Evidence emerging from ShadCab meeting makes clear MSM ‘Lab remain shift’ claims were pure spin

Times ‘scoop’ claiming Corbyn switching to back ‘referendum and remain’ always thin, exposed further by day’s developments
Spinning wildly – parts of the ‘mainstream’ media today

Late last night, Sky’s Sam Coates trailed a ‘scoop’ by one of his former colleagues at the Murdoch Times.

The article claimed Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn was about to switch to a full ‘referendum and remain’ position during today’s meeting of the Shadow Cabinet, at which a briefing document would be circulated warning Labour’s top front-benchers that the party must switch to full support for a new referendum and that Labour must campaign for remain:

Labour’s policy – perfectly clear and simple in spite of media claims to the contrary – is to enact Brexit, keeping a new public vote only as an option in case there is no alternative to prevent a no-deal exit.

The article claims that a:

senior Labour source confirmed that Mr Corbyn was endorsing the shift in policy, adding: “It is a moment.”

An unnamed ‘senior Labour source’ covers a multitude of sins, of course. It is entirely easy to imagine Tom Watson briefing the media in this way, but that does not mean the assessment is accurate – and other ‘senior Labour sources’ would say the opposite. So the premise of the claims was thin to begin with.

But events during the day have made clear just how thin and misleading.

When the Shadow Cabinet briefing document came out in a tweet by the BBC’s Paul Twinn, it did none of the things trailed in the ‘scoop’. Rather than advocating support for a new referendum and a campaign for remain, it warned that there is no evidence that such a switch would win remain voters – and emphasised the serious risks to Labour in its leave-voting heartlands of any such move, without any corresponding gains or reward in ‘winnable Remain majority areas’:

That this paper said the opposite of what Labour’s hard-remain faction want was obvious from the reaction reported by the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg in response to her colleague’s post:

The content of the paper and the absence of any suggestion of a switch to remain makes it perfectly clear that the ‘Labour source’ spitting feathers was one of the hard-remainers.

That reality was further underlined by the reaction of another pro-EU ‘left’ pressure group, as reported by one of the BBC’s better correspondents, Iain Watson:

Corbyn, meanwhile, has said that he intends to consult with unions and with party members before making a decision on Labour’s next steps. Meanwhile, the ‘mainstream’ media have focused the wording in Corbyn’s statement that a deal would be subject to a public vote.

However, Corbyn made the same statement in Dublin – and specifically said he was referring to it – so his statement today contains nothing new about a public vote. But while the media are casting old news as some kind of change, they are ignoring the most important sentence in today’s statement:

This will of course depend on Parliament.

Corbyn knows – and the media know, as do the hard-remainers – that there is no consensus in Parliament supporting a public vote. And there will be none unless there is a new general election.

In Dublin, which he again specifically pointed to, Corbyn made that link perfectly clear:

But faced with the threat of No Deal and a Prime Minister with no mandate, the only way out of the Brexit crisis ripping our country apart is now to go back to the people. Let the people decide the country’s future, either in a general election or through a public vote on any deal agreed by parliament.

For Labour any outcome has to work for our whole country, not just one side of this deliberately inflamed divide.

Part of Corbyn’s Dublin speech last month

In other words, Corbyn’s ‘public vote’ includes a general election – and he knows that it is in fact the only kind of public vote that can ‘break the deadlock’.

In Dublin, Corbyn also closed off the avenue of any ‘new referendum’ in the sense that most advocates of a so-called “people’s vote” want – because he added that any new vote should not be a ‘repeat of the 2016 referendum’.

And, most lethally for the claims of the ‘scoop’, none of today’s developments, nor the briefing paper, nor Corbyn’s statement, commit Labour to campaigning for remain if there was a new vote on a proposed exit rather a general election.

Today’s media narrative has been a case study in the attempts of the Establishment to paint Corbyn into a pro-referendum, pro-remain corner and to airbrush out the fact that only a general election will do anything to solve the parliamentary impasse on Brexit.

Nothing that actually transpired in the end supported the spin.

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.

67 responses to “Evidence emerging from ShadCab meeting makes clear MSM ‘Lab remain shift’ claims were pure spin

  1. What a silly remark by Skwawkbox ‘hard Remainers’. Remainers want to see the country saved from being damaged by fanatical Brexiters, what’s hard about that?

    With regards to Watson, this is a situation which bucks the norm. In this case it most definitely is a case of blame the messenger not the message. We know without doubt that Watson wants to overthrow Corbyn but that doesn’t detract from the message that the people should have the final say over Brexit and that Labour must campaign to Remain.

    • Sorry Jack,
      But as with Steve H et al, I think the word ‘Hard Remainers’ is appropriate, especially given their actual numbers within the PLP, which in no way corresponds with the Membership or Labour Voting Public – this issue has been highlighted by Steve Howell (former senior JC advisor) today on Twitter.

      Indeed, like it or not, and I know both Hard camps don’t as I’ve been discussing it today on Social Media with Labourites on both sides of the fence, the fact remains that the over-riding priority of both Members and long time Labour voters is for a General Election, which may come sooner than many expect if the new Tory PM does not desire to repeat Gordon Browns mistake when he had his coronation, namely a quick run to the country, of course with the press all elated by the thought of a BoJo ticket.

      Now, and as Howell has clearly indicated, and the document itself illustrates, no political gain come with backing a People’s Vote, indeed, it would mean political suicide.

      Maybe Steve H and Jack T can explain to me and my fellow travellers in South Wales at least what exactly has EU membership done for us given our manufacturer heart was shredded by Thatcher in the 80’s when we were EEC members, with corresponding no, new serious industries to replace them.

      Of course, our Remain pals will talk about economic damage, as if we’ve not suffered enough and little remains to damage, but hey, what do I know being a pig ignorant South Wales oik with zero knowledge of economics, monetary policy or fiscal policy!

      • christopher rogers at 6:32 pm

        “Sorry Jack,
        But as with Steve H et al, I think the word ‘Hard Remainers’ is appropriate, especially given their actual numbers within the PLP, which in no way corresponds with the Membership or Labour Voting Public”

        Do you have any credible evidence to support this assertion?

      • Steve,
        As no detailed figures exist with regards sentiments over the past few weeks, although we know where many in the PLP stand, I’ve been discussing the issue at length with CLP members in my own constituency and Labour voters in and around the Pontypool area, not withstanding all those I associate with on Social Media, none of whom are in the FBPE Brigade, and the consensus is to uphold Conference policy. However, quite happy to actually conduct a Poll myself of at least 1,000 members and Party voters if this helps, although, as you’d expect, all are on the Left of the Party, so a little biased shall we say.

      • ”Do you have any credible evidence to support this assertion?”

        Do you? No poll results, thanks, or else Christopher could say Steve Howell’s opinion is fact, every bit as much as you thinking your poll results are.

        I also note you haven’t answered his question about explaining what the eu done for S. Wales but you’ll no doubt again try to convince us all (and fail) you have, and then demand he answers your question(s).

      • If you ask Remainers what they’d like you get a diversity between ‘same as before’; join the Euro; enter a Federal Europe. Not joining the single currency and not plumping for Federalisation suggests the UK stays ‘semi removed’ from the project anyway. A Corbyn deal that included staying in the Customs Union has always been the best option. Only a GE can provide a resolution to both a Rightwing Tory Government and a Macho smash up in November.

      • If JC is taking any notice whatsoever of Steve Howell, no wonder we – the Labour Party are in such a mess, so many assertions without evidence and so much input from Union leaders and Labour MPs trying to protect their own skins rather than save the country from the mad Brexiters.

        “the over-riding priority of both Members and long time Labour voters is for a General Election” No, this is the overiding priority of those who would drive Labour to defeat by not having a clue how to read the information which has been given to us by the electorate both in recent elections and surveys. To go into an election means we have to produce a manifesto and in that manifesto we would have to express clearly our plans to solve the Brexit mess. If we said we would campaign for ANY sort of Brexit we would be decimated.

        Christopher Rogers, you were at pains to say you converse with both sides on social media but it is clear you are in your own bubble.

        In the navy, there is a phenomenon known as a ‘a radar assisted collision’ where the officer on watch keeps his head stuck in the radar hood, misreads the information and fails to lift his head up and take a look out of the bridge windows to see the vessel which is now bearing down on them.

        Take your head out of the social media bubble which you appear to be in and take a look outside at the signals the public is giving you and it is not to leave the EU.

        As to examples of what benefits the EU has given us, if you are seriously interested, don’t expect me to do your research, just Google it and you will get the answers from experts.

      • Toffee,
        Its quite simple to run a small Poll and have it qualified by a few Experts I know who learned their stuff as Post grads at the LSE, however, my own Social Media network is 2,000 strong and been most active today with Brexit at the forefront and commentary on the alleged Corbyn change, now totally sunk by JC – most of my Social Network voted Remain, so, they are in no way Brexiteers shall I say.

      • “the word ‘Hard Remainers’ is appropriate, especially given their actual numbers within the PLP, which in no way corresponds with the Membership or Labour Voting Public”

        Sorry, Chrisopher – you’re simply wrong. The Labour membership and vote is strongly ‘Remain’ in all credible analyses. It’s a major factor in Labour’s serious nose-dive of support.

      • “Its quite simple to run a small Poll and have it qualified by a few Experts”

        Really? I think that statement actually only confirms a lack of grasp of data collection and analysis to match the cavalier dismissal of existing available information.

      • Jack T,

        Not too sure which planet you live on, I know I’m from a run down part of South Wales and that my area voted Leave by a higher than national average, partially explained by its demographic make-up and class composition, i.e., its not Middle Class. That said, I get out and about, I talk politics and engage with my local community – so, if that’s living in a bubble, it must be a rather big one. Oh, and most I know don’t associate with Social Media, something to do with struggling to survive, many being on social welfare of one variety or the other.

        As for your assertions about Steve Howell, who’s a Marcoms expert of some renown in Wales, evidently he knows nothing, despite being Corbyn’s Deputy Strategist for the 2017 Election – maybe you can read his book on the subject matter, or here’s a link to a recent Guardian Article by him: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/29/corbyn-back-second-referendum-labour-2017-coalition
        Alas, like me, he knows bugger all, is unable to read Polling data sets and must be talking through his arse – my God man you sound like a typical centrist.

        The Toffee, no idea what you are talking about, I’ve a few responses to my own opinion and see no enquiry about EU funding for Torfaen, South Wales or Wales in general in any of them, so please point it out as have full figures, which you can easily get yourself from the Welsh Assembly – a number of other socioeconomic indicators are also available, or is the Welsh Assembly also in a bubble or time warp?

        Now, as for biases, its self evident that those I engage with on SM, despite being Remain Voters are extreme Brexiteers in the opinion of many posting here today, which will come as a shock to them.

        Not too sure where most of you live, but please come and look around Pontypool centre most week days, you’ll see many an ashen faced individual, many with chronic illness. Please also come and speak to a few doctors at the Medical Centre to discuss socioeconomic and health issues, maybe even visit the Dole Office and note the plight of many of those who live in the locality. Oh, and many don’t think much of the EU, nor for that matter the Welsh Assembly or Westminster. And yes, its that sad, hence not much interest in the Brexit issue with them I’m afraid.

      • christopher rogers, blaming the EU for not protecting the UK from Thatcher’s depredations is something I’ve read here before from the brexit camp and I’ve let it pass.

        Brexiters want to “take back control” and hand it to this year’s ravening Tory government …. because the EU failed to exercise sufficient control over a ravening Tory government of yesteryear.

        Do you see no logical unreason in the argument?

      • Christopher Rogers, don’t you think it it is just possible that the deprivation you mentioned could be down to successive Tory governments and not the EU? There are no scenarios in which leaving the EU will produce a better outcome for those who have suffered under the Tories. So why did so many vote Leave? – because demagogues such as Farage are selling a pig in a poke.

        If you and Lexiters believe in ‘jam tomorrow’ and ‘bright horizons’ marketed by the Brexiters with their lies emotional hooks, it shows a distinct attachment to the alternative planets where you think others belong.

        First and foremost Labour has to take into account what is best for the country and get rid of this idea that we can please everyone, we can’t. We have to be honest with people and emphasise that the referendum was a device to benefit the Tory Party and it has failed catastrophically.

        When Jeremy became our leader we told everyone we wanted to be a different type of Government, for the many not the few. We should therefore campaign to remain in the EU, otherwise the electorate will see no difference between us and the Tories and that old complaint will return – “You’re all the same”

    • Our two ever-tiresome all-day-long paid trolls also spitting feathers that their Mandelson/Campbell puppeteers are still failing to bounce Labour down an electorally suicidal PV and Remain policy path. Rule number ONE for the Left is obviously to disbelieve all “scoops” in the MSM relating to the Labour Party policy on Brexit – particularly that deadly enemy of the Left, posing as “progressively Left of centre” , The Guardian. Great explanation of the real continuing Labour position, Skwawky !

      • jpenney 19/06/2019 at 7:42 pm

        Do you also disbelieve the direct quotes that I posted below at 5:55pm.

      • Ha’Penny emerges once again, fantasising about imaginary beings from the depths of his duvet in the darkened room of Toytown leftism.

  2. What Jeremy Corbyn said today

    “We have committed to respecting the result of the referendum, and have strongly made the case for an alternative plan for Brexit as the only serious deal that could potentially command the support of the House. At conference last year we passed our policy, the members’ policy. Over the past nine months, I have stuck faithfully to it.

    “A no deal Brexit risks would plunge us into the worst excesses of disaster capitalism and trash our economy on the back of fantasy Tory trade deals or worse, very real and very damaging trade deals with Donald Trump, opening up our NHS to American companies.

    “I have already made the case, on the media and in Dublin, that it is now right to demand that any deal is put to a public vote. That is in line with our conference policy, which agreed a public vote would be an option.

    “A ballot paper would need to contain real choices for both leave and remain voters. This will of course depend on parliament. I want to hear your views, I will be hearing trade union views next week, and then I want to set out our views to the public.”

  3. Off topic, but it occurred to me yesterday that why on EARTH would anyone think to have TV debates re the Tory Party leadership candidates when the ONLY people who will be voting for them are Tory MPs. It doesn’t make sense, and even the final vote will only be down to the Tory membership – ie about 120,000 people. Has it ever happened before? Seems to me it’s just an excuse to do a PR job for the Tories.

  4. Assuming that by October 31st Labour’s still in opposition – and that Tories don’t themselves call for a public vote – May’s deal, no deal or another extension will be the only options open to them.
    If we wish to avoid both those bad deals (and I see no-one demanding another extension) the last chance to oppose them would seem to be demanding a public vote ourselves.
    If we don’t fight May’s deal/no deal with every means at our disposal the Tories and the MSM will later claim Labour shares responsibility for the disaster.
    Or is anyone here still predicting a miraculous post-Brexit Tory-led Renaissance?

    • David McNiven 19/06/2019 at 8:59 pm

      Until we actually leave then the option to revoke Article 50 remains and as Corbyn himself has said today “A ballot paper would need to contain real choices for both leave and remain voters.”

      • Steve, I was thinking initially about what would be viable options for May’s successor, hence “open to them” – thinking he might not survive his own party’s anger at revoking A50 or asking the EU for another extension.
        I’m assuming the EU will stand firm and that “renegotiation” promises will come to nothing if Boris wins – and that the spectre of an imminent no deal crash out might offer a No Confidence opportunity, given an embittered DUP and a Tory party that’s been holding its giblets in with sticking plasters while it ‘kicked the can down the road’ for three years.

        On the other hand revoke or even some kind of repeal of A50 after October, or an extension before, might be granted to an incoming government untainted by the ill-feeling felt within the EU for Tory ‘negotiators’ – and beginning afresh in a spirit of goodwill and genuine negotiation.

  5. Red Tory snowflake neverenders are revolting
    Luciana Berger is a strange one, Finchley and Golders Green is a straight Lab / Con fight, the only party she could possibly damage would be cheap and nasties,
    Its impossible to underestimate how thick these people are,
    Will say it again, Labour succeeded in Peterborough as there support is more solid, their members more active and manifesto a proven winner
    GE in autumn for two simple reasons, Boris has long standing relationship with Lynton Crosby who ran his London mayoral campaigns and is behind leadership bid
    Lynton lost it for Theresa, strong and stable my arse campaign, so badly wants to have another go at Corbyn
    Finally the mouse that Roryed is knocked out for committing the cardinal sin of blue on blue attacks, say one thing for them, they do stick together like shit to a blanket

  6. Brexit will be our undoing. We were 40% at the last election, look at us now. The EU is bad but Brexit is going to be a whole lot worse.

    • Indeed – anyone who can’t read the writing on the wall urgently needs to find an optician.

  7. I am personally sick and tired the arguments regarding the brexit bu55it and would recommend concentrate on the the survival of socialism in the Labour rather than just the I think attitude on this site.

  8. Just signed the free Assange petition and find it not surprising that Twitter is taking action against the petitioner, there is enough past evidence of its lack of independence. For the sake of future information and whistle blowers I really hope he survives but suspect that he is already a dead man and that Tory twat Javid signed his death contract

  9. The main existential threat to the Labour Party, despite this ‘Brexit civil war’, is self inflicted. It is the adoption by NEC of the IHRA definition of Anti-Semitism, which means that any criticism of Israel is, by definition, Anti-Semitic; therefore the Labour Party is always guilty by its own definition. It is also the same definition used by the BBC.

    • Absolutely agree. What madness to make criticism of one of the World’s most aggressive and Rightwing Nations a criminal offence! Until that changes there will be no peace in the Labour Party.

  10. Some good news from the Court of Appeal.

    The court of appeal has declared British sales to Saudi Arabia of arms used in Yemen unlawful because they contributed to civilian casualties in indiscriminate bombing.
    The ruling from three senior judges follows a challenge brought by Campaign Against Arms Trade, which had accused the UK government of licensing the sale of arms when there was a clear risk that their use could breach international humanitarian law.

  11. News from The Canary that goes some way to explaining why the party, members and supporters have been let down over Anti Semitism
    Jon Lansman
    The other snowflakes who obviously smell power and crave keys to
    No 10 are working on JC to cave in to neverenders
    That my friends is the challenge and threat to a historic socialist government, politicians who turn into jellyfish, gutless and spineless
    Hate to shit in their custard but it was clear red water that got us here and it will be those beliefs and policies that get us over the line
    Shame it’s the enemy within that could deny us
    Green light please

    • To advocate ignoring the wishes of the majority of Labour members and voters to follow a right wing Tory policy is an novel interpretation of ‘clear red water’.

      • The majority of Labour members made their views clear when they voted for the 2017 Manifesto that accepted a Brexit but sought closer economic ties with the EU than May’s red lined proposals. Labour voters were in favour of the policy as the 2017 election and the Peterborough election showed. Just because one overbearing man (Watson) wants to make sure Labour LOSES the next election so he can pick up the pieces is not a good reason to throw out the Left. It happened under Kinnock but Watson is pretty much hated in many circles now for his traitorous behaviour. Give the members a chance to VOTE and the situation will resolve itself very quickly. The Lib Dems are welcome to take on the once heavy weight, Watson will certainly sort them out; perhaps he could become Deputy Leader there and then take over?

      • Paul 20/06/2019 at 1:01 pm

        “The majority of Labour members made their views clear when they voted for the 2017 Manifesto

        That is disingenuous crap, and you know it.

      • To advocate ignoring the wishes of the majority of Labour members and voters

        Yet again – NO proof.

        Members = maybe. Electorate = Absolutely not.

      • The Toffee (597) 20/06/2019 at 3:08 pm

        It really isn’t my fault you are too dumb to keep up with the conversation.

      • SteveH 20/06/2019 at 3:29 pm · ·
        The Toffee (597) 20/06/2019 at 3:08 pm

        It really isn’t my fault you are too dumb to keep up with the conversation.
        —————————————-

        And it really isn’t my fault your stroke has obviously altered your perception of reality.

        I’m not the one persistently claiming the majority of labour voters (Be they diehards or potentials) are in favour of a 2nd ref. You don’t even know how people intend to vote in an election – nevermind if they’re leave or remain.

        Gobshite.

      • “The majority of Labour members made their views clear when they voted for the 2017 Manifesto that accepted a Brexit”

        Nonsense on stilts. Talk around is all you need to do to realize that the majority just held their noses over the Brexit policy that subsequently failed dramatically.

        Anyone who thinks that people vote for the totality of manifestos needs to question what they’re inhaling.

  12. @ David McNiven,

    I’m at a loss with your comment, however, as i oppose Austerity, which is itself a by product of neoliberal madness (neoliberal economic prescriptions as practiced by Westminster & Brussels) why on earth from your tainted logic should I support or issue support to those running Westminster or Brussels. Further, and as a democratic socialist quite versed on Westminster and Brussels I’m allowed to exercise my voting rights, which I have done in an informed capacity, not knee jerk reaction to something 5 seconds ago.

    Indeed, it would seem many of the Remain camp posting here have styled themselves as experts and believe Labour’s own Polling experts and advisors are deluded – well done, I’m glad you don’t want a Labour Government and glad you’d sacrifice a Labour Government over membership of an Institution which itself is in crisis.

    The figures, which those issuing advice to JC understand are clear that if you ignore the Leave vote in the Labour heartlands then Parliamentary losses will ensue, these being far higher than losing a few seats in the South East.

    • It seems doubtful that Labour would lose any votes in the SE by sticking with the current policy; look at Peterborough. If Watson’s new policy was to be adopted it will take generations before Labour could recover. The GE choice will be stark; Corbyn or Johnson for a 5 year term; I suggest many Labour Remainers would hesitate before letting Johnson take over, let alone vote for him, especially in the circumstances were Labour wants a soft Brexit.

    • christopher rogers, if you don’t recognise the glaring contradictions in your position there would seem to be little more worth discussing.

      • McNiven,
        What glaring contradictions mate, I support policy as reached at Conference via a democratic vote, my emphasis on ‘democratic’. Further, unlike many others in my area, I voted Labour in the EU Parliament Election, thus again endorsing Labour’s current position – as most here and incapable of endorsing Labour’s policy – any Confirmation vote only available if Labour is actually in government, as JC recognises, basically you’re all talking out of your arses, not withstanding condemning us to an absolute tyranny of neoliberalism, which it would appear many posting don’t have a clue about – New Labour my arse I’m afraid.

        And as a final cautionary word, to be blunt if dick heads in England yet again deliver governance my own Country has not voted for, its time for me to move camps and dispense with any support whatsoever for Westminster.

  13. Dont give an inch to red Tory snowflake neverenders
    Theres a GE coming very soon and we need to stick to our winning manifesto in 2017, where we were two weeks away from power in the biggest shift since 1945
    There is a devil’s pact between Boris/Linton Crosby/Nigel Farage where cheap and nasty Tory party will sub contract out seats in South West, North and Midlands to Brexit party on a pre coalition agreement
    It negates biggest fear of going to the country before Brexit is implemented and gives them best chance under FPTP for No Deal majority 8n parliament
    Only chance of defeating this nightmare scenario is JC and Labour party, straight fight between casino economy, disaster masters, NHS sold off to American Health Companies and progressive socialist democratic, hope party
    To enemy within dont find yourselves on the wrong side history, get back to the day job, fighting Tories
    We can continue debate after we win battle
    Scotland
    FFS get Geordie Galloway in to concentrate minds and get back 50 seats we are desperately going to need

    • Doug 20/06/2019 at 1:23 pm

      get back to the day job, fighting Tories

      I agree, as do the vast majority of Labour’s supporters that supporting Tory policies would be a fundamental error.

    • Well said! We face having one of the worst Governments in our recent history, a Johnson- Farage Coalition. In the current climate of hysteria they’d be looking for a landslide victory. The following 5 years would be country-changing. Even the intellects of N London will surely baulk at allowing that to happen?

      • “We face having one of the worst Governments in our recent history”

        Correct. So why is the Labour Party’s support in a historic nose dive and shedding votes to LibDems and Greens, whilst not gaining any discernable Leave support ????

        As Einstein said ….

  14. As the Tory Party goes full-on hard Brexit it will lose that precious game decider, the Centre ground by the shovel full; the Party is on the verge of collapse as we’ve seen. Labour would be crazy to copy their hysteria and go full-on Remain. Their shovels would be full of Leave voters. Those hard extremes in both parties are not building the compromise so obviously needed. Labour should take up the vacuum in the Centre left by crazed Tories and avoid kicking 30-40% of their electorate and 50% + of the population (2016 figures!) in the testicles.

    • Paul, I’m afraid I couldn’t disagree more – “the centre” is as empty as a Polo mint.
      Ask “the centre” what measures it proposes to stop – or even slow – the inexorable rise of the 1% and you’ll get only blank looks.
      To them it just doesn’t compute.
      All they “know” is that nice people aren’t radicals of the left or the right. Nice people like them like the middle way.

      Problem with that is that we live in a radically neoliberal world.
      The 1% own 50% of our country NOW and their holdings are growing at a phenomenal rate – only RADICAL action has the slightest chance of reversing the growing wealth gap, the inevitable result of which is at best a universal subsistence income for the many dictated by those who will soon be the 0.1% as wealth concentrates in the hands of fewer and fewer oligarchs.
      Oligarchs who love only superyachts, private islands, zero taxation and governments that do as they’re told.
      How thin a gruel are “centrists” willing to accept on your behalf, do you think? Just to be nice and to keep the peace for those few rich people who, let’s remember, “pay more tax than everyone else put together.”

      Fuck, I thought everyone here understood this shit.

      • You are simply pretending that a Brexit compromise means compromising everything else. That’s silly.

      • Paul, I didn’t mention Brexit.
        Not once.
        My point, as always, is that the mentality of the so-called “centrist” takes us in the end to exactly the same place full-on, rabid neoliberalism takes us.
        Abject serfdom – just a little delayed.
        It’s crucial that we recognise that and don’t give the blue-rinsed Quislings an inch.

      • But I was talking about Brexit so your failure to spot that is unfortunate

      • McNiven,
        May I enquire what compromises have been made over Brexit by Corbyn, and I’m specifically referring to Corbyn here, who desires to honour the votes of more than 17 million Brits that the UK exits the EU – this was made clear in the 2017 Manifesto and for clarity, with much at stake presently, at Conference and at the latest Shadow Cabinet meeting – the Policy is well known, or should be to posters and has been reiterated once more. If TWATSON et al don’t like it, well tough, its a democratic decision and much of the PLP seems to have difficulty understanding democracy, nevermind the fact that these traitors are overwhelmingly neoliberal hangovers from the Blair/Brown/Milliband years – not my cup of tea and not democratic socialists.

        The fact remains, the lying MSM and traitors within the PLP are trying to portray JC as something he ain’t and dictate policy, a policy Conference has voted for. Again, these are stupid, crass anti-democrats we are discussing.

        As for neoliberalism and its fall out, I witness it each time I look out my window, I witness when I go shopping and I witness it when I visit the doctors surgery – we have no manufacturing anymore, despite dismal efforts by the EU in funding for business – its just a trickle in an ocean of misery – alas, I don’t understand neoliberalism or its fallout, please pull the other one.

        Again, and being blunt, if Labour under JC appeases the traitors anymore we can kiss any chance of a reformist Labour Administration goodbye as I’m afraid metropolitan, middle class numbers don’t match working class numbers in the heartlands.

        Indeed, I’m distressed when peers across the UK are contemplating abandoning Labour if it sells out the Brexit Voters, which means even safe seats like mine could fall to the Tories given the Brexit Party will take working class votes, and, as those posting here should be aware, in 2016 C2’s, Ds and E voted in a majority to leave the EU. And yes, in most cases this was both a protest vote and howl for help, which the Labour Party must provide or else it just becomes another middle class entity addressing middle class concerns, none of which will attack the disease that’s killing us, namely neoliberalism.

      • I just can’t see how following a RW agenda which will finally kill off what’s left of volume manufacturing in this country will benefit the ‘working class’ or provide the tax revenue to finance the changes we want to make.

  15. David McNiven 3.13pm
    You are spot on but forget that the haircut has been postponed from 2007 when capatalism disappeared up it’s own backside, only to be rescued by Brown and Obama, then to add insult to injury we invented the Great Experiment to keep them afloat
    QE or socialism for the 5%
    Best advice I can offer is SELL SELL SELL
    This particular shitfest is To Be Continued

  16. SteveH,
    Your final comment says it all, namely you have zero idea of economics, indeed, your economics is that of the Household analogy – here’s a fact, tax removes money from the economy and all collected taxation does not cover government expenditure, hence, the focus on take is a Red Herring given money really is created out of fresh air – of course I don’t expect you to believe me, but both the Bank of England and Bundesbank endorse this simple fact. The Rightwinger is you I’m afraid as you seem incapable of understanding simple monetary policy and how a fiat currency actually works – far from destroying manufacturing, we need to rebuild manufacturing, whilst also greening our economy. Keep focusing on tax though.

    • Oh, do please give us your famous lecture on MMT.
      We’re all so completely ignorant of how economics really works and you obviously understand the subject thoroughly – won’t you educate us?
      Pretty please?

      • David,
        As a matter of fact, Prof. Steve Keen is not a member of MMT, he is a heterodox economist, as is Ann Pettifor – the Heterodox School of Thought has multiple areas of concern/enquiry – and Michael Hudson ain’t no twat, if this is what you are eluding, nor is Bill Black, nor is Stephanie Kelton, who advises Bernie Sanders.

Leave a Reply