Current Affairs The Labour Party

[catcherintherye]

Extract from article on Keir Starmer in Telegraph today.

'Sir Keir's calm and meticulously forensic approach is precisely what these dramatic times require and was deployed to great effect in his opening set of questions yesterday. He is going to be heard because the nature of this emergency demands that we have an effective Opposition. After a long hiatus, Labour has a grown up leader once again.'

It's taken a while.

Well lets see how he does in elections. We have lots of self important hacks writing for papers proclaiming who they think is brilliant or not. I'll judge him by the number of votes he gets.

 

[catcherintherye]

Its not a secret, Kinnock and those around have spoken about it many times. Corbyn has consistently done his best to go against Labour time and time again.

I also think we have to challenge the assumption that Thatcher won because of Kinnocks decision to turf out the Militant. That was his decision, he owns it. If it cost them an election (I don't believe it did) thats on him. I would also add, I have seen no evidence that Corbyn was in any way involved with the Militant.

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

While not Big Jezza's biggest fan, suggesting he was a Thatcherite is a bit bonkers

Not suggesting that he was a Thatcherite. Just that he was responsible for what his cabal are crying about now, conspiring.

 

[tsubaki]

Its not a secret, Kinnock and those around have spoken about it many times. Corbyn has consistently done his best to go against Labour time and time again.

Did he get kicked out when Militant did?

If not, this claim he “helped Thatcher” and was therefore equivalent to what Woodcock / Austin etc did at the last election is bilge.

 

[catcherintherye]

Yep he will absolutely destroy Sir Keir......

I think you are wrong on this Pete. Starmer is a very good debater, and frankly Johnson is a very poor debate. The issue is though, Johnson (or more pertinently Cummings) is playing while Starmer is playing checkers.

I think the worry for Starmer is they over egg the importance of PMQ's. They have a certain importance, but it's mainly a function that seeks to speak to the very politically engaged and the journalistic lobby, who place a level of importance onto it that isn't really matched in the wider public.

I'll be quite honest, most internal critics of Corbyn (from the right of the party) would make a massive song and dance about things like PMQ performance. Most people on the doorstep didn't mention it to me. Some mentioned the IRA stuff, some mentioned issues of anti-semitism. Essentially the "attacks" from the media (particularly the print media) were far more effective than a somewhat subdued performance in PMQ's.

It's fine if you are reflexive enough to see outside of the bubble. I'm not saying it has no importance, but it is held in too much importance. When Cummings said "get out and speak to some poor people" which was treated with enormous consternation in the lobby, he was essentially correct. He understands the limitations of PMQ's and I doubt will lose much sleep over this.

But yes, obviously the country's leading QC is going to be a lot better than Corbyn, and the bumbling Johnson. However they are going to have to acknowledge there is ore to winning than just impressing lobby journalists at PMQ.

 

[catcherintherye]

Not suggesting that he was a Thatcherite. Just that he was responsible for what his cabal are crying about now, conspiring.

I think there are key differences in how it was done though. Look it's one thing to be open about your differences. To make that quite clear and transparent. When an election comes it's important that whatever your differences, if you either stand for, or work for Labour (or any political party) you should be trying to do your best for that political party.

What we see from these leaks, are people pretending publicly to want Labour to win, but behind the scenes conduct their own campaigns to (and I'll be generous here) undermine Labour. As a subs paying member I am quite happy for people of different views to be on the payroll, but I am not happy for people who are actively working against the wishes of Labour in a covert manner to take funds and use them.

Likewise electoral law dictates certain spending limits are met. When they were supposedly channeling funds to certain MP's at times without the knowledge of the wider party, was this declared publicly to the electoral commission? If it wasn't, there is a chance that this is not just ethically wrong, or potentially liable in a civil case, but also a breach of criminal law.

So I mean if I were you I would drop the phrase "crying about" as what we are actually talking about are very serious allegations here, that funds were misappropriated in or around an electoral period, which is against the law. People should be raising concerns, and in truth there ought to be an independent enquiry.

This tome is also wholly different to someone having a different perspective. Tony Blair has regularly outlined a different political perspective to the leadership of the time. He has every right to do this. Whats not on is to work against the party in an underhand way, which some of the staff may have been doing.

 

[peteblue]

I think you are wrong on this Pete. Starmer is a very good debater, and frankly Johnson is a very poor debate. The issue is though, Johnson (or more pertinently Cummings) is playing while Starmer is playing checkers.

I think the worry for Starmer is they over egg the importance of PMQ's. They have a certain importance, but it's mainly a function that seeks to speak to the very politically engaged and the journalistic lobby, who place a level of importance onto it that isn't really matched in the wider public.

I'll be quite honest, most internal critics of Corbyn (from the right of the party) would make a massive song and dance about things like PMQ performance. Most people on the doorstep didn't mention it to me. Some mentioned the IRA stuff, some mentioned issues of anti-semitism. Essentially the "attacks" from the media (particularly the print media) were far more effective than a somewhat subdued performance in PMQ's.

It's fine if you are reflexive enough to see outside of the bubble. I'm not saying it has no importance, but it is held in too much importance. When Cummings said "get out and speak to some poor people" which was treated with enormous consternation in the lobby, he was essentially correct. He understands the limitations of PMQ's and I doubt will lose much sleep over this.

But yes, obviously the country's leading QC is going to be a lot better than Corbyn, and the bumbling Johnson. However they are going to have to acknowledge there is ore to winning than just impressing lobby journalists at PMQ.

Starmer has had one half decent go against a PM Substitute for a government on the back foot over Covid19.....I’ll wait and see what happens once Boris returns.......

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

I think there are key differences in how it was done though. Look it's one thing to be open about your differences. To make that quite clear and transparent. When an election comes it's important that whatever your differences, if you either stand for, or work for Labour (or any political party) you should be trying to do your best for that political party.

What we see from these leaks, are people pretending publicly to want Labour to win, but behind the scenes conduct their own campaigns to (and I'll be generous here) undermine Labour. As a subs paying member I am quite happy for people of different views to be on the payroll, but I am not happy for people who are actively working against the wishes of Labour in a covert manner to take funds and use them.

Likewise electoral law dictates certain spending limits are met. When they were supposedly channeling funds to certain MP's at times without the knowledge of the wider party, was this declared publicly to the electoral commission? If it wasn't, there is a chance that this is not just ethically wrong, or potentially liable in a civil case, but also a breach of criminal law.

So I mean if I were you I would drop the phrase "crying about" as what we are actually talking about are very serious allegations here, that funds were misappropriated in or around an electoral period, which is against the law. People should be raising concerns, and in truth there ought to be an independent enquiry.

This tome is also wholly different to someone having a different perspective. Tony Blair has regularly outlined a different political perspective to the leadership of the time. He has every right to do this. Whats not on is to work against the party in an underhand way, which some of the staff may have been doing.

Agreed that we will see with the leaks whether it is hot air and sour grapes from the Momentum lot and just whatsapp chats or something more serious.

My fear is that the project Corbyn cabal will keep agitating and hinder the party moving forward.

A quick look and you'll see previous evidence of Corbyn and Lansman trying to move the party to their favoured position and recently with the help of Communist/Marxist/Militant types.

On 14 January that year, Mr Jeremy Corbyn, secretary of the Campaign Group of MPs, told the Guardian that they were "considering putting up a candidate against Neil Kinnock for the party leadership" and “taking soundings among CLPs and trade unions".

By 14 April, Mr Jon Lansman (now a leading figure in the pro-Corbyn group Momentum), was telling the same paper that there is "no difficulty justifying the campaign to the party…by having an election, we will force a debate about the direction of the party in which it will be much more difficult for Kinnock to make everything an issue of loyalty to him".

If we keep at eachother as a party you have to worry that we will be left with successive Tory governments.

 

[tsubaki]

If we keep at eachother as a party you have to worry that we will be left with successive Tory governments.

Advice that would be far better heeded by the centre than anyone else, I feel.

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

Advice that would be far better heeded by the centre than anyone else, I feel.

Not sure mate. I'd suggest that the vocal minority and empowered Corby crew have felt superior enough to call what I would call traditional Labour voters Tory's or Tory lite. I've seen this first hand, sadly, thus my dislike for its roots and branches.

But for balance put both together and it shows that the party needs to heal or move on in some way.

 

[tsubaki]

Not sure mate. I'd suggest that the vocal minority and empowered Corby crew have felt superior enough to call what I would call traditional Labour voters Tory's or Tory lite. I've seen this first hand, sadly, thus my dislike for its roots and branches.

But for balance put both together and it shows that the party needs to heal or move on in some way.

Not sure how you aren’t doing exactly that will all this Corby crew tosh.

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

Not sure how you aren’t doing exactly that will all this Corby crew tosh.

I not denying that I see what has happened as an entryst threat to the party.

But if you had the choice of being a member of the Corbyn Crew or a Tory what would go for. I'm with Jeremy on that one.

 

[catcherintherye]

Starmer has had one half decent go against a PM Substitute for a government on the back foot over Covid19.....I’ll wait and see what happens once Boris returns.......

I can assure you now, he will do very well at PMQ's. Johnson is very bad at them, and he is very good at them. However there is more at play than just PMQ's.

 

[catcherintherye]

Agreed that we will see with the leaks whether it is hot air and sour grapes from the Momentum lot and just whatsapp chats or something more serious.

My fear is that the project Corbyn cabal will keep agitating and hinder the party moving forward.

A quick look and you'll see previous evidence of Corbyn and Lansman trying to move the party to their favoured position and recently with the help of Communist/Marxist/Militant types.


If we keep at eachother as a party you have to worry that we will be left with successive Tory governments.

Well irrespective of where it emerged from, I think the whatsapp conversations are quite clear.

I have no intention of wrecking the project. In all honesty I thought we have 4 very ordinary candidates and have little faith in any of them, but certainly won't be throwing my toys out of the pram because my preferred candidate lost. You may want to address that message though, to those full timers who when they lost, seemed to spend 4 years undermining Labour. I have no idea why they think they have a divine right to rule.

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

My take on Starmer v Johnson in the HoC is that Starmer will dissect Boris who will revert to making noises/jokes/shouting slogans. As a lawyer Starmer will persist and keep Johnson on the spot.