Labour leader and senior MPs embark on summer ‘tour’
Jeremy Corbyn and his senior MPs are going on tour. In a series of ‘Labour Roots’ events, they will meet activists and members of the public around the UK in what is envisaged to be a rolling and continuing programme to give the public the chance to raise issues, discuss ideas and influence policy – as well as provide new ways to take the message out to their communities.
Labour’s press release describes it:
Labour Roots is a rolling series of exciting, open events bringing together activists and the public with Jeremy Corbyn and members of the shadow cabinet.
Imagine a celebration of Labour politics built by our communities. Imagine discussing big ideas, radical policies and new forms of organising, with a large rally and social in the evening – mixing politics with music and forging new friendships and connections. Imagine local people, community groups, party members and trade unions working together to build a new kind of politics.
Labour Roots is going to break down the barriers between the public and their representatives.
An inaugural series of events in Leeds on 1 June kicks off the tour, with other dates already announced as follows:
- Cornwall – 27 July
- Bolton – 17 August
- Hastings – 19 October
- Wallsend – 23 November
- Birkenhead – 14 December
Links to register an interest in each event are available here.
The Leeds event will consist of 2pm gatherings in:
- Harehills with Diane Abbott MP and Richard Burgon MP on the topic of racism and how to take on the far right
- Leeds Central with Barry Gardiner alongside activists and experts to discuss Labour’s plans for a Green Industrial Revolution
- Pudsey with Angela Rayner and parliamentary candidate Jayne Aitchison, together with campaign groups and local people, to talk about the government’s attacks on public services
Attendees will also have access to the Great Big Rally in Leeds City Centre, with speeches by Jeremy Corbyn and shadow cabinet members including Angela Rayner, Barry Gardiner, Diane Abbott and Richard Burgon, plus local parliamentary candidate Jane Aitchison, Chris Peace from the Orgreave Truth and Justice Campaign and live music from Ferocious Dog, Duncan Evans and others.
SKWAWKBOX view:
As usual, Labour is the only party with not only the confidence to meet the people but to engage with them to discuss the issues that really matter to them – and give them the chance to feed into Labour’s already strong policies to repair the damage done to the country by years of Tory abuse and mismanagement.
Labour is living up to its pledge to be a party ‘for the many, not the few’.
The SKWAWKBOX needs your support. This blog is provided free of charge but depends on the generosity of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here for a monthly donation via GoCardless. Thanks for your solidarity so this blog can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.
If you wish to reblog this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
Bring it on Jeremy! Let’s show people how transformative a Labour Government can be. Please have an event in Birmingham we need remind people in the West Midlands what sort of inclusive society they can have with a Corbyn led government. It will also remind some of the MP’s around here who the boss really is?
If Jeremy really wanted to listen to activists then why did he back the Momentum coup?
And why didn’t he carry through on the democratic transformation of the Party and bring in open selections, aboliish the Blairite “stakeholder” sections of the NEC and restore the policymaking centrality of Party Conference?
Because as you should know as a Labour party member Danny , it was our Delegates or to be precise Lansman and Len MaCluskie that pulled the carpet from under the Conf re supporting the Mandatory reselection motion.
Much to my anger and no doubt Corbyns too!
And Corbyn had nowt to do with any Momentum Coup, the only Coup was Lansman dictatorilly taking over control of Momentum and pushing out any idea of Momentum members having a vote or say in Momentum Leadership, hence my resignation from it forthwith,
Just to get the facts right
After trawling back through the “free vote on Brexit” thread currently on this page with 102 comments, many of them full of spite for fellow Labour members and little else, I was pretty sure this wasn’t always the norm so I spent the last half hour browsing the 2017 and 18 archive.
I found some but surprisingly few.
I remember having spats myself with SteveH, maybe RH and others back then but can’t remember the subjects for the life of me.
This comment caught my eye:
4foxandhare 05/01/2018 at 10:12 pm
Most of my news comes from the Skwawkbox, and a big part of it’s attraction is the high quality of the comments section.
Thanks everyone
So sorry we’ve descended to this level of ‘debate’, 4foxandhare.
I agree and I suggest that the reason for this is because some of those who comment here are Brexit fanatics from the extremes and they can see their ill gotten Brexit slipping away from them. ‘Informed consent’ is a term they do not understand or agree with which is why they shiver at the thought that the electorate may be asked again to cast their vote, now that they have a better idea of the consequences.
They try to cover their anger in an immitation cloak of democracy and fail to acknowledge that the only people who can alter or confirm the original vote are the people themselves. When this is suggested to them, like petulant children they lash out in fits of anger, resentment and foot stamping. Skwawky doesn’t help, instead, he panders to their sense of self-entitlement by spinning every set of statistics/polls in their favour.
Good point David ,, and myself too have become embroiled and guilty of that , much to my shame.
The real enemies are the Tories who have done so much harm and damage to the whole countryvwhichvIam suecyou all know ,, And through their Austerity IMO have created the perfect storm on which to launch their Brexit.
Passion runs high on either side of the debate but to what end I wonder , here on a small blog site , that none of us commentators can affect the eventual outcome, but as you so well point out just pour out spite on what should be fellow Left Winger Comrades.
The Tory way Divide and Conquer….. , Labour …divided we fall.
David and others, absolutely. David, thanks for taking the time to have a look back and confirm the difference.
It seems to me that it’s all part of the poison that the decision to have a referendum has spread through the country. The EU was not a major issue 5 years ago, well down ordinary people’s priorities. The only ones obsessed were a bunch of right wing tories. Then the worst prime minister in the last 100 years chose to break apart the country for cheap political partisan gain.
And we’re not going to be able to fix it for a generation, no matter what the end result.
Valid observation, David – and Simon has also been vocal in nudging debate back towards civility.
I think I am being honest in saying that I don’t initiate ad hominem insults in the course of debate. But I own that I do respond to them – perhaps too readily, especially when they are patently absurd; it’s actually the absurdity that is the issue for me, rather than the self-defeating ad hominem nature of the shitfest. Perhaps it’s also worth considering that the ad hominem stuff can mask a fragility – but I’m not sure what to do about that possibility in this context other than it reinforces the ‘don’t respond’ idea.
So – ‘Don’t respond’ is perhaps the one lesson, taking out one source of the tediousness of pointless slanging matches.
Beyond that – I wouldn’t care for arguments to be falsely anodyne. ‘Respecting’ ideas is different from respecting their authors and their motives. Bullshit can be called bullshit, and lack of evidence and illogic called out for what it is. ‘On the one hand’ and ‘on the other’ is too often pretend politeness.
Ironically, the current divisive situation is an object lesson – you can hold one idea or the other – but you can’t hold onto both.
Hard to avoid escalation I know, and I’m as prone as anyone.
Sorry if anyone hoped I might have a useful suggestion 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂
RH, that’s very honest and thoughtful.
I think that trying to tone down things can work. Toffee and NVLA are 2 of your insulters in chief. But they also have valid things to say. Being a lexiter is mostly totally different to being a kipper or a Faragist in morals and motives. They’re not using Brexit as a hidden front for racism or for breaking up the NHS. A large part of their criticism of the EU is merited
They both clearly have a knowledge of relevant topics.
What lets them down is their tone and especially their assumption that anyone who disagrees with them is a malign right winger and thus utterly wrong.
If you look back at the last few days you’ll see that I’ve had fairly civil exchanges with both of them with arguments fairly made.
I don’t think this is insignificant. We’re all still going to be here after October 31st, whatever happens then. We need a modus vivendi.
(I suspect that IA is a lost cause though)
@Simon
You reap what you sow.
Primary poster who started this OT point has been incredibly rude towards myself for having a different opinion
Another is a keyboard warrior, who early has anything positive to say.
I’ve tried and tried to be civil, because I believe you should treat people how you want to be treated, but it’s difficult when you get a constant barrage of insults and put downs.
I expect debate, and am happy to proven wrong. But if I’m insulted then barbed replies are kinda to be expected.
Feel free to trawl through my posts to prove me wrong.
So, NVLA – fresh start and we try to maintain civility?
David, NVLA, RH, sounds good to me.
Perhaps the lessons to try and implement maybe to debate the facts not insult the person no matter how much one may disagree with their opinion. Their POV and opinions should be perhaps better respected, and maybe bear in mind it’s not just the content of discourses but how one phrases says things that may initalliy be seen by the opposite party as condescending or dismissive .
As stated already, adding facts aids understanding and informs us all , which is the name of tge game, slanging matches does the opposite, kills contribution and keeps us ignorant.
Iam as guilty of all that as anyone else , see ny condescending reply above to Danny , for which I apologise I am going totry dam hard to keep it civil as I hope we all can try to do the same
In civil solidarity comrades
rob
”I think I am being honest in saying that I don’t initiate ad hominem insults in the course of debate.”
To paraphrase steve h: You’re ‘mistaken’**
Now, I don’t deny that I do do ad hominem – once provoked. and you provoke people constantly with your disdainful attitude toward anyone pro-leave and/or working class.
So here’s just one that you’ve kicked off, ‘genius’ (Scroll down further from the ‘genius’ barb, to see your ‘initiated’ ad hominem on me)
https://skwawkbox.org/2019/05/15/impress-rejects-watson-complaint-against-skwawkbox/#comment-105503
** ‘mistaken’ in inverted commas because – again, to paraphrase steve h – I was trying to be polite, but to hell with it…I’ll just call you a liar.
Noted. Obviously, I don’t agree – and would cite the post to which I am responding. But I doubt anyone could bear the tedium of trawling through past threads to prove the point. Life’s too short.
So – I suggest the simple solution to move the issue (that obviously commands general assent) forward : following my own advice, I’ll not comment on any posting by you, and I suggest you do the reverse. That should save others from unwanted tedium and a general slitting of wrists.
@DM
I’m willing to let bygones be bygones.
@RH
Describing people’s reactions as runny shit is _not_ helpful, is it? Do try…
As I said … ‘Respecting’ ideas is different from respecting their authors and their motives. Bullshit can be called bullshit,
Jeremy Corbyn has, (quite rightly), set a course towards full general election.
The problem is that he doesn’t have command of the tiller. That’s in Tory hands. Unless something changes – this shit-show carries on until 2022.
OT ALERT
Idly looking at the current state of the parties on the Parliament website wondering whether a no confidence win might be more or less likely since the recent musical chairs nonsense.
Guessing it’s no change or somebody would have said something?
The SNP 35 I expect might support the Tories, given that a left wing Labour is more likely to take Scottish seats back in a GE than are Tories.
I wonder what would make them support their natural allies – us – instead? Without sacrificing principle what would sway them and enough others to outvote the Tory/DUP’s 323?
We could live with a fresh referendum on Scottish independence if we’d held a 2nd referendum and remain had won I think. A Labour government without the right wingers would make a far better case for Scotland to stay in the UK – but I doubt the SNP would want to face Labour in such a fair contest.
The Libdems Change and independent 32 might even each other out – but what if some form of PR were on offer?
Won’t save their arses in 2022 but maybe the principle would sway them? Just kidding 🙂
Sorry for rambling.
The more things change, the more they stay the same 🙂
Their lack of principle or my rambling? ‘~’
Think carefully before answering or I might retract my ‘like’.
🙂 I mean the whole general f.ing political scene at present. Be assured.
If I could ‘like’ having the power to unlike I would.
I’m gonna ask Skwawky to give me the power to unlike everyone else’s likes too.
Ooh, I’ve just discovered I can like my own posts. What’s that about?
Now to see if I’m all-powerful and can unlike everyone else’s likes.
Hope Karma’s not looking.
Back later…