Video: Corbyn takes it to Lennon/Robinson in Bootle. Here’s his full speech

Labour leader visits Bootle in Merseyside a day before far-right figure. His speech and those that came before show why Labour is the answer to right-wing hate and division
The Bootle crowd gathered to hear Corbyn

Jeremy Corbyn showed the confidence of Labour’s message for both sides of the Brexit divide today when he visited leave-voting Bootle on Merseyside, immediately to the north of remain-voting Liverpool, the day before far-right European Parliament hopeful ‘Tommy Robinson’/Stephen Yaxley-Lennon targets the town.

Corbyn started his speech with a tribute to Liverpudlian legend Jack Jones and a reminiscence about Merseyside mayor Steve Rotheram telling him to ‘go for [David Cameron’s] effing ankles’.

But he went on to speak powerfully of the threat posed by the far right in this country and Europe – and of Labour’s message of hope and the party’s relevance to ordinary people no matter their opinion on Brexit:

Corbyn’s speech was preceded by other powerful messages from other leading Merseyside Labour figures. To hear them too, see the Facebook Live feed here.


Corbyn gave a powerful and timely reminder of why he’s the real people’s politician – and why Labour is the hope of the people against hatred, division and exploitation.

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.


  1. Farage attracts hundreds and MSM report thousands and a wave spreading across the country,
    JC attracts thousands and MSM fail to report it at all,
    Still wouldn’t want to peak to early, head down arse up lads and lasses

    1. Meanwhile police have banned the sale of milkshakes during a Farage rally as they fear he could be pelted with them as happened to Tommy Robinson and Carl Benjamen – LOL I’d love to see it but I wouldn’t waste the price of a milkshake on him.

      1. Ha ha ha thats really funny. Lets laugh at violence to the candidates which we personally don’t like. After all, its not fascism when WE deny right of free speech.

      2. There is a difference between free speech and hate speech. While I would always defend the freedom of speech I have absolutely no problem with the banning of hate speech.
        Also I have not advocated violence towards anyone but I do find the picture of a hate preacher like Tommy Robinson with a milkshake running down his face humourous – this would cause him no physical harm whatsoever but would show him the contempt in which he is held by most of us. But like I said I wouldn’t waste the price of a milkshake on him.

      3. There isn’t any difference. Its just an excuse for censorship.

        Who gets to decide what hate speech is?

      4. Yes there is a difference between the freedom to express your views reasonably and expressing them in a way which incites hated of others. The latter can have serious and/or fatal consequences for the targets of the hate speech.

      5. “Without freedom of thought, there can be no such thing as wisdom; and no such thing as public liberty, without freedom of speech.”

        “If all printers were determined not to print anything till they were sure it would offend nobody, there would be very little printed.” – Benjamin Franklin

        There is no such thing as hate speech. If someone decides to attack someone, that’s assault.

        If I told you to go jump off a cliff, are you going to accuse me of hate speech?

        Hate speech is a term used by people to shut down opinions. They may stink, they may be awful, but they are entitled to express them.

        Just because you’re offended doesn’t mean you’re right.

      6. NVLA, like the Franklin quote but I don’t agree about there not being any hate speech which should be banned.
        Simply offending people is one thing, but hate speech can directly or indirectly lead to violence. Look at the harm Alex Jones does.
        And repeated abuse directed at individuals can have quite important effects, including on mental health. The appalling abuse that Diane Abbott gets must wear her down, no matter how strong an individual she is.

      7. Can’t agree with you on this issue.
        I believe in the right of people to express opinions which I or others disagree with or find offensive e.g. I have been offended indeed outraged by comments Tories have made over the years but neither I nor anybody else has a right not to be offended.
        The Tories are perfectly entitled to express their opinions and I am equally entitled to express disagreement with those opinions. Healthy debate even if it results in disagreement is good while respect for the views of others is essential in a democracy.
        Hate speech is different.Its not expressing a view or opinion about an issue. It is designed to incite hatred of an individual or a group so that others harm or wish to harm that particular individual or group.
        I don’t want to give any examples here for obvious reasons but there are plenty out there and numerous physical attacks on people attending gay clubs and other entertainment venues , synagogues, mosques, churches etc have resulted.
        There has also been the murder of a Labour MP Jo Cox by a right wing extremist while other right wing extremists have been jailed for plotting to kill Luciana Berger and Rosie Cooper.
        Providing people who applaud these vile actions and who encourage others to emulate them with a platform is not upholding freedom of speech. It is giving these dangerous people space to spread hatred and encourage violence.
        They have advanced the freedom of speech argument many times to enable their continued use of inflamatory language and unfortunately many people like you (who no doubt have the best of intentions) accept that argument. Therefore they are allowed to continue inciting others to hatred,violence and abuse in the name of freedom of speech.

      8. What starts with a sausage like Jones soon moves on to people like you and me questioning the agenda.

        I don’t agree with people like Jones, but I’ll defend their right to talk cobblers all the same.

      9. Racism is racism. It is not hate speech. Its a bullshit term, designed to be as vague as possible in order to shut down debate.

        Your example of Diane Abbott is racism. And it needs calling out.

      10. Being Milk shaked is by definition at the milder end of being assaulted if at all
        In good old days candidates were pelted with far worse
        Now here’s one for debate
        Have any of you ever had a good kicking and can you tell me what was good about it
        That’s one I’ve never worked out

      11. “There is no such thing as hate speech”

        I disagree with that general proposition. Utterances that encourage violence or active discrimination against an individual or a group should not be permissable.

        However, I do agree that such incitements have to be very clearly defined to prevent the sort of abuse of the charge that we have seen in the manipulation of the term ‘antisemitism’ – or the charge being used just to shut people up.

      12. Again, there is no such thing as hate speech.

        What you’re describing is incitement. And that is illegal.

      13. @Doug

        I’ve always felt that expressions like a good kicking or a good beating comes from most of us either being a sadist, masochist or a sadomasochist.

        And whilst I agree that being milkshaked is small beer, some of the followers of people like Robinson take great exception to it. There has been death threats towards the guy who did it recently

      14. I have no problem with people talking cobblers. They have the right to do so if that is what they want.The issue I have is with hate speech. You have referred to this as a bullshit term in reply to another contributor.
        I use the term to describe incitement to hatred and violence so lets set the term aside for now and let me ask you this – do you think people who attribute the ills in society to certain groups and who encourage others to verbally abuse ,maim or kill people in these groups should be able to do so under their right to freedom of speech? If someone gets wound up by what they have heard and goes out and murders someone does the person exercising his/her right to freedom of speech bear any responsibility for the murder in your opinion?

      15. Yes, I believe people are entitled to air their terrible view and opinions on minorities of various ilks.

        And I believe it’s our job to defeat them via debate and reason and not to stifle them from talking to begin with. If someone is extreme enough to incite death, then they need arresting for incitement. Not for a generalised unspecific catch all term like hate speech. Do you agree with straight white male privilege? Its a similar turkey.

        Once you censor, where does it stop? It doesn’t, as Google is proving.


      16. What’s to stop it escalating?
        What’s to stop the next idiot throwing a brick to outdo the first in hopes of more likes on youtube?
        And then what?

  2. “…people may have voted leave – they didn’t vote to leave their jobs – they didn’t vote to have unregulated food – they didn’t vote to open up the economy to Donald Trump and his agenda from the United States – and so we put forward all those alternatives and we will continue to put them forward in Parliament and I’m quite happy there should then be a public discussion and decision on them in the future”

    1. You do grasp that the EU’s unlimited labour supply has totally destroyed worker bargaining power in entire lower paid sectors of the UK and rest of the European economic area don’t you , David ? You really have no idea at all of the globalist neoliberalism enabling function of the EU, do you, McNiven. It was the EU that completely secretly (until leaks revealed their plans) negotiated the TTIP deal with the USA (put on ice at present after huge opposition from many European populations) – and the very similar , implemented, CETA deal with Canada – which provides for a Big Business dominated extranational legal adjudication process, above EU and individual nation state laws or processes, which will indeed allow US companies (or US Canadian subsidiaries with the agreed CETA deal ) to sue the EU for massive , “profit loss” compensation if their chlorinated chicken and GM crops, or cigarette packaging , etc, is restricted by EU rules . The tobacco giants successfully stopped the Australian government enforcing rules on cigarette packaging via the similar Trans Pacific trade deal.

      You are obviously a complete ignoramus about the neoliberal enforcing role and function of the EU. The only difference between the final neoliberal line of march of the EU compared to the Tory extreme globalist Brexiters is that they want to get to the same endgame FASTER. Stop pumping out your ignorant nonsense about the bogus protective, benevolent, function of the EU – and do some solid background reading to educate yourself. Your naivety and parroting of the Mandelson/Blairite PV nonsense is embarrassing.

      1. ”You really have no idea at all of the globalist neoliberalism enabling function of the EU, do you, McNiven”

        In fairness, he’s not alone in that respect. The entire remain cohort that post on here don’t, neither.

        I’d almost forgotten about TTIP – the corporatist apocalypse that the EU were so enthused about they wanted to keep it under wraps…

      2. For the life of me, I cannot recall the name of the Swedish negotiator for TTIP, but I’ll never forget her statement.

        “I answer to no-one”

        Its also worth noting that one Manuel Barroso pushed ttip and went on to work for Goldman Sachs after his EU presidency.

      3. JPenney, I read your post. The points you make are hugely undermined by the unnecessary insults which litter the post.
        Do you really think that they enhance your arguments or improve the chance of convincing anyone who isn’t convinced already?
        All that will happen is that anyone new to the site will just get repelled and come away with a view of Lexiters as just like the
        People’s Front of Judea – but without the humour

      4. jpenney What you carefully forgot to say is that it was our own TORY government which maintained the TTIP secrecy and it was the Germans who fought hardest against it but it doesn’t suit your anti-EU stance to mention it. Either that, or you’re another Brexiter with limited knowledge.

      5. Neoliberalism being a worldwide phenomenon that’s trying to grab all the levers and become all-powerful isn’t exactly news to me either.
        If you drop the name calling I’ll discuss the issues with you.
        And the first thing you can do is apologise for the mandelblart insult – I don’t parrot anyone and any thoughts not my own I attribute.
        Anyone can copy and paste text to a plagiarism checker. Grammarly has a free one.
        You should try it. I have.

      6. ”The points you make are hugely undermined by the unnecessary insults which litter the post.”

        You read any of rh’s diatribes recently, Simon? Whopper even convinces himself (but nobody else) that he doesnt instigate any animosity…

        No, honestly!!

      7. Toffee, you’ll see on other posts that I’ve called RH. ‘Mardy’. His response was to accept that he was ‘acid’ at times and to perhaps tone down. Your response to me is to point out someone else’s behaviour, as if that made your insults acceptable. Why not tone it down yourself as well. You’ll find the benefits will be there.
        And cutting out the insults and just including the arguments for or against will mean less typing!

      8. He’ll start claiming innocence in the rise of the far right, next…

      9. Blimey. It looks like I’m still being obsessively stalked, despite my suggested solution.

        Ah well … one tries.


      10. @Toffee It was OUR Government that was pushing for TTIP.

        As soon as we voted to leave, the EU abandoned it, while our Government started talking about a TTIP on steroids for the UK.

        There is NO DOUBT AT ALL that our best protection against TTIP is in remaining in the EU and joining with the many others across Europe who don’t want it.

      11. “he EU’s unlimited labour supply has totally destroyed worker bargaining power in entire lower paid sectors of the UK”

        That’s simply a historical fiction shaped to support a particular view of Europe.

        Worker bargaining power was damaged by entirely home-grown measures by the same right-wing factions that initiated the Brexit scam.

      12. Ultraviolet 19/05/2019 at 10:32 am · ·

        ”As soon as we voted to leave, the EU abandoned it, while our Government started talking about a TTIP on steroids for the UK.

        There is NO DOUBT AT ALL that our best protection against TTIP is in remaining in the EU and joining with the many others across Europe who don’t want it.”

        Is that right?


      13. RH 19/05/2019 at 10:30 am · ·
        Blimey. It looks like I’m still being obsessively stalked, despite my suggested solution.

        You’ve a very high opinion of yerself…For a gobshite.

        You know where to insert the tube, so do it, and pour your ‘solution’ down it… It might even end up coming out smelling a bit sweeter than what usually does.

      14. “the TTIP deal with the USA (put on ice at present after huge opposition from many European populations) ”

        Out of the mouths …..

        The whole point – it might not be easy or straightforward, but critical mass – aka the EU – is essential for such resistance.

        An isolated UK has no chance of resisting those commercial pressures from big capital. A New Jerusalem? In your dreams – rather, the incipient Tory nightmare envisaged in Brexit.

    2. “a public discussion and decision” A clear indication we will press to give the electorate the final decision.

  3. Jeremy unites the wonderful progressive middle class and working class but also offers hope to the Left Behind.
    For example hopefully we can create 1m Green jobs and place as many as possible of these in areas of industrial decline and offer HOPE!

    1. Agree with Bazza – we’ll need ships to service the offshore wind farms and we need to build both for ourselves rather than buying from abroad – and one day tidal/wave generation installations too. Tories would just buy from Korea or whoever’s cheapest and gives the best bungs on the day.
      We’ll have to change planning regulations and overrule the nimbys who don’t want wind farms on land or solar/wind generators on their roofs.
      In a global emergency profits and house prices shouldn’t factor into the argument.
      I believe it’ll be obvious by then which party is best equipped to see it through and it’s not the Tories or the Greens.

  4. ”they didn’t vote to open up the economy to Donald Trump and his agenda from the United States ”

    Point of pedantry, but that was probably due to the fact that trump hadn’t been elected when the referendum was taken.

    However, people DID vote leave so the UK could get a deal with the US unhindered and independent of EU regulation…

    1. But not chlorinated chicken and the NHS privatised! Ripping up work regulations that are English bugger all to do with the EU. You may believe it will be wonderful after this brexit I don’t care anymore. BUT if it’s not I hope you have the courage of your convictions to say your wrong!

      1. DG, actually UK Work regulations are nearly all derived from EU directives, translated into UK law.
        But in fact that strengthens your argument. The Tories hate them and have tried to weaken them, but have been hampered by being in the EU. For a lot of Tories it’s one of the reasons they want to leave.
        EU Health and Safety law has improved the lives of thousands upon thousands of working people; seeing the benefits of this is one of the reasons I want us to stay in the EU.

      2. Err…Isn’t the NHS being privatised now – while we’re still EU members? What did the eu do to prevent it?

        Only a labour govt would prevent it, and the chances of a labour govt dwindle with every shriek about a 2nd referendum.

        Your choice…

      3. It beggars belief that the uncritical EU trolls on here now have the illogical chutzpah to claim that the EU (which very secretly negotiated the TTIP Deal , and wouldn’t even let MEPs have a copy of it , and did successfully secure the very, very, similar CETA deal with Canada) “is our best protection against a UK/US TTIP-type deal” ! illogic or what ? The EU bureaucrats negotiated the TTIP Deal FFS – and only put it on ice because it was leaked , and mass opposition in some European states gave too many politicians in a few EU states cold feet. The EU will of course CONTINUE to secretly negotiate more globalist , democracy-denying, TTIP type deals – because that is the permanent neoliberal line of march of the EU . Only the very stupid , or totally wilfully ignorant, or cynical Trolls can believe the EU is a benevolent institution today. The EU which did nothing for the last two years as Macron smashed workers rights in France, the Tories decimated and privatised our education and Health services, and LED in the rapacious assault on Greece for the German and French banks !

      4. jpenney, the US will do its best to crush real socialism here as it does elsewhere. The much-lauded ‘special relationship’ won’t save us – it’s always been contingent on the UK meekly playing along and coincident US interests.
        The US applying economic sanctions against an EU member will be resisted by the EU because to do otherwise would risk its fall.
        It knows that.
        I could live with chlorinated chicken – I haven’t heard of anyone dying from that – what I won’t accept is US domination of UK politics.
        One more insult from you and my unilateral truce will be over.

  5. The EU is bad but leaving is even worse. Nobody is particularly defending the EU, it is just that Brexit has and will cause economic disaster and suffering, especially for over 5m UK/EU people.

    1. Yes – the basic argument is that simple, whilst the Lexit case is based on the equivalent of success in backing a 1000-1 chance of a Christmas wish coming true.

    2. Numbers are hard to obtain as there is no central recording in USA but there are over 300 deaths a year due to food poisoning. Poultry is the number 1 cause of this so you still want to roll the dice? Nope I like my meat if i decided to eat it to be safeish as it is now, thanks and I will not get that in the USA trade deal thanks…

      Sorry Ray not a reply to you but David above I can’t seem to be able to reply to his comment….

      1. Hi DG, that number is a bit scary (even though it’s less than one in a million) but I’m not sure whether the claim is that it’s because of chlorination or the poorer hygiene that chlorine allows, or something unrelated.
        In the UK about 100 people a year are said to have been “made ill” by campylobacter in chicken livers. E-Coli in under-cooked chicken causes a lot more but I’m too lazy to check how many.
        I’d be surprised if there weren’t deaths in this country due to food poisoning where chicken is responsible.
        Remember BSE/vCJD? Foot and mouth? Avian flu? Horse pies? Few countries are innocent in this area.

        For the sake of clarity – I’m not defending the US or its agricultural practices – to me it’s the ‘great satan’ – on the contrary I want the UK defended from the US by being part of a larger body with more clout than the UK alone – like the EU.

        To reply to a comment that doesn’t have its own red ‘reply’ button – scrolling up to the first one above the comment you want to reply to and clicking that is about the best you can do on this site I think.

  6. Fascist Robinson – the fake name taken from a well known Luton football hooligan and the EDL set up with and funded by a Finance capitalist – and now Turd Robinson telling working class people “I am just like you” – what with his what £500k home and healthy income from the Fascist rich!
    Highly recommend Daniel Trilling’s book – Bloody Nasty People.
    But just an afterthought, bet Fascist discos are bloody boring Ha! Ha!

      1. Careful, he’s the leader of some schoolboy warriors. I know because they will be the vanguard of this weird new right wing. The S.A, schoolchildren anonymous. Are people genuinely put out of joint by milkshakes. Wouldn’t have lasted too long in the 70, 80 and nineties. Dark days and not a milkshake in sight. It is called the class war and people would do well to remember that. Youngsters were always set upon at sales, pickets and demos. People had to say enough! The opposition have no qualms about who they assault and abuse. Remember those days and I still quake so I am not advocating violence but I have a feeling that things might develop. Look across the channel. Who would have thunk it. Good luck all.

    1. Who’s the blond one with all the ivory. She gives fascism a bad name. Pip Pip.

  7. Meanwhile the MSM uniformly gave Corbyn’s speech 2nd billing to Keir Starmer’s latest attempts to confuse the public as to where his loyalties lie.

    Bet Mandelson put them up to it!

    1. I think that only the already terminally confused would be confused – such as those who think that following the ERG policy line might lead to a socialist renaissance.

      1. Why do you feel that a brexit vote is following ERG policy?

        And how do you know that 17+ million voters support a group led by a soaking wet Harry Potter?

        Its like claiming all remain voters love Chukka…

      2. NVLA, soaking wet Harry Potter? Surely a shrunken Voldemort?
        I agree with you about the irrelevance of name calling by comparing lexiters to the ERG or Remainers to Blairites. This debate is not at all straight left or right- which is one of the reasons it gets so poisonous.I wish more people here would acknowedge that.

      3. NVLA, it’s hard to believe but for once I agree with you.
        People CAN come to the same decision for different reasons and from different directions.
        That’s been forgotten here for some time by both sides of the debate.

        On the hate speech thing I’m almost in agreement but it does stifle debate.
        No-platforming the far right just sends them underground, and I believe it’s better to give Holocaust deniers etc. enough rope.
        They do escalate and they will cross whatever line is drawn – it’s in their natures.
        If it were possible to set a line below where innocents were hurt or driven to depression and suicide I’d be fully in favour.
        Sadly the line is likely to be drawn where the establishment choose for it to be – to protect themselves.

      4. I think that the longer that the thread has gone on the more people have realised that their positions aren’t that far apart.
        Anyway, much as I rationally disapprove of milkshaking, I think the Internet was won today by the person who tweeted about Farage’s little bit of moistening ‘Lactose meets intolerant”.😂

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: