Attempt to push remain against party policy angers Labour members
Earlier today, Labour deputy leader Tom Watson spoke to a pro-EU group and subsequently to the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg. On each occasion, he pushed Labour as the party of remain – in spite of the party’s 2017 manifesto and its conference policy committing the party to honouring the result of the Brexit referendum unless there is no other way to avoid a no-deal exit.
Tonight, a new Twitter hashtag of #SackTomWatson has gone viral – at the time of writing it is trending at number two for the UK:
Tom Watson has been contacted for comment.
SKWAWKBOX view:
Watson has previously been the subject of extremely viral, negative sentiment, with #ResignTomWatson trending globally last year.
The new hashtag reflects the intensifying anger of Labour members and supporters and their loss of any patience with the man they feel continually undermines the leadership’s strategy at every opportunity.
How much longer will Watson refuse to give members a democratic say on whether he continues in his position by calling a new election to test his mandate?
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.
Tom Watson has stepped into the gap caused by indecision and fence sitting. Even though he is articulating what the overwhelming majority of Labour members want, because of his obvious opposition to Jeremy Corbyn, he should never have been allowed to take the initiative.
Yes and No Jack. Whatever JC had done, or did, HE – Tom Watson – would have taken a contrary position. To think otherwise would be naive. And the corporate media and the BBC would have done their bit to misrepresent his/Labour’s position, just as they HAVE done.
Sorry Allan I disagree. Do you think if Jeremy started supporting Israel and it’s treatment of the Palestinians, Watson would take the opposite view? – I don’t.
You have it in one, Jack. The current past-the-sell-by-date non-policy, as well as being unpopular, gives Watson legs and donates votes to the LibDems and Greens, whilst Labour loses the initiative as the Tories indulge in a shit-fest of a beauty pageant. Meanwhile those conservative Leave votes predictably stay with the Tories or the Faragists – their natural home.
Apart from the obvious fact that it also entails effectively endorsing national hari-kiri devised by said Tories.
No amount of Twitter twattery or a new-found love for Kuenssberg changes those hard facts.
T”Watson has stepped into the gap caused by indecision and fence sitting”
Except there is no indecision and fence sitting
That’s a lie perpetrated by a few right wing Labour MPs, echoed with joy by the Tories, and spread by the right wing press, and – sadly – certain trolls, who know better.
heenan73 – no indecision and fence sitting. Ah right 🙂
heenan73 17/06/2019 at 11:09 pm
The majority of both the Labour Party’s membership and voters want the party to unequivocally support a CV. Do you have any credible evidence to the contrary?
In response to Jack’s 11.10pm post:
Oh, right, so Tom Watson’s position is sincerely held (as with anti-semitism being endemic on the left).
https://order-order.com/2019/06/17/tom-watsons-brexit-u-turn-bad-al-pulling-strings/
Yes, I do think that Watson’s views are probably sincerely held but that doesn’t mean l support those with which I disagree.
Do you remember some of our members who were unfairly suspended just because they expressed support for some ‘Green’ policies?
I don’t think we should be a Party which doesn’t accept that others can have good ideas. It’s cutting off our nose to spite our face.
One thing you are NOT Jack is naive, so don’t pretend that you ARE. He – along with his buddies – has done everything he can to undermine JC’s leadership and demonise him and the left. Oh, right, but it was all done sincerely and with the most noble of intentions. Yeah, sure!
I am a member of Labour and, along with many members that I know, we respect the original referendum result which was in manifesto for the 2017 election. Tom is out of step with a vast majority of us as we do NOT want a second referendum on this issue and he is making it difficult to put across party policy.
“How much longer will Watson refuse to give members a democratic say on whether he continues in his position by calling a new election to test his mandate?
For starters the above quote is nonsense – There is a democratic process in the rule book for challenging Tom Watson. If there isn’t enough support to trigger that process then we’ll just have to accept that. The same rules that protect Jeremy from challenges to his leadership also protect Tom.
Trying to bully Tom Watson out of office because you can’t do it within the rules is not a good look for the party. Are memories so short that people can’t recall the outrage expressed by members when the PLP tries to bypass the rules and bully Corbyn out of office.
tries to bypass the rules >>> tried to bypass the rules
“The same rules that protect Jeremy from challenges to his leadership also protect Tom”
What do you mean?
JC has been challenged and won; he isn’t protected from challenges and doesn’t need any protection. So far as I know, Watson hasn’t been protected, he just hasn’t been challenged.
heenan73 17/06/2019 at 11:23 pm
If you read the relevant section 2019 Labour Party Rule Book then you’ll know (what you are talking about)
I know what I’m talking about, I just don’t know what you’re talking about.
If you read the rules you will see that their is protection for the incumbant holders of the Party Leader & Deputy Leader. If you check back with the rules in force at the time of the Corbyn’s 2nd election you will see that the rules have changed.
It would not be credible to argue that the current leader and deputy are not given a degree of protection from challenge by the rules.
Chapter 4, Clause II
2. Election of leader and deputy leader
A. The leader and deputy leader shall be elected separately in accordance with rule C below, unless rule E below applies.
B. Nomination
i. In the case of a vacancy for leader or deputy leader, each nomination must be supported by 10 per cent of the combined Commons members of the PLP and members of the EPLP and either:
a) 5 per cent of CLPs; or
b) At least 3 affiliates (at least 2 of which shall be trade union affiliates) compromising 5 per cent of affiliated membership. Nominations not attaining the thresholds under either a or b above shall be null and void.
ii. Where there is no vacancy, nominations may be sought by potential challengers each year prior to the annual session of Party conference. In this case any nomination must be supported by 20 per cent of the combined Commons members of the PLP and members of the EPLP. Nominations not attaining this threshold shall be null and void. The sitting Leader or Deputy Leader shall not be required to seek nominations in the event of a challenge under this rule.
What’s the EPLP? European Parliamentary Labour Party?
If so, better change them rules pdq 🙂
Hullo. Are you suggesting that the woman abuser is vulnerable. What is his standing with his own membership? Plainly he thinks that he is invulnerable. Where are our men in grey suits and I don’t mean Momentum. Best wishes.
I came across the following yesterday, by chance, whilst doing a search to ascertain which newspapers (if one can call them that!) covered the Boris Johnson/7.7 episode (as reported by SB yesterday):
Spot the difference! The initial Sun article on May 24th regarding a thinktank report about Climate Change and drastically reducing the working week had the following headline and sub-headline;
Working a NINE-HOUR WEEK could be the key to saving us all, experts say
Think tank Autonomy says shorter working weeks are urgently needed
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9143888/nine-hour-work-week-climate-change-autonomy/
Continued below
And then a couple of weeks later – after obviously having worked out a way to use it against JC’s Labour Party – they came up with the following, along with the Daily Mail et al:
Labour aides discussing plans to combat climate change by cutting work to ten hours a week — and slashing pay (with the sub-headline: BRITS could be clocking off after just ten hours a week – under plans being discussed by Labour)
Needless to say, it WASN’T being discussed by Labour, and the whole Big Lie was based on a single comment – a tweet in fact, on May 22nd – by Leo Murray, an advisor to Clive Lewis MP, that the propagandists dug out and used in their Fabrication – ie transformed the tweet of an advisor to Clive Lewis into ‘Labour aids discussing plans….’. So first they invent a story, and then they contact Tory Central Office to ask them to get them two or three quotes from Tory MPs who of course dismissed the idea as absurd. They do so enjoy themselves concocting all their Big Lies and fasehoods! (see below for link):
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9253266/labour-work-cuts-pay-climate-change/
Oh, right, and towards the end of this deception of their readers (I assume it was in the hard-copy newspaper as well), it says: ‘Labour last night declined to comment’, which is of course just an additional falsehood, and needless to say, the Sun DIDN’T contact the LP for a comment, and for the obvious reason.
NB The Mail reported it in the same fashion initially – on the same day as the Sun on May 24th – then did a hit job on the LP a couple of weeks later, on the same day as the Sun in EXACTLY the same manner as the Sun! There’s no conspiracy of course. Perish the thought!
Here’s the Daily Mail’s initial article/coverage:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7066243/Britain-switch-NINE-HOUR-working-week-cut-emissions-save-plane.html
And this is their ‘revamped’ coverage a couple of weeks later:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7120817/Labour-plans-bring-10-hour-week-tackle-climate-change.html
PS I forgot to mention that when I did a search re Boris Johnson and his alleged comment re the families of 7/7 victims, just about ALL the top-rated comments in the Daily Mail coverage had it as a “smear campaign” and “dirty tricks”, but you can be absolutely certain that these same people NEVER say the same about the smear campaign and the dirty tricks directed at JC and the left, and that they play along with it all even though they know that THAT is what it is:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7145655/Boris-Johnson-accused-F-families-rant-7-7-terror-attack-victims-relatives.html
Another good spot Allan.
You jump over the wall and your faced with the Leave apple tree and the Remain pear tree, what do you do
Correct and
That’s how you win General Elections
JC playing a blinder
It’s also why red Tory snowflake neverenders cannot win
First class honour degree in mathematics has been shared this year between TWatson and ERG group
I’m struggling to understand your metaphor.
Oops – This was a reply to Doug at 10:11 pm
Lots of trending, but Twatson is still there, pedalling dissent and damaging the party. At what point will Labour actually DO something?
wlbcarepants at 10:18 pm
The solution is clearly laid out in the Rule Book, the question you need to ask is why hasn’t anyone else in the PLP challenged him?
I’ve often wondered that myself. The only answer I can come up with is that it’s been discussed and dismissed as a distraction. That’s pure guesswork, mind you. But there is a decreasing need for it, as even the “sympathetic media” find him to be a joke. I’m glad Tory Laura took him down, but I’m sure her motivation was very largely to embarrass Labour. Though it’s hard to imagine even a rookie journalist taking him seriously these days.
But we’ll see at conference, if not before.
”The only answer I can come up with is that it’s been discussed and dismissed as a distraction. That’s pure guesswork, mind you”
I’m inclined to agree. Nevertheless, watson’s persistent mouthing off is causing a bigger distraction to the entire electorate and giving the impression of disunity within the party.
This is where outsiders are getting the idea that the party’s ‘sat on the fence’ from.
He is deliberately flying in the face of party policy (and the result of several parliamentary votes) and at the very least ought to be put on ‘gardening leave’ (if possible).
Malevolent nuisance.
What a humiliation! Our Deputy Leader makes us all look like monkeys in front of – oh, horrors – Laura Kuenssberg!
GET – RID – OF. Immediately. And by any means possible.
He even admits that adoption of a pro-remain, pro-2nd-referendum line will lose Labour votes in a GE, and with it, he might have added, the only chance in a generation (at least!) of electing the reforming social democratic government the many so desperately need.
There is a virulent toxin within the body of the Labour Party, and its name is Tom Watson.
Redveg 17/06/2019 at 11:29 pm
It has obviously escaped your notice that sitting on the fence will lose us more votes than reaching a firm and clear position.
Except that we not sitting on the fence. We are merely following party policy, which you don’t happen to like. Hence your trolling.
heenan73 18/06/2019 at 1:46 am · ·
“Except that we [are] not sitting on the fence.
🤣
heenan73 18/06/2019 at 1:46 am · ·
I agree, the majority of the membership are not sitting on the fence they have made their views clear. The membership is fighting to get the leadership to fulfill their pledge to listen to them.
“Screaming Lord Cheesestrings” belongs in a different era – #SackTomWatson
As soon as I get the chance I’ll vote against him – but when will that be? Can it be expedited? It is rather urgent with the Party Deputy declaring new policies without consultation, let alone agreement.
Paul 17/06/2019 at 11:59 pm
Likewise but as I said above.
The solution is clearly laid out in the Rule Book, the question you need to ask is why hasn’t anyone else in the PLP challenged him?
https://labour.org.uk/issues/labours-plan-brexit/
”Labour respects the result of the referendum, and Britain is leaving the EU.”
That’s an official labour party release, so what the absolute f**k does fatboy slime think he’s playing at?
‘But why hasn’t watson been challenged, then?” Wail those who agree with watson, but say they’d vote against him in a deputy leadership election
To which I ask: ‘Why hasn’t a 2nd referendum been passed long before now if it’s what the majority of the party supposedly want?”
Isn’t it strange how the usual three whoppers go on about how those who don’t want a 2nd ref are aiding & abetting the toerags…
…Yet they openly declare their wholehearted agreement with watson, who’s on record as saying his job was to save the toerag govt from crumbling?
Mighty strange…
I agree with that Tom Watson is viral. I never get any good impression about him. He always appears so desperate to be recognised, almost like he thinks nobody pays attention if he does not do different.
There have been suggestions that the deputy leader of the Labour Party should be female, as the leader is male. That would mean Emily Thornberry or Yvette Cooper or Mary Creagh or Jess Phillips or even Harriet Harman & that eliminates Chris Williamson. What a good idea?
No, no, no, no and no!
…………but then there’s Rebecca Long Bailey…….dammit, she could get my vote!
Agreed! The others are all old Blairites about to cause as much trouble as they can for the Labour Party. They reckon their best chance of taking back control is by LOSING the next GE. It’s as simple as that.
Yes, yes, yes!
A serious researcher needs to look into this character. Something is rotten in the state of Labour and I believe that there are some very questionable people within the PLP. Regards.
I think we need a grassroots campaign to oust him twitterstorms everyday every day until hes gone