, child benefit for every child.
But now, while the UK is still the world’s fifth or sixth biggest economy, we can’t afford the same for our grandchildren!
These policies may appear costly but they are an investment in our country’s future. The costs of unemployment, homelessness, rising crime, struggling health service will hold our economy back.

"survived" maybe but "prospered" never. With the highest rate of homelessness, more people using food banks, more people on zero hours contracts, the highest ever numbers recoursing to bancrupcy deals, an NHS permanently in crisis and schools asking parents to plug the funding gap very few have prospered and those who have done so have done it at the expense of the poorest. You Day 6 may be able to ignore those people and pretend everything is bright and rosy but some of us are disgusted that a rich affluent nation should allow this to happen.

"You Day 6 may be able to ignore those people and pretend everything is bright and rosy."

You are doing it again - using the hardship of others to maintain that YOU care and I don't.

That is a big, fat clever trick. I am aware of the hardship many face but Labour cannot level the playing field.

Society exists in tiers of wealth and always has. The man who lives in a shop doorway, the man who lives in a hostel, the man who rents a damp flat thanks to his benefits, the man who rents a better but cramped flat thanks to his part time job, the man who rents a bigger flat because he has work, the man who rents a small house for his family....I could go on and on and on. Where do you fit on that scale?

a rich affluent nation should allow this to happen.

So, how do you rate Germany? Homelessness there. How do you rate the USA? Homelessness there too. How do you rate France? Go see the homeless in shop doorways. Go to any European capital and see exactly the same.

All these emotive buzz phrases are trotted out time and time again by the left yet they have not solved the problem.

The NHS is "crumbling" is another favourite yet many of us can testify to having excellent service and treatment.

Try instead - "The NHS is over used and struggling to meet demand" - that is the truth as recognised by the government we have. Everything needs money throwing at it. That is another truth and one which Corbyn and co will have to come to terms with should they gain office. However, budgeting (and costs) doesn't seem to be Diane Abbott's forte, does it? Heaven help us all if they ever get their hands on the purse strings.

The present government have

Ignore last unfinished sentence

What has Diane Abbott got to do with costings for the NHS?
It’s a myth that Labour isn’t good at managing the economy, a myth that has been exposed as nonsense many times.

Government debt has increased by £555 billion since George Osborne took office in 2010, the latest official figures show (2016)

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/the-uk-national-debt-has-risen-by-555-billion-since-2010-under-george-osborne-a6947661.html

"The costs of unemployment, homelessness, rising crime, struggling health service will hold our economy back."

These problems are not peculiar to the UK.
These problems exist world-wide in many affluent nations.
Left wing parties across the world have been unable to solve the problems yet all would profess to be compassionate.

Guess what - that compassion exists throughout the world too and most individuals are caring and decent people.

Many of them in the UK do not need to side with a Marxist dominated, far left party in order to highlight areas in which we as a civilised society could do better. We need a stable and financially aware government, spending taxpayers money wisely to be able to best help the less fortunate.

No one would look to the disastrous Venezuelan idea of socialism to solve our problems. Corbyn has the same dreams.

What would have a chance of succeeding ( in the next GE)
Would be a moderate LP with someone other than Corbyn
mcDonnell ( Marxists both) and the hopeless Abbott at the helm.The thing is, that now seems an impossibility.
What we may get, is the three stooges in control ( or not in control) leading this country down the garden path into
Massive debt, while they put ideology before all else, and it takes years to then rise from the ashes.

Just hope it never happens! [cheers] to that thought.

Time somebody started a new thread for this, or move it to the Corbyn thread.

Well if you’d read my point above you might have noticed that the Tory government has already put us into massive debt since 2010. Do people really want more debt, low wages, zero hours contracts, gig economy, underfunded NHS. It’s Labour who spend wisely and maintain stability.

Your constant criticism of Diane Abbott, the first ever black woman in Parliament, who is very popular with her constituents, smacks of racism.

trisher your insult that grans on here are mindless presumably excludes yourself and any cronies!
Yes, start your own threads, it’s high time you did.
I shall leave this daft thread started to lament the departure of a few, and put any other political titbits on the Corbyn thread.

Racism? Don't be daft. If she is in parliament in a position of authority she will be criticised (like all the rest) for many more reasons than racism. Being black has no relevance to how people rate her competence or lack of it. In fact being equally criticised is a sign of her equality with an equivalent non-black politician. If she were sacrosanct because of her race, that would be a sign of INequality.

...some of us continue to believe that those in need today should have the same support as we did.

Yup. And the fact that some think the best way to achieve that is Way X, some think it is Way Y, and some really aren't sure at all what Way would be best, is called politics. The fact that people's approaches are different is not a sign that any of those people are uncaring or unthinking.

Oh do lemon then I will be spared them.
Day6 I am just listening to a discussion about the homeless man who died www.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/14/homeless-man-dies-on-doorstep-of-houses-of-parliament
The man from St Mungos said homelessness has increased by 169% under this government. Now while I may be prepared to accept that there are tiers of wealth I am not prepared to accept that anyone should die because they are sleeping on the street. There are basic standards that all citizens in a civilised nation should be entitled to.
It is strange that in order to discredit my points you have to resort to accusations of Marxism, compare this country to Venezuela and be abusive about a black woman MP. It smacks of desperation and a guilty conscience.

I think if you look into it Elegran you will see that Diane Abbott is constantly abused on social media with misogynistic and racist abuse of the very worst kind. Far worse than other prominent politicians.

Do you really think that because she is a politician she should expect this level of abuse? People have short memories. Jo Cox was the recipient of online abuse and death threats before being murdered.

You seem to think vile abuse and death threats to politicians should be the norm. Police can sometimes prosecute these abusers if they can track them down.

Your constant criticism of Diane Abbott, the first ever black woman in Parliament, who is
very popular with her constituents, smacks of racism.

Excuse me! Diane Abbott's repeated poor performances during interviews; her inability to get her facts right and prepare for an interview, are nothing to do with her gender or the colour of her skin. It is everything to do with the fact that she simply doesn't prepare herself properly, even though she knows the subject that she will be asked to discuss. She hasn't done that once. Or even twice. She's done it several times now and has gained a reputation in main stream media for that.
And mostlyharmless, don't you think that segregating DA from any criticism is, in itself, racist? Don't you think that all politicians, irrespective of gender, race, colour or creed should be held to account,if and that by treating any one of them differently is racist or misogynistic?

"You seem to think vile abuse and death threats to politicians should be the norm. Police can sometimes prosecute these abusers if they can track them down."

I have seen some twisting of another posters words before but that is beyond ridiculous mostlyharmless.

Obviously the tragedy of Jo Cox’s murder has been forgotten.