|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 20, 2019 12:09:06 GMT 1
You are not giving due weight to the comments from Chris Leslie. He is clear that he is against the thrust of the 2017 manifesto policy commitments.
Money doesn’t talk it swears. And where it is given in secrecy to politicians it will have a subverting effect.
Let me be clear there will be MPs from more than one political party who will have received gifts and money from foreign governments. I believe that a number of foreign governments intervene subvertly into our politics. I also believe that the U.K. government spies on countries that we would normally regard as friendly to understand their political positions. I believe that the select committee report I have linked to above is quite astonishing and has serious implications for our democracy. As a democratic socialist (and therefore an extremist in 2019) that concerns me.
Social media brings a wholly different dimension to this. I’d recommend going on to YouTube and googling James Patrick and Malware for Humans.
I am an unreconstructed and undiluted Bennite and I believe that the reasons for the establishment of the ILP in the 1890s are still important. The founders of the ILP included ordinary trade unionists and working people (when the two were rightly synonymous). They saw that the free market severely constrained their ability to provide for themselves and their families and for their communities to thrive. Therefore they sought worker representation in parliament, independent of the Liberal party, so those resources could be voted for.
This is such a successful idea that all sorts of interests try to do the same, but only individuals living in a constituency can vote for their MP. But money swears, it doesn’t talk.
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Feb 20, 2019 12:33:59 GMT 1
We had similar here in Shrewsbury when Paul Marsden left Labour, crossed the floor to the Liberals, on his 2nd Term. Then he didn't call a Bi Election, so we had a Lib Dem MP instead of a Labour, and don't we vote for the party rather than the candidate in habit, unless its a celeb MP lol. Some vote for the Prime Minister they want etc. I don't think this new party will build unless others join from across the floor, but I think they should all call their electorate from their towns. People like tradition, and it UKIP 20 years to get this far....the Lib Dems have shrunk despite being about 40 years, but are Liberal at heart. Not according to Chuka Umunna! But then he's operating under the principles of expediency. Had he said anything else then he might have been pressurized into fighting a by-election. If he genuinely thinks that the electorate vote for people rather than parties then I'll have no need to shoot down the pink pig flying overhead. But of course he doesn't. He's just a career politician playing the best options available to him.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Feb 20, 2019 13:16:43 GMT 1
There is a common thread here. Most if not all of these characters have jumped before they were pushed in that nearly all were likely to be deselected by their Constituency Party before the next election. The evidence is there that the Conservatives who are thinking of resigning from their party are facing deselection too. None of them are likely to be asked to represent their respective parties at the next election, so this is their last roll of the dice in the hope of maintaining a political career. I'd imagine that others are only delaying joining them until they are more or less certain that they are also going to be deselected. As soon as they come to that conclusion, we'll be seeing further resignations. It's nothing to do with principles, it's all about self preservation. I don't believe that for a minute but, even supposing for a moment that it were true, the question to ask would be why they faced deselection and the answer would be because they're some of the most vocal critics of their own parties. If you're suggesting it's because these are the biggest scoundrels in the House of Commons, I'd expect to be seeing some very different names than these.
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Feb 20, 2019 13:26:41 GMT 1
There is a common thread here. Most if not all of these characters have jumped before they were pushed in that nearly all were likely to be deselected by their Constituency Party before the next election. The evidence is there that the Conservatives who are thinking of resigning from their party are facing deselection too. None of them are likely to be asked to represent their respective parties at the next election, so this is their last roll of the dice in the hope of maintaining a political career. I'd imagine that others are only delaying joining them until they are more or less certain that they are also going to be deselected. As soon as they come to that conclusion, we'll be seeing further resignations. It's nothing to do with principles, it's all about self preservation. I don't believe that for a minute but, even supposing for a moment that it were true, the question to ask would be why they faced deselection and the answer would be because they're some of the most vocal critics of their own parties. If you're suggesting it's because these are the biggest scoundrels in the House of Commons, I'd expect to be seeing some very different names than these. Not at all. It's the infiltration of the Constituency Parties by ex UKIP members, Momentum etc which is causing the trouble for them. Here's what's happening:- www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/bristol-labour-mps-deselection-list-2557558www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/news/101905/tory-brexit-splits-deepen-sarah-wollastonOthers believed to have little chance of surviving deselection challenges include former party leadership candidates Mary Creagh and Angela Eagle, Commons Brexit committee chairman Hilary Benn, leading Brexiteer Kate Hoey and former international development spokesman Kate Osamor.
|
|
|
Post by ssshrew on Feb 20, 2019 13:37:03 GMT 1
Ok. We are one month all but a few days from Brexit. Just what do this lot propose to do in this very short time (even in politics) to improve and/or better the situation that we, the voters, and the our country find ourselves in?
Our MPs should be pulling together somehow to sort this mess and then decide on what to do.
If they are to be believed, anti semitism has been rife in the Labour Party for ages (and if so it’s disgusting) but why wait until the brink of Brexit to do something about it?!
A plague on all of them.
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Feb 20, 2019 13:43:55 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Feb 20, 2019 13:44:54 GMT 1
Ok. We are one month all but a few days from Brexit. Just what do this lot propose to do in this very short time (even in politics) to improve and/or better the situation that we, the voters, and the our country find ourselves in? Our MPs should be pulling together somehow to sort this mess and then decide on what to do. If they are to be believed, anti semitism has been rife in the Labour Party for ages (and if so it’s disgusting) but why wait until the brink of Brexit to do something about it?! A plague on all of them. What can MPs do? The brexit process is run (being charitable) by the government. MPs aren't able to formulate policy. May is only trying to deflect the blame when she criticises MPs for saying what they don't want and not saying what they do. If she was serious about that, she'd have opened up the entire brexit process but she never has and never will, because she's being run by the ERG and the DUP. What do you mean by "pulling together"? The only way they can do that is by voting for May's deal. What sort of MP would do that if they thought it was bad for the country for the sake of "pulling together"?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2019 13:46:58 GMT 1
I don't believe that for a minute but, even supposing for a moment that it were true, the question to ask would be why they faced deselection and the answer would be because they're some of the most vocal critics of their own parties. If you're suggesting it's because these are the biggest scoundrels in the House of Commons, I'd expect to be seeing some very different names than these. Not at all. It's the infiltration of the Constituency Parties by ex UKIP members, Momentum etc which is causing the trouble for them. Here's what's happening:- www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/bristol-labour-mps-deselection-list-2557558www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/news/101905/tory-brexit-splits-deepen-sarah-wollastonOthers believed to have little chance of surviving deselection challenges include former party leadership candidates Mary Creagh and Angela Eagle, Commons Brexit committee chairman Hilary Benn, leading Brexiteer Kate Hoey and former international development spokesman Kate Osamor. 'Infiltration' by actual voting age human beings eligible to join the party. How dare they.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Feb 20, 2019 13:54:34 GMT 1
I don't believe that for a minute but, even supposing for a moment that it were true, the question to ask would be why they faced deselection and the answer would be because they're some of the most vocal critics of their own parties. If you're suggesting it's because these are the biggest scoundrels in the House of Commons, I'd expect to be seeing some very different names than these. Not at all. It's the infiltration of the Constituency Parties by ex UKIP members, Momentum etc which is causing the trouble for them. Here's what's happening:- www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/bristol-labour-mps-deselection-list-2557558www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/news/101905/tory-brexit-splits-deepen-sarah-wollastonOthers believed to have little chance of surviving deselection challenges include former party leadership candidates Mary Creagh and Angela Eagle, Commons Brexit committee chairman Hilary Benn, leading Brexiteer Kate Hoey and former international development spokesman Kate Osamor. OK, point taken. I thought you were implying deselection might be because of some untoward behaviour on their part, rather than political differences. As I said originally, I'm saddened to an extent by the splitting of Labour (though delighted that it's happening with the Tories as well). For me, brexit has been the issue that has exposed how utterly inadequate our two party system has become. It simply can't reflect, let alone cope with, the divergence of strongly held opinions on the most fundamental subject facing the country. So let it fall; I think that's the best way forward. In these intolerant times, perhaps "broad church" political parties have had their day. Perhaps we need a more diverse party politics. Sure, there would have to be compromise and alliances across party lines to enable government to function, but that has always happened within the big two parties anyway. Let's have it out in the open and let other voices be heard.
|
|
|
Post by ssshrew on Feb 20, 2019 14:30:49 GMT 1
Ok. We are one month all but a few days from Brexit. Just what do this lot propose to do in this very short time (even in politics) to improve and/or better the situation that we, the voters, and the our country find ourselves in? Our MPs should be pulling together somehow to sort this mess and then decide on what to do. If they are to be believed, anti semitism has been rife in the Labour Party for ages (and if so it’s disgusting) but why wait until the brink of Brexit to do something about it?! A plague on all of them. What can MPs do? The brexit process is run (being charitable) by the government. MPs aren't able to formulate policy. May is only trying to deflect the blame when she criticises MPs for saying what they don't want and not saying what they do. If she was serious about that, she'd have opened up the entire brexit process but she never has and never will, because she's being run by the ERG and the DUP. What do you mean by "pulling together"? The only way they can do that is by voting for May's deal. What sort of MP would do that if they thought it was bad for the country for the sake of "pulling together"? I guess I’m not too sure but it just seems to me that all this is deflecting from a serious state of affairs that we are in at the moment. Time, energy, publicity is being spent on all this when we should all be monitoring what the hell is going on in the negotiations. Whether people voted in or out, to me the current situation is a shambles. It just seems too late for them to do anything positive now. I think if was me I would stay in my mainstream party for the present and keep trying to change things from the inside. Time to leave when things are a bit calmer. If I were a voter in one of their constituencies I don’t think I would be too chuffed to be honest. Presumably whatever the next vote on Brexit turns out to be for, they will vote exactly as they have before so there will be no change in the outcome.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 20, 2019 16:19:27 GMT 1
The selection and deselection process in the Labour Party is stalled until the NEC decides what approach is going to be taken.
In my experience a good proportion of Momentum members are former Greens and Liberal Democrats as well as Old Labour who walked in 2003.
Both Waverley and Nottingham East CLP have expressed concerns about their MP's lack of visibility in the constituency, including surgeries for the public. So there is an issue here about MP conduct too.
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on Feb 20, 2019 20:28:38 GMT 1
Labour 'moderates' before yesterday: 'Haha, the Corbynites call anyone that doesn't worship their dear leader a Tory!'
Chuka and co now 'Come join us Tories, we can work together'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2019 21:05:30 GMT 1
If you needed an example of the fanatical and paranoid state of denial that the hard-left is in look no further than some of the posts on this board and the (now withdrawn) outburst from Ruth George MP. Some MPs are leaving the Labour party? It must be an Israeli/Zionist conspiracy. Yet the Labour Friends of Isreal call Corbyn a threat to National Security. Conspiracy theories indeed.
|
|
|
Post by Worthingshrew on Feb 20, 2019 22:34:48 GMT 1
The chances of individual MPs changing matters in their parties, is nil, so only option is to leave.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Feb 21, 2019 14:20:03 GMT 1
Hatton re-admitted after 33 years. You put yer left foot in, yer left foot out...in, out, in out...and shake it all about... What a farce...
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 21, 2019 14:49:00 GMT 1
I'm happy for anyone to give an alternative explanation for the video of Joan Ryan, and let's see how it stands up. But even if one is given MPs still receive gifts and money from foreign governments.
Calling something a conspiracy theory is one way of closing down and dismissing a point of view. Again the select committee report from the Culture Media and Sport is instructive to how vulnerable our politics is to foreign manipulation.
|
|
|
Post by another fine mess on Feb 21, 2019 17:53:28 GMT 1
Calling something a conspiracy theory is one way of closing down and dismissing a point of view.
I assume that’s aimed at me.
I respect your right to hold your views and I don’t want to close anyone down.
I think you should be cross with Ruth George though. In her apology she said:
"I had no intention of invoking a conspiracy theory and I am deeply sorry that my ill-thought out and poorly worded comment did this. I withdraw it completely."
That seems pretty clear. If something is a conspiracy theory, what else are you supposed to call it?
Honest question… Do you really think that these MPs are leaving the Labour party because they’ve been paid to by Israel? I bet you don’t.
It’s reasonable to be concerned about the funding of political parties but it’s bonkers to blame Israel for these defections, especially when there are far more obvious reasons - i.e. the ones they gave.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 21, 2019 20:25:41 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 21, 2019 20:30:27 GMT 1
Calling something a conspiracy theory is one way of closing down and dismissing a point of view.
I assume that’s aimed at me.
I respect your right to hold your views and I don’t want to close anyone down.
I think you should be cross with Ruth George though. In her apology she said:
"I had no intention of invoking a conspiracy theory and I am deeply sorry that my ill-thought out and poorly worded comment did this. I withdraw it completely."
That seems pretty clear. If something is a conspiracy theory, what else are you supposed to call it?
Honest question… Do you really think that these MPs are leaving the Labour party because they’ve been paid to by Israel? I bet you don’t.
It’s reasonable to be concerned about the funding of political parties but it’s bonkers to blame Israel for these defections, especially when there are far more obvious reasons - i.e. the ones they gave.
I have no information on the funding of the Altrincham company. No one has. That is the point. On the basis of the Israel’s government’s relationship to organisations affiliated to the Labour Party and organisations of which Labour MPs are members I also would not rule out funding by the Israel government has facilitated this. I would also say that it is not my place to prove one way or the other, given the manner in which this has been done.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 21, 2019 20:40:34 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Feb 21, 2019 21:51:11 GMT 1
I assume that’s aimed at me.
I respect your right to hold your views and I don’t want to close anyone down.
I think you should be cross with Ruth George though. In her apology she said:
"I had no intention of invoking a conspiracy theory and I am deeply sorry that my ill-thought out and poorly worded comment did this. I withdraw it completely."
That seems pretty clear. If something is a conspiracy theory, what else are you supposed to call it?
Honest question… Do you really think that these MPs are leaving the Labour party because they’ve been paid to by Israel? I bet you don’t.
It’s reasonable to be concerned about the funding of political parties but it’s bonkers to blame Israel for these defections, especially when there are far more obvious reasons - i.e. the ones they gave.
I have no information on the funding of the Altrincham company. No one has. That is the point. On the basis of the Israel’s government’s relationship to organisations affiliated to the Labour Party and organisations of which Labour MPs are members I also would not rule out funding by the Israel government has facilitated this. I would also say that it is not my place to prove one way or the other, given the manner in which this has been done. It's fair to criticise the lack of funding transparency. Taking a public guess that this whole thing has been funded by Israel and then in effect saying "it's not up to me to prove my supposition has any truth in it, it's for others to prove it hasn't" is quite a different matter. "People believe what they are shown. I’m stating what I have seen and experienced," you said yesterday. Yes to the first part, apparently not to the second. Fake news indeed.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 21, 2019 22:12:12 GMT 1
I have no information on the funding of the Altrincham company. No one has. That is the point. On the basis of the Israel’s government’s relationship to organisations affiliated to the Labour Party and organisations of which Labour MPs are members I also would not rule out funding by the Israel government has facilitated this. I would also say that it is not my place to prove one way or the other, given the manner in which this has been done. It's fair to criticise the lack of funding transparency. Taking a public guess that this whole thing has been funded by Israel and then in effect saying "it's not up to me to prove my supposition has any truth in it, it's for others to prove it hasn't" is quite a different matter. "People believe what they are shown. I’m stating what I have seen and experienced," you said yesterday. Yes to the first part, apparently not to the second. Fake news indeed. I clearly have not made a guess that it has all been funded by Israel. For the avoidance of doubt I stand by the statement you have quoted in italics. Again, I repeat what I have said before. I am a Labour Party member, you know my name, you will know what CLP I am a member from my handle on the Messageboard. Anyone is free to screen shot this Messageboard and make a complaint to the Labour Party about anything I have written. Go on.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 21, 2019 22:50:47 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Feb 22, 2019 0:19:24 GMT 1
It's fair to criticise the lack of funding transparency. Taking a public guess that this whole thing has been funded by Israel and then in effect saying "it's not up to me to prove my supposition has any truth in it, it's for others to prove it hasn't" is quite a different matter. "People believe what they are shown. I’m stating what I have seen and experienced," you said yesterday. Yes to the first part, apparently not to the second. Fake news indeed. I clearly have not made a guess that it has all been funded by Israel. For the avoidance of doubt I stand by the statement you have quoted in italics. Again, I repeat what I have said before. I am a Labour Party member, you know my name, you will know what CLP I am a member from my handle on the Messageboard. Anyone is free to screen shot this Messageboard and make a complaint to the Labour Party about anything I have written. Go on. Why would I want to complain? I'm simply pointing out that you are "showing" people your supposition as to who is behind the Independent Group, and presumably expecting that to be believed in accordance with your earlier statement that you say you're standing by, whilst simultaneously saying it's not for you to prove it. If you have evidence, why not say so? Why wouldn't you want to prove the point? If you don't have evidence, then you're making a supposition that's little more than a guess. Why would you do that and claim that it's not a guess? Why are you so keen to "show" this and have people believe it if you don't know that it's true?
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 22, 2019 1:38:53 GMT 1
I clearly have not made a guess that it has all been funded by Israel. For the avoidance of doubt I stand by the statement you have quoted in italics. Again, I repeat what I have said before. I am a Labour Party member, you know my name, you will know what CLP I am a member from my handle on the Messageboard. Anyone is free to screen shot this Messageboard and make a complaint to the Labour Party about anything I have written. Go on. Why would I want to complain? I'm simply pointing out that you are "showing" people your supposition as to who is behind the Independent Group, and presumably expecting that to be believed in accordance with your earlier statement that you say you're standing by, whilst simultaneously saying it's not for you to prove it. If you have evidence, why not say so? Why wouldn't you want to prove the point? If you don't have evidence, then you're making a supposition that's little more than a guess. Why would you do that and claim that it's not a guess? Why are you so keen to "show" this and have people believe it if you don't know that it's true? That’s right, in the matter of political funding this organisation needs to be transparent and quickly. You are making the supposition that I am making am supposition. I am stating that the burden of proof lies with the Altrincham company because of its secrecy and also given the video of Joan Ryan that Joan Ryan says doesn’t exist. For other payments and gifts from foreign governments simply take time to trawl through the the register of members’ interests.
|
|
|
Post by LetchworthShrew on Feb 22, 2019 10:20:09 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 22, 2019 10:21:07 GMT 1
9-3 was a little late in coming in but the Labour Party received a ringing endorsement of its efforts to clean up its operation in the West Midlands and Sandwell & Dudley in particular with the resignation of Ian Austin from the Labour Party. A day after hours of hearings of appeals against refusals to be readmitted into the Labour Party in Sandwell and Dudley.
One CLP in the West Midlands had its first AGM in 14 years this year thanks to the new leadership in the West Midlands regional HQ.
Will John Mann go later today or announce in time for the Sunday politics shows.
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Feb 22, 2019 10:54:05 GMT 1
Not surprised. He wants a deal and is not supportive of a second referendum, so is unlikely to be comfortable being in the Independent Group.
|
|
|
Post by theriverside on Feb 28, 2019 8:08:37 GMT 1
|
|