Uncategorized

Poll suggests 3 out of 4 Labour members back Lavery over Starmer

Ian Lavery (left) and Keir Starmer

A poll suggests that three quarters of Labour members would back ex-miner Ian Lavery over centrists’ hope Keir Starmer to lead the party to take back the ‘leave towns’ that Labour lost in this month’s general election.

Of the two candidates below, who represents the best chance of Labour retaking the leave-voting towns it lost in the general election?

The poll question

Of the 1.814 votes cast, 1,359 (74.92%) favoured Lavery, compared to 455 (25.08%) for Starmer:

The poll results

To prevent automated activity, the poll required a response to a ‘Captcha’ question. Multiple votes by the same respondent were blocked.

Of the responses received, only 27 came from an IP address that appeared more than once – and of those, only one, with 4 , showed more than two votes.

94.9% of votes were cast by UK-based respondents. Labour members overseas are also entitled to vote in leadership elections. Of the 34 non-UK countries that appeared in the results, none involved more than ten votes.

SKWAWKBOX view:

Taking back the leave towns Labour lost is essential for Labour to return to government in 2024. A large majority of Labour members believe that Ian Lavery, who consistently voted in Parliament to support the wishes of his leave-voting constituents, would be able to do so.

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.

87 comments

  1. Do you think this result may have been influenced by the editorial coverage on the two individuals.

    1. Not me personally, I did my homework; Looked at his voting history which shows his values, his background etc – I’d assume most members with a valid vote would do this also

      1. In a perfect world that would be the case but the GE results unfortunately illustrate that (at best) very few people get past the headlines`

    2. Not influenced at all by the media, never read it, known Lavery for years. Commited unionist a fighter for rights, he got my vote in the poll.

      1. Hi Dave – I was referring to the editorial content on this website.

  2. Starmer strikes me as being in the “Dead Sheep” category when it comes to suitability for the leader’s role,and that is before considering his position on the right of the party.

    1. Jeremy Corbyn a compassionate statesman who remains gracious even in defeat.. He has been abused and vilified for 4 years by the establishment, the PLP, the Tory party and MSM all of whom worked together to orchestrate his defeat ( and then blamed him for it) but there is not one word of self pity or nastiness towards his abusers in his Christmas message.
      He just expresses his concern once again for the poor and needy, He is worth 100 of his abusers put together. If I were one of them I would hang my head in shame every time I saw a homeless person. a food bank queue or saw a disabled or elderly person struggling,
      Jeremy God bless you and your family this Christmas season. I have no doubt that people will eventually come to realise that you are a good and decent man who posed an threat to the economic status quo i.e. the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer and they were conned into thinking otherwise.

      1. Indeed!

        He is a kind and sincere person, but his enemies and detractors would never concede this. They fear his values, but his integrity more.

        Let us work hard to make them ubiquitous in Labour and more common in the country.

    2. Those who self select to take part in a poll often do so to try and reinforce the appeal of their chosen candidate. The relevance of Lavery in the next election 4 -5 years after a Brexit deal with the EU is done is limited. We need a new face.

  3. “Taking back the leave towns Labour lost is essential for Labour to return to government in 2024. A large majority of Labour members believe that Ian Lavery, who consistently voted in Parliament to support the wishes of his leave-voting constituents, would be able to do so.”

    I assume 2024 will hang on how brexit looks by then.
    If the Tories/MSM can paint it as a success and a majority believes them – then they probably win by a landslide whatever we do – everything else being equal.

    Even if brexit’s an unmitigated, undeniable and irreparable disaster we could still have a fight on our hands because they’ll blame Labour again and some people will believe anything.
    I fear brexit will be seen by history as a mistake but I don’t KNOW whether it’ll be a success, a failure or open to interpretation like most things – and neither does anyone else.
    Nobody predicted in June 2016 we’d be precisely here today.
    Nobody predicted all the shit we’ve seen and those who pretend otherwise – that they “knew exactly what they were voting for” – just make themselves look stupid.

    I won’t even predict that if it turns bad Leavers will say “the remainiacs did it” – or that it’ll be harder to find a Tory-voting LabRat in the Labour heartlands in 2024 than it was to find a ThatchRat in the 1990’s – because nobody knows.

    Some people have pointed to having called the election right and by implication claim insight and even prescience – but more than half the electorate called it so nothing to see here.
    Predicting, like Giant-killing, is mostly luck.

    Best Labour can do I think is stick to and advertise its principles. There’s sorrow but little shame in losing honestly when the other lot had all the power and all the money and all the professional liars and all the hired spivs and trolls and got what they paid for.
    Playing that game like the sell-outs Blair, Brown and those who are currently jockeying for position is what’s shameful, win or lose.

    1. It also depends on Labour becoming embedded in communities and old wood in CLP’s and MP’s who also aren’t working going.

    2. “Taking back the leave towns Labour lost is essential for Labour to return to government in 2024.
      In the North East we never recovered from Thatchers axe. Shipyards, mines, steel works, foundries, chemical companies, engineering plants- all gone. Nothing replaced them except part time, temporary, agency or zero hour work. Communities living below the poverty line and existing on benefits if they are lucky. Thatcher started it, Major did nothing, Blair/Brown did nothing, Cameron did nothing, May did nothing.
      If people get treated like this is it any wonder that they lash out. Corbyn couldn’t sell his ideas to them, he came across as lacking passion or belief in himself. BJ was the typical snake oil salesman and people fell for him. As usual, we will get nowt from him too.

      1. “If people get treated like this is it any wonder that they lash out.”

        But no, as you actually imply,they often don’t ‘lash out’ in any meaningful sense, other than that of the abusive drunk kicking the cat They don’t look to change things. They don’t rebel, let alone think. They lose even belief and become compliant to the masters who whisper in their ears

        A sort of Stockholm syndrome. Such is Tory hegemony built on.

      2. I don’t know what the answer is to provide employment in those areas that were previously served with heavy/basic industries. The last rescue of Port Talbot steelworks involved a subsidy of over £900,000 per job! The govt had to do some fancy footwork to get round anti state aid EU regs. The costs of production in S. Asia and Far East are so much lower because of wages, health and safety, planning, energy, environmental etc etc. Where Chinese firms have reopened factories in the US, pay is 50% of what it was with no health/medical benefits which are so important there. You would probably need to rip up all planning and many Health and Safety regs, offer 100% capital allowances allied with funding big expansion of the university/pharma/engineering/chemical sectors and cancel the myriad ‘low carbon’ regulations that make energy costs in the uk so prohibitively expensive.

      3. I constantly hear the negative .comments from plain citizen and disinformation.I Welcome a debate but propaganda from TORY HQ is not appreciated.900,000per person government subsidy at port Talbot ? Don’t have a solution for the Tory vandalism of the Northern industry?.,S east Asia a cheap Labour job spot ?.Like everywhere in asia S east Asia is seeing the benifits of having the backing of China. I am constantly staggered to see the massive investment in this area and re skilling.We in Britain need leaders of vision who invest in people and a re skilling for a better future.How much of the government subsidy ends up in the pockets of directors for the companys to squander abroad…..?The peoples taxes have been thrown away on the alter of global capitalism.

    3. We should immediately start explaining why local government is failing miserably! Austerity, the hard-nosed regressive choice that BJ is continuing. Vicious cuts to finance for Labour authorities, which not only a political choice, but viciously anti-working class. The inability of local councils to build homes, start schools, run utilities or even profit from outsourcing our recycling activities (there are MASSIVE profits to be had, but only by for-profit operators).

  4. I couldn’t vote at all, perhaps because of the way wordpress works on my phone. I would have voted for Ian if I had.

  5. If Brexit turns back then some people will moan saying why did you not tell us that it would be that bad. We can quietly say that we did, but no one was listening……
    By the way I support RBL, AR and RB.

    1. It may only turn bad because of the way in which the tories are purposely mismanaging it. I suspect johnno would LOVE to crash out no deal because his russian banker friends will stand to make a LOT of money by the pound tanking.

  6. Read ‘Andy Beckett’ article in Guardian
    Sums up a lot of what we are wrestling with on here and goes a long to confirming we are not all going mental
    Best wishes to all,
    Enjoy the festivities and prepare for the long road to Cheltenham

    1. Yes, good article but misses out a highly important issue which helped to decide the election – the never ending smears and lies propagated against Corbyn by the very newspapers and media which poisoned the minds of joe public. Its all very well these writers looking back in hindsight and whining about ‘where it all went wrong” when they fail to mention their own complicity in the whole affair.

      1. Correct, Corbyn and Labour were hit with a deluge of smears and snide comments from the media, which was totally predictable. When faced with such an onslaught the answer was not to cower in silence and acquiescence but to have a purposely and professionally assembled media department to answer and rebut all the smears with confidence and facts.

        With intelligence and in depth knowledge, from informed supporters of Corbyn, such as Tony Greenstein many of the smears could have been turned right back on to the accusers in such a way as to embarrass and undermine them and make them think twice about making further accusations. Almost every smear could have been turned to Labour’s advantage.

  7. Open Labour the self appointed representatives of the so called ‘Soft Left’ have come up with a 10 point pledge that they want all the leadership candidates to sign up to.

    1. – I will stand for a transformative socialist economic agenda, to making sure this is credible and coherent, and that it resonates with voters’ priorities.
    2. – I will support a respectful and comradely political culture, and demand a high standard of conduct both from my supporters and other members.
    3. – I will fight for a truly independent and transparent complaints process, giving members clear guidance on their rights and responsibilities. I will work pro-actively to improve relations with Britain’s diverse faith communities.
    4.- I will seek to increase the party’s BAME, LGBT+, Disabilities and Women’s societies’ roles in related policy, representation and internal party matters, and safeguard the rights of trade unions in the party.
    5. – I will lead a review the party’s campaign infrastructure, policy-making processes and priorities, and the work of the NEC and leader’s office to ensure transparency and effectiveness.
    6. – We need a more pluralist party. I will campaign for the party to adopt the voting system used to elect the leader (STV) for use in all internal elections above CLP level, guaranteeing wider and more accurate representation for our members.
    7. – I will only attend leadership hustings where all candidates have been given the opportunity to attend.
    8. – I will encourage all socialist societies, affiliates and Labour member-based organisations to ballot their members before endorsement of candidates, and to give all candidates an opportunity to be heard by their members.
    9. – I will commit to a voluntary spending cap on campaign costs and call on other candidates to agree the same.
    10. – I will broaden Labour’s international cooperation with like-minded parties and civil society in other countries and strengthen our relationship with non-UK citizens resident in the UK. I will fight any effort by the government to use Brexit to reduce rights and living standards for all residents.

    1. SteveH , interesting pledges but it’s notable they miss the most obvious and vital one and that is further democratisation of the party and handing power to the membership , vis mandatory reselection .
      Who are the so called soft left , by implication there is a hard Left which I guess they would mean Corbyn whom I consider to be moderate by past standards.
      Can’t assess this really until the source of it is known and hence bias.

    2. SteveH, I can’t take seriously any organisation so incompetent it doesn’t have someone versed in English grammar proof-read its flim-flam.
      “… and safeguard the rights of trade unions in the party.” can fuck off too.

      1. SteveH, I knew that – I don’t ever remember assuming your endorsement of the substance of the finds you link to.
        Re-reading my comment it was a bit negative though, even for me…
        Xmas TV’s unremitting mawkishness puts me in a very un-xmassy frame of mind I’m afraid – most unlike my usual sunny disposition 🙂

  8. I would never vote for starmer,he chose his allegiances when he aceppted a knighthood and same for all who accept,titles and gongs I would have voted for the bricklayer,but that chance was lost on the alter of AS scam.Anyone that aceppted,the lie,Will also loose,my,vote.Theirs realy only one socialist on offer at the moment,so I will go with the miner.and trust that is experience at the coal face has left a lasting impression on his loyalty to the working class..Happy Christmas comrades.

  9. Happy Winter Solstice – at least days get lighter.

    The more I think about it, the less enthusiastic I am about an early leadership election – although I am aware that asking Corbyn to grit his teeth further is a big ask after what he has had thrown at him.

    There needs to be a period of solid reflection – but above all,time for the dust to settle and candidates to merge. As said before, the Party has got policy on the right lines, and needs to have confidence in that instead of any ‘third way’ irrelevance.

    As important is the remaining legacy of the Blair years and the lack of direction of PLP members owing their allegiance to that time. We have no outstanding candidates for the leadership with all the necessary candidates – as yet. Hardly surprising in the aftermath of the election and the dissension in the Party that it has emphasized.

    Not a good time for decisions.

    I don’t expect perfection. I expect a realistic outcome that balances ideology and electoral leadership. It’s also necessary to grasp the deficiencies of Jeremy Corbyn as a leader, whilst continuing to prize the assets that he brought to the role, whilst recognizing that no-one could have done more to sustain himself against the quite extraordinary media
    campaign.

    I will find it hard to vote for anyone who implicitly failed to resist the ‘anti-semitism’ slurs or, worse, endorsed the scam. Even allowing for the unspoken intimidation that causes it, I will find it hard to support any member of the JLM or LFI who doesn’t speak clearly about the injustice meted out to Palestinians and spells out the reality.

    Like others, I can’t forgive those who actively tried to undermine Corbyn and set things up to fail.

    I will also find it hard to support someone who uses the term ‘Labour heartlands’ to describe the current conservatism of the old industrial areas – its a knee jerk outdated trope that hides the real nature of one of the essential problems that Labour has to face. Similarly, a historical simple ‘Leave’ position for me will raise questions of judgment.

    None of that, I admit, poses any solution – it’s just one member’s take on the issues.

    But – Good Wishes.

    1. Oh – and one addendum. I cannot support any chancer candidate who, like Dan Jarvis, (see today’s Groan) simply agrees with the media propaganda (and uses it’s effect on public perceptions) concerning the last few years rather than targetting the venality of the media itself.

    2. The Winter Solstice was on the 21st, and the days begin to get longer, not lighter.

      And just out of interest, how long do you think it will take for this ‘dust’ you refer to to settle, and for a left-wing leadership candidate to emerge to continue Jeremy’s legacy?

      I mean I’m just wondering why they haven’t emerged already if they are going to emerge at all. And how many Labour MPs will they need to endorse them, as such, anyway?

      1. Allan – As you’ve just spent the last 9 hours trawling through 10 days of comments finding people to troll then surely you could have spared a few minutes to do something more constructive like looking that up for yourself. You’ll find the information you requested on page 21 of the 2019 Labour Party Rule Book. (Chapter 4. Elections of National Officers of the Party and national committees. Clause II Procedural rules for elections for National Officers of the Party)
        https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Rule-Book-2019.pdf

      2. Steve. It was a rhetorical question, and YOU know it!

        But being the little shill-head that you are, you’re ALWAYS looking for some way to undermine AND divert attention away from my exposing you shills for what you are. And needless to say, I didn’t spend NINE hours checking out anything. But I see you’ve obviously been monitoring and checking out the several comments I’ve posted through the night on a number of threads/SB articles! Yep, always monitoring everything every day aren’t you Steve!

        Hmm, I mean WHO does THAT?!!

      3. Now IF, as SteveH claims, I HAD just spent the last 9 hours trawling through 10 days of comments, how on earth would he know THAT?

        Perhaps you’d like to explain Steve?

        PS Just for the record though, I did in fact spend a couple of hours last night looking through THREE days of comments in the aftermath of the GE to ascertain how many times the likes of Joseph O’Keefe and signpost had said Jeremy must stay on as leader and, as such, found ELEVEN such comments, mostly by ‘Joseph O’Keefe’ and ‘signpost’. Eleven times during the course of three days between the 15th and 17th of December, and THAT’s on top of the NINE such comments on the 13th and 14th of December which I found a few days ago. So that’s TWENTY such comments over a period of five days! Most of them by the two aforementioned posters, three by Joseph in which he says it is Jeremy’s ‘duty’ to stay (unless he is sick), and two in which signpost says ‘JEREMY MUST STAY’.

        I wonder how many MORE times they’ve said it since the 17th! So why would you keep repeating such a thing over and over and over again when you KNOW that he – Jeremy – is going to stand down once a new leader has been elected (probably in about three months time). Could it be because you want to inculcate the idea that he SHOULD stay on as leader in the minds of people who read skwawkbox, so that when he DOES step down, you can then castigate him for deserting the membership and letting us all down and betraying us etc, etc?

        Anyway Steve, I await your explanation.

      4. Allan Howard at 11:50 am

        Allan – How am I supposed to be able to read your mind. The fact that you chose to take it the wrong way says far more about you and your currently grumpy persona than it does about me.

        As I woke up this morning to an in-box that was a solid block of your numerous posts throughout the night all of them attacking other individuals mostly for comments that were made several days ago.there was no need to do any monitoring. One could legitimately ask what sort of person purposely hunts people down. I would argue that it is far more perverse to actively seek out people to attack than it is for me to simply read the emails in my in-box that inform me of new posts to articles I have commented on.

        Your postings in the last 12 hours would indicate that your claims may not be accurate. As far as I’m aware you posted comments at 23:55 on 25/12 where you commented on a post I made 10 days ago on 15/12 you then posted (again as far as I’m aware, there may be more) at 03:39, 04:07, 04:12, 04:19, 04:57 06:25.06:43, 08:01, 08:53, 0910, 10:10, 10:33, 11:50 & 12:09 today. You also made 7 posts on 17/12, 20 on 18/12, 6 on 20/12, 6 on 24/12 and 3 on Christmas Day. Again these are just the ones that I am aware of from my email in-box so there may be more. I’ll leave it to others to judge the veracity of your claims about your frequency of postings etc.

        I hope the above answers all your questions, let me know if I’ve missed anything out.

        Perhaps it’s time you got some sleep and hopefully you’ll wake up refreshed and in a more sociable frame of mind.

      5. “The Winter Solstice was on the 21st, and the days begin to get longer, not lighter”

        Allan – pedantry is no virtue. Or particularly relevant I am quite aware of the cosmic facts 🙂

        As to the substance : “I’m just wondering why they haven’t emerged already” is a good question.

        To which the answer is ‘I don’t know’. But I do know that the Party is in a lousy position at the moment to make a judgment.

      6. THAT should probably have read (at the beginning of my above post:

        Now IF, as SteveH claims, I HAD just spent the last 9 hours trawling through 10 days of comments, how on earth would he – or ANYONE for that matter – know THAT?

        And just to be clear, whilst in the process of looking through the comments from the 15th to the 17th of December (for the reason I mention above), I ended up posting several comments, and I’m pretty sure they were all addressed and in response to ‘Joseph O’Keefe’ and ‘signpost’, and in relation to what I’ve said about them both above. And the fact that SteveH describes it as ‘trolling’ tells you all you need to know about HIM! Oh, right, and by using the term ‘trawling’, he is trying to associate my research with what the CAA and JLM and LAA have been doing for the past four years and what the McNicol staffers used to do!

      7. Your tin hat has slipped Allan, it won’t protect you from the conspiracy theories unless you wear it as per the instructions.

      8. Now someone else may have thanked me for correcting them RH. But I didn’t do so for YOUR benefit so much as for other people who read skwawkbox and who may not be familiar with when the Winter Solstice is, and who may very well have gone away believing it’s the 25th after having read your post.

        Anyway, I’m pleased to hear you’re aware of the cosmic facts!

      9. “purposely hunts people down”!

        Right, so the fact that posters – mainly Joseph O’Keefe and signpost’ keep relentlessly pushing this thing about how Jeremy should stay on as leader when they know full well that he has said he is standing down shortly when a new leader is elected is of no concern to you then Steve. Hmm!

        And I just lurve the colourful language….. ‘trolling’ and ‘trawling’ and ‘hunts’ people down. Give over Steve, you’re just further exposing yourself for the paid shill that you are. It’s exactly the sort of rhetoric the propagandists in the Sun and the Mail and the Express use all the time so as to try and paint someone in a negative light. So, for example, when Jennie Formby criticised Tom Watson for interfering in the Complaints procedure, she is described by these propagandists as having ‘attacked’ Tom Watson. And in one Jewish Chronicle article I read – not long after he’d been suspended – they had Asa Winstanley as ‘attacking’ this, and ‘attacking’ that.

        And my four or five posts prior to you posting at 10.00am filled your inbox did they?! Yeah, sure they did Steve! Your inbox must fill up really quickly again and again throughout the day (and night) if you are receiving notifications every time someone posts a comment. I mean there must be between a hundred and two hundred comments being posted just about every single day! And yet you make a big deal out of me posting just four or five comments!

        Purposely hunting people down! It’s pathetic beyond words Steve, but of course designed to ’emotionalise’ readers, as ALL black propaganda IS.

        Anyway, just out of interest – given your comment/response the other day regarding my web searches – how widely WAS the story about Boris Johnson breaking his promise re the minimum wage covered by the MSM, because you indicated that it was widely covered, and yet ALL I came across was the Huffpost and the Indy. And of course my main point was that the former Labour voters who voted Tory this time are hardly going to be regretting it after just one week AND that the Tory/Establishment media are highly unlikely to be informing their readers and viewers and listeners about his broken promises. Not that he/they ever intended to keep them of course.

        PS And don’t forget to get a few ‘Likes’ up shortly, if you and the crew haven’t done so already, so as to manipulate what people think!

        It’s all so glaringly transparent Steve!!

      10. Allan Howard 26/12/2019 at 3:05 pm · ·
        You really are clutching at straws and you need to learn how to count. “And my four or five posts prior to you posting at 10.00am filled your inbox did they”
        You posted comments at
        03:39, 04:07, 04:12, 04:19, 04:57 06:25.06:43, 08:01, 08:53, 0910,

        “Anyway, just out of interest – given your comment/response the other day regarding my web searches – how widely WAS the story about Boris Johnson breaking his promise re the minimum wage covered by the MSM, because you indicated that it was widely covered, and yet ALL I came across was the Huffpost and the Indy.

        Well we’ve already doubled the number of mainstream outlets that you original claimed had covered it. I’ll get back to you later on with a few more publications .when I’ve got the time and inclination to do the research to provide the evidence and I will also address the rest of your diatribe at the same time.

        “The only news outlet I found that covered it (that’s anything approaching mainstream) when I did a search was the Huff Post:

      11. Ah, resorting to personal abuse are you. Says it ALL, but then what COULD you say Steve? I mean does anyone seriously believe that an ordinary poster would choose to be notified of every single comment that is posted EVERY single day!

        Anyway, I just this minute recalled that ONE of the comments I posted during the night was in response to yourself, and how you were ‘staggered’ at my lack of self awareness, or something to that effect, and you said it in relation to my having posted about signpost posting numerous ultra-long posts every day, day after day after day. And as I said in my response to you Steve, about a third of my posts – at least – involve exposing the machinations and falsehoods dissembled by the trolls/shills on here, and just about ALL my posts since the early hours of this morning have been precisely for that purpose.

        Anyway, I doubt I’ll be hunting down anyone else today Steve, so you can rest easy (but keep an eye on your inbox cos you just never know!)

    1. “…grand European alliance of nationalists…” was that meant to be a joke?

      I’m reminded of the vicar, the priest, the rabbi and the imam smiling sincerely and promising to meet in heaven, all four certain that the other three are going to hell.

      1. RH, my comment was unclear, sorry – I didn’t mean ‘a joke’ by you – I meant to question whether nationalists have enough of a sense of humour to appreciate the incongruity of nationalists forming alliances with foreigners when their raison d’être is hatred of foreigners.

      2. David – I reckon some unholy alliances can occur. Remember Hitler and Stalin?

        But it was the wider significance of right-wing coups that attracted my attention – the real aim of the Brexiterati.

    2. RH
      More than anything let’s decide now which policies are going to get us elected and start campaigning 1st January 2020
      It is critical that we frame the narrative around those policies, not least that they are not that radical and that they are in fact mainstream in most developed countries
      Stick religiously to policies, costings and delivery in stark contrast to Cockwombles lack of them,
      Give folk something to believe in and look forward to, by the time we get to next GE Labour will be like a pair of auld shoes and the cheap and nasties will be completely discredited
      But it all starts with a clean out of those who wake up plot against us every morning,
      Our media strategy will attack how they frame the party and policies, all we will agree to are head to heads on policy
      I see Ian Lavery as a hatchet man who will do the dirty work to clean out the stables before handing over to a Pidcock/ Tarry dream ticket

      1. Easily remedied once she’s ready to come back,
        Point is we cannot carry on with back stabbing centrists, JVL and LFI, MSM and toilet papers
        Let policies do the talking but we have to clean out stables and Ian Lavery is just the man to do it

      2. Doug – I wouldn’t disagree with you over policy. But we already have that framework.

        What the Party didn’t have was priorities and focus on the policy front.

        Above all, it failed in communicating a clear message.

        “Let’s get Brexit done” was misleading,disingenuous shite. But it worked in terms of communication. We had the reverse – great substance but lousy reach.

      3. RH
        So you play to your strengths and change the conversations we have with the MSM and toilet papers,
        Only needs two responses ‘what’s wrong with our policy, sorry but your talking nonsense again’ and ‘what’s the cheap and nasty Tory party policy, oh dear they havnt got one or oh dear it’s not costed’
        Takes out 99% of scumbag media output
        At same time clean out stables

      4. I think you’ve missed my point, Doug, which is about communication rather than policy itself. Admittedly, we’re running up a steep hill with the degree of bias in the media, but I do think the messaging needs to be more focused.

  10. The right of the party are already claiming that the left is ushering in a coronation of a Corbyn successor, so we know that they will brief the Tory press against anyone who is not their preferred candidate.

    And that will give us a repeat of the last four years, risking much the same result.

    The only choice that they have left us is to bring back mandatory re-selection.

    That way at least some of the backstabbers and saboteurs will feel they might be held to account for aiding the Tories again.

    Let’s put their skin in the game for a change, because they don’t give a damn about anyone else’s.

      1. DOn’t forget Lansman in Momentum also withdrew support .
        Cnf MUST get this thro this time round or we are stuffed …again !

      2. Lansman’s Momentum is a mixed blessing. One can’t help but think it would be improved by an injection of democracy rather than providing a template for Farage’s Brexit Ltd

      3. Open selection is pointless if local parties are stitched up by Blairites
        There are a lot of seats where a candidate will have to be imposed by the party
        That is a simple fact of life if you want loyalty in the PLP
        All I would say is it has to be a local candidate

      4. Oh NO! What if he gets all “How dare you question my decision… I knew what I was voting for” and switches Unite’s allegiance to the Tories!!?
        OMG, it’ll be ALL OUR FAULT when he votes Tory, not his. Why oh why couldn’t we just accept that his democratic decision last year supersedes every other consideration and has to be respected for ever?

    1. Mandatory reselection is no magic bullet, although I support it. To think it magical stems from the same illusions that were evidenced here when the old gang were re-selected in some constituencies. The reaction often showed no grasp of the complicated *actuality* of the Labour Party; the same illusions that call the conservative voting old industrial areas the ‘Labour heartlands’, or the Brexit vote a ‘working class’ rebellion’.

      There’s a place for dreams, but not in re-writing reality.

      1. As illustrated by the left’s complete inability to get its act together to get rid of Hodge despite being gifted a trigger ballot.

      2. RH Mandatory Selection is but one step at a time in the rehabilitation of the LW in the PLP , it is a vital element along with OMOV and the attempt to invigorate LW participation in the CLPs , despite the stitch ups .Better to have it than not imo

      3. I don’t think it is a magic bullet, but it is a clear declaration of intent that the left is not going to turn a blind eye to those within the party working against the Leadership and helping the rightwing press.

  11. A long period of reflection would be good! But the media think they run the party,with good reason.The need for a rush for a new leader escapes me,I do not envy any leader taking control with such a divided PLP and NEC.Surely Corbyn can see the opportunity now to clean house ,hes untouchable now.The Traitors have done their worst to Corbyn and the electability of the Labour party.Revenge is a dish best served cold.and the need for purge never more important.The media do not get to choose our leader or our politics.

    1. Oh, so Jeremy’s untouchable now, is he? What total B/S!

      And Joseph doesn’t envy any leader taking control with such a divided PLP and NEC, and so Jeremy should stay – despite the fact that he announced in the early hours of Friday the 13th of December that he will be standing down after a period of reflection on the GE result – and clean house! What a complete and utter joke!

      I mean just look at what happened when the LP said they were going to sanction Hodge for telling Jeremy to his face that he’s a ‘fxxxing anti-semite’. Outrage and condemnation galore!

      But everything would be just hunky-dory if Jeremy stayed on as leader and cleaned house, cos he’s untouchable now! I mean Joseph said so, and he has no doubt conferred with Tony B and his Blairites and the MSM and the Jewish newspapers and the JLM and the CAA and LAA etc, etc, etc.

      As I say, Joseph is spouting complete and utter B/S. And he knows it of course!

      1. I tend to agree with you. But you will not persuade anybody by losing your rag.
        If Corbyn has espoused one central virtue, it is to be temperate in debate.

      2. In the skwawkbox post/article prior to this one, Joseph said that:

        …its Corbyns duty unless he is sick to stand with the membership to protect the socialist revival in the Labour party. No [leadership] election needed now before we clean house.We CANNOT burden another leader with this nest of vipers in the PLP.

        To which *I* replied:

        Oh, right, but it’s perfectly OK is it to ‘burden’ Jeremy with another five years [or whatever] of being relentlessly attacked and vilified and demonised, another five years [or whatever] of character assassination?

        And how does Joseph counter THIS? By trying to lead people who read skwawkbox to believe that Jeremy is now untouchable – ie by ‘introducing’ it into his argument!

        It’s so goddamned transparent – ie contradicting what he in effect said in his previous post – it’s laughable!

        But if you think about it – as I just this moment DID – the only potential leader who would draw down this nest of vipers on themselves would be someone who is, in effect, a Jeremy Mk 2 (whether male or female) who would continue the socialist revival, and THAT is precisely what Joseph keeps telling us he wants!

        Joseph – the Chameleon – O’Keefe!! And THAT about sums him up!!! He (and signpost) have an agenda, and that’s why there is no consistency from one day to the next in what he says.

      3. Now if I was swearing and cursing Ceredig, then people would have every right to think I’d lost my rag, as you put it, but I don’t swear and curse and I was just being blunt, as such. But I assume you’ve said this on the many occasions when posters HAVE been swearing and cursing (and are presumably angry), although I haven’t noticed it as such if you have.

        I very rarely do anger, but what I do DO is contempt on occasion.

      4. Anyway, I’m pleased to hear that you tend to agree with me Ceredig. And I will of course keep an eye out from now on to see if you say the above to posters who have in fact lost their rag. I mean I’ve come across numerous posts in which posters are effing and blinding, and more than a few in which posters use the C word, and yet I don’t recall you ever offering them such advice.

        And if someone draws attention to a poster’s inconsistencies and contradictions, which is what I was doing, then surely ‘persuasion’ isn’t a factor, and it speaks for itself, and no ‘persuading’ is necessary as such.

      5. Allan Howard 26/12/2019 at 1:52 pm · ·
        “Yep, always monitoring everything every day aren’t you Steve!
        Hmm, I mean WHO does THAT?!! “

        You apparently !

        “And I will of course keep an eye out from now on to see if you say the above to posters who have in fact lost their rag.”

        You’d better watch out Ceredig you are being watched.

      6. Allan – Reading through your last few voluminous postings does suggest that you need to regain a sense of proportion and balance in responding to others.

  12. A love letter from the EU
    Frans Timmermans the Executive Vice-President of the European Commission

    You have decided to leave. It breaks my heart, but I respect that decision. You were in two minds about it, like you have always been in two minds about the EU. I wish you had stuck to that attitude, it served you well and it kept all of us in better shape. Was it necessary to force the issue? Not at all. But you did. And the sad thing is, I see it is hurting you. Because the two minds will still be there, even after you have left. In the process so much unnecessary damage has been done to you, and all of us. And I fear more will follow.

    Truth be told, I felt deeply hurt when you decided to leave. Three years later I am just sad that a member of our family wants to sever our ties. But at the same time I find comfort in the thought that family ties can never really be severed. We’re not going away and you will always be welcome to come back.
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/26/my-love-letter-to-britain-family-ties

  13. To Joseph O’Keep me Deluded: I always express pragmatically, facts we need to consider in ways of improving the lot of the working classes in the UK or honestly held opinions about the party and its leading figures. As a traditional labour working class socialist voter, it’s what we do. You typify the opinions of the Westminster wine bar socialists who spout airy fairy ideas from la la land without any evidence or concrete policy ideas (tax rates, planning, evidence etc) to support your vague statements. The problem for Labour especially outside the cities is the metropolitan utopian waffle and sloganeering you exemplify doesn’t cut it any more. Change your name to ‘Deluded of Daubhill’ (if you know where that is) and you might get some respect from real people not your wine bar warrior pals on this site.

    1. Not many wine bars in the Mekong delta,but I am sure its coming along with the belt rd and Skyscrapers.And as for daubhill lovly Bolton people but shame in voting in 2Tory mps and an illegal council. Also not suprised at your words from the new right wing of Bolton..

  14. What is noticeable with politicians is they talk a lot but rarely say anything,
    Its upto us to force to the issues
    Will you replace JLM and LFI with JVL
    Which policies will you keep
    Will you get rid of FPTP
    Will you reform MSM and toilet papers
    What’s your big idea

  15. Interesting pattern in BBC News this morning – now that the immediate issues of bias during the election are not current.

    I don’t generally listen to ‘Today’, but I was doing one of the ritual end-of-Christmas taxi trips to the station early this morning.

    A significant item just before 8:00 a.m was the interview with Lady Hale, incisive retiring as chair of the Supreme Court, in which she lambasted the devastating cuts in legal aid – particularly in the Family Courts.

    By the 8:00 headlines this had been pre-empted by the irrelevant routine gawp at an air crash in Khazakhastan – proper ‘headline news’ for the UK in no sane editorial book. By the 1 pm headlines, the air crash maintained poll position, and this trenchant criticism of the Tories was not in sight.

    Such is manipulation of the narrative by priority and sequencing.

  16. A major GDPR and security breach by the Cabinet Office that has put people at risk
    The Cabinet Office has apologised after a list of the home addresses of New Year Honours recipients, including police officers, politicians and celebrities, was accidentally posted online.

    A spokesman said: “A version of the New Year Honours 2020 list was published in error which contained recipients’ addresses.
    https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/uk-news/apology-after-home-addresses-new-17483045

  17. Unfortunately Corbyn was unable to change much in the LP structure and it is still down to MPs to choose the candidates, who will need 30 nominations.

  18. Must first attack the corruption charges – how dare a party and government stuffed with corporate thieves and tax dodgers with off shore accounts criticise me/Lavery for gratefully receiving help from the Union that I worked for for manly years. We won’t put up with these slurs and groundless accusations against the Labour Party and its leadership – we will fight back and expose the lies from now on. Then put out constant details of dodgy financial dealings by Tory names – no end of those.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: