Jeremy Corbyn made a small piece of Labour history today – by holding the first ever virtual shadow cabinet meeting, to keep MPs safe from infection in response to the coronavirus pandemic.
The main points of the meeting included:
- a powerful contribution from party chair Ian Lavery
- questions about NHS services and cut-backs
- the issue of social isolation for poor and working-class people in our communities
- a call for members to step up in calling out the government out on its woeful response to the coronavirus crisis
- amendments to the government’s emergency powers bill
Although other members of the Shadow Cabinet who are involved in the leadership and deputy leadership contests participated in the call and made contributions, the SKWAWKBOX understands that Keir Starmer did not join.
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.
Why have you have neglected to mention why Keir Starmer didn’t ‘join in’ ?
It would be helpful if you could give us a complete list of those who participated in this ‘shadow cabinet’ meeting.
Steve H Why you no listen mr Fawlty Sir keir Starmer has already declared he’s won in his foreign funders e-mail You must have missed it Sir keir will not be happy if you’ve been caught sleeping on the job.Steve.And everyone was there of course.
Joseph – Firstly I’m puzzled why you feel your reply to my comment is in any way relevant to my question and secondly I have absolutely no idea what you are on about. Why don’t you cut and paste this email so that we can all be better informed. The betting odds do seem to indicate that you may well be right that KS has already won.
Joseph – We’re still waiting for a copy of this email that you are obsessing about.
Stamers Donors please SteveH ,,, we await your answers , some of us are deeply concerned that we STILL don’t know of all the money behind Starmer and who is funding him .
I find it puzzling why someone with reasonable intelligence continues to support with such blind faith , a candidate that has not been entirely open and transparent about such a fundamentally important fact.
Does it not concern you that if Starmer is being so obstructive and imo dishonest in his revelations or lack of them , then he cannot equally be trusted with this position as Leader.
Add to that his voting record and his actions as DPP in the Julian Assange case and the picture is complete for most Socialists to see … others perhaps not so .
I was on the video conf call last night with Corbyn and as part of his excellent speech he thanked all those who had been brilliant in the response to the CV19 virus including a role call of his top team , it was notable that missing from that role call was Starmer , needless to say RBL was mentioned.
I’d say that if the membership wanted any more of a guide to Corbyns preferences then these little subtle hints if you choose not to ignore them , are a good indicator of Corbyns choice .
Still each to their own choice and I sincerely hope for the sake of Socialist Labour Starmer looses , it’s quite clear to me that should he win the party will become Blairite MK 2 .That may please a small rump of Neoliberal loving RWingers but the vast majority who joined because of Corbyn will no doubt be somewhat disenchanted to say the least and my guess will act accordingly as the Blairites have done.
Starmer will have one hell of a job on his hands unifying the party , or maybe will be happy to see it shrink instead to irrelevance . Its your choice .
Rob – “That may please a small rump of Neoliberal loving RWingers but the vast majority who joined because of Corbyn will no doubt be somewhat disenchanted to say the least and my guess will act accordingly as the Blairites have done.”
On the contrary the polling indicates that the majority the members who voted for Corbyn now support Keir for the leadership. We’ll all know for certain in a couple of weeks.
Humm as usual with you and Starmer , there is no answer to the most pertinent question , who is fully funding him , and that’s quite simply because YOU and US the membership STILL don’t know , because he ain’t going to tell you .
Now you maybe happy with that level of opacity and obstruction , a level of deliberate dismissal and dissonance , but the more incisive of us, I would conjecture , are not .
Re the poll ( singular ? ) , pse provide link to said poll , indicating its veracity and trustworthiness .
This poll would be at the same level of accuracy as the one’s you kept using to indicate an overwhelming vote in favour of Remaining …. that went sooo well for us in Labour didn’t it Steve !
Perhaps if so and it follows the same level of inaccuracy then I’d be very happy with the outcome … a loss for Starmer .
rob – Perhaps you should be addressing your queries about the disclosure rules to Jennie Formby who formulated these rules and whilst you are at it ask her about her reluctance to change them..
Because it is strange. Maybe he has good reason for not attending, but possibly because he is a cold-hearted, self-interested, little man and a massive schemer who is showing his real colours and unsuitability to be leader of our wonderful political party within the fabulous Labour Movement.
qwertboi – As far as I’m aware SB has so far neglected to inform us why Keir didn’t participate in this ‘shadow cabinet meeting’, who did participate and who was invited to participate. Without this vital information it is difficult to know what conclusions to draw from this article.
He was probably counting his money from his foreign funders…Once a knight always?
Did I miss the episode where Starmer disclosed his donors’ names or has he still not done so?
Is he in hiding to avoid being asked about it again?
Is the war criminal one of them?
If he gets in he’ll probably be known as Stamper
Starmer appears to be unfit to be leader of the Labour Party. So, no doubt, that’s what we’ll get: a “leader” who doesn’t turn up, who evades answering questions and who spouts meaningless platitudes the rest of the time. Back to the same old, same old.
Less than 5years an MP,and hes claiming its “iTs in the bag” according to the Sir Keir Starmer email I have just recieved?…I must admit that in watching the Johnson’daily briefings,I imagine Sir keir doing it…and I wonder what is the difference?…Well they both attended private school and have wealthy foreign backers,but Sir keir has the knighthood and more money than Johnson ever had.Whilst Johnson was making up storys for the toilet paper,Sir keir Starmer was being groomed for higher things in the Commercial world of the LAW..Barrister,QC,DPP,and now take a bow leader of the Labour party Sir keir Starmer,the best leader money 💰 can buy.The man for whom everyone has a price but the peasants have no value….How did it come to this?
Joseph – Less than 5years an MP,and hes claiming its “iTs in the bag”
Keir has been an MP for longer than RLB
Well they both attended private school
Like our current leader Keir Starmer passed his 11+ to attend a Grant Maintained Grammar School. I am puzzled why you keep banging on about this because I have pointed this out to you (along with supporting direct quotes and links to Hansard). Whilst at the school it converted to a fee paying establishment and because this had been brought about by government legislation the gov put in place transitional arrangements so that all the current pupils fees would be paid by the state until they had completed their education there. As far as I’m aware Keir was educated at a state junior school unlike Jeremy who was educated at a fee paying prep school (current fees £3040/term).
You appear to be obsessed with the Knighthood that KS received following his tenure as DPP. Just like every other DPP before him since 1880 when the post was created. I’ve also pointed this out to you on several occasions so your continued obsession with a title he chooses not to use seems to a little perverse.
Why do you feel the need to denigrate his success as a barrister, would he be a more acceptable to you if he’d spent his legal career as a pen pushing property solicitor working for corporate law firms rather than as a leading civil and human rights advocate (he was named QC of the year in 2007).
Who are these wealthy foreign donors that you are obsessing about.
Considering that he made his career as a human rights lawyer what do you mean when you mean when you say ” Starmer was being groomed for higher things in the Commercial world of the LAW..Barrister,QC,DPP” As far as I can see his success has been due to his own merits do you have any actual evidence to the contrary.
You missed out what his arse tastes like
NVLA – Profanity is a cheap and ignorant substitute for cogent argument.
Just one question Steve. As a human rights lawyer he would surely be opposed to the apartheid treatment of the Palestinians by the Israeli state. So why did he acquiesce so readily (along with Nandy and Long Bailey) to the demands of the Board of Deputies?
Do you think bowing to the demands of an external body, notoriously right wing conservative, who want to control the whole process of the complaints procedure, possibly even breaching the Data Protection Act (which, as a lawyer, he should be perfectly well aware of), while at the same time demanding that other Jewish groups, such as JVL, are excluded is the act of a socialist?
Moreover, anyone they deem to be supporting those accused of antisemitism will also be suspended, if not thrown out as well. And don’t forget, they want the JLM, who again are not a socialist movement (and why they’re still affiliated I find not only absurd but utterly contemptible), to re-educate those they consider to be antisemitic. I certainly don’t need their re-education, thank you very much.
For these reasons alone I can no longer remain a member of the Labour Party and consequently ended my membership back in January, as I suspect many others have, and more will do in the not too distant future.
PW – Like yourself I found Keir’s support for the IHRA disconcerting but given that the other two contestants for the leadership unlike Keir also took it a stage further and self proclaimed themselves as Zionists at the JLM Hustings with one getting the endorsement & nomination of JLM and the other proudly proclaiming that she would welcome Berger and Ellman back into the party plus pay compensation to those ex staffers who appeared in the infamous Panorama ‘documentary’ for their ‘hurt and distress’ I think on this he is the best on offer. Unfortunately my favoured candidate wasn’t endorsed by the PLP.
–Like yourself I found Keir’s support for the IHRA disconcerting–
But I didn’t ask about the IHRA or Starmer’s response to it at all, did I? Or give my opinion on it. Nor did I mention the proclamations of the other 2 about being Zionists. You’re side-stepping the question.
What I did ask was whether you thought his acceptance of the BoD’s demands (who, I repeat, are decidedly NOT a socialist organisation but RW conservative), and their insistence on controlling the process for judging accusations of antisemitism, was the act of a socialist, bearing in mind that as a human rights lawyer (which, from your posts, you put great store in as some sort of defining quality) he should be in support of the plight of the Palestinians, whose human rights are being trampled on relentlessly by the State of Israel?
Do you not think it hypocritical to want to lead a democratic socialist party while allowing a RW conservative organisation to dictate terms in matters of such importance, even to the point of dismembering any who stand in open support of those THEY deem to be antisemitic, even when they happen to be Jewish themselves!?
PW – My apologies there was no intention to sidestep the ‘issue’ as you put it and I’m more than happy to substitute the first few words of my reply with Like yourself I found Keir’s acceptance of the BoD’s demands disconcerting ………
Fair enough but ‘disconcerting’?
Surely, it should be wholly unacceptable to allow an organisation, with undoubted ties to a foreign government, and which displays unquestionably open hostility towards many of the party’s members should they not agree with its rationale, to have such a controlling influence over a British political movement?
I find it really extraordinary that anyone could accept such a thing! For make no mistake, once they do get control of the disciplinary process they will not rest until they have silenced any and all opposition to their demands.
This whole issue could very well decimate the party membership back to the level it was at the end of New Labour’s time in office. Already many, like myself, have left or will allow their membership to lapse. You only have to look at comments here and elsewhere to see this is so.
Well that’s it, I shall end my part in this discussion here as it really is of no more interest to me since I no longer belong to the party. Nor will it ever get my vote again so long as it continues with this folly.
PW – I’m hoping (probably in vain) that once the EHRC report is published (which most of the candidates seem to have provisionally ‘agreed’ to adopt in full) it will give the new leader the excuse to diplomatically tell the BoD to f… off.
SteveH, I can’t help but agree with PW and others – ex human rights lawyer but ex Director of Public Prosecutions – wants to lead Labour but would hand over a left wing icon – a David – to the Philistine Trunt.
Such inconsistent choices come from naked ambition not principle.
Sadly Nandy and Long Bailey appear similarly lacking.
Steve, you may even be right that Starmer’s the least objectionable of the three – I don’t think so but I really don’t care – none of them are remotely acceptable to me.
There were few enough worth voting for before Corbyn and there are even fewer now.
Choosing which of three grease-stained polemonkeys should replace him is lower than I’m willing to go.
Let’s not forget that Starmer is a member of the Trilaterals, a right wing organisation, which has had members such as the war criminal Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski former National Security advisor who inserted Al Qaeda into Afghanistan ( he wrote a book called the Chessboard which was the strategy for proxy war using Islamic extremists to fight the Empires wars). Moreover, this anti democratic organisation founded by and funded by a Rockefeller, who sponsored most of the Presidents in the US since the murder of JFK, also controls the Bilderberg group, another elitist right wing, anti democratic, elitist group. So the question is, why would a so called social democratic politician espousing soothing propagandistic views of unity, be ashamed to publicly state his ties to this fascist organisation. Naturally, Starmer his stalling to cover his tracks of his secretive sponsors who will require a quid pro quo.
Whats more the point why would a knighted champion of the establishment and the monarchy wish to be the leader of the democratic socialist Labour party?
Just like the membership chose our current leader they’ll also democratically select the next one.
That SteveH presupposes that vast amounts of money which Starmer is using, does not sway votes and hence imo corrupt our Party democracy . Now I don’t know about you mate but I sure as HELL want ALL donors and their money OUT of our Party Democracy .
The candidates should be allocated a fixed small sum to cover expenses by the NEC and approved at Conference by us the membership .
The candidates stand or fall on their past performance and record NOT ON THE SIZE OF THEIR DONORS WALLETS ! ( and yes I am shouting as I am fucking furious as to what is going on here and members like you seem to think that’s fucking fine ! )
The trajectory Labour is now on internally mirrors the corrupted DMC in the USA by the day .
I’d be extremely concerned over that one mate
rob “The candidates should be allocated a fixed small sum to cover expenses by the NEC and approved at Conference by us the membership .”
I wholeheartedly 100% agree, I found it particularly reprehensible that the NEC charged all the candidates £5,000 + VAT for access to our membership data.
So therefore SteveH as we both agree that there are attributes of our NEC that desperately need democratising ( I exclude Jenny from that as I believe her heart is in the right place but she is surrounded by other NEC members who’d see her gone in a jiff if possible ) ,why the heck would you be voting for a candidate , Starmer , who does not support automatic reselection which RLB has openly done so .
Thus allowing us the membership the opportunity to make democratic changes and further democratisation , a reality ?
Your choice of leader and what you say you want are diametrically opposed .Starmer will imo deliver less democracy in our party and entrench the very aspects of power you say you find reprehensible .
Poll links and veracity ?
Full list of Starmers Donors ?? no answer , leave a messg after the tone , he’s out , and you’ll never know , just like Johnson buried no released Russian election interference report .
rob – Reference donors, it is my understanding that he has a legal responsibility to report all donations to the standards committee and could be prosecuted if he makes a false declaration. So unless you have evidence to the contrary your assertion is nothing more than a baseless accusation.
As for the assertions of RLB about party democracy I’m sorry to say that I don’t think she could deliver on her promises. Jeremy vowed to give the party’s membership democratic power and failed so why should I trust JLB to deliver when she is beholden to those two well known ‘advocates’ of greater power for the membership Lansman and McCluskey.
As for the links to the polling you’ll have to wait until this evening, at the moment I don’t have the time or the inclination to search out the information for you but in the meantime if you doubt the veracity of what I’m saying I’m sure you can find the info on Google.
Even if the reason Starmer hasn’t disclosed was the amount he spent rather than the identities of his donors – spending far more than other candidates (if he did) is nothing less than an attempt to buy the leadership.
Even Neil Kinnock gets it now. Trying to import American culture makes self-respecting Brits want to throw up.
“Well all RIGHT!” made me want to gouge my eyes out with a spoon.
British kids copying school proms makes me want to copy a school shooting…
SteveH 21/03/2020 at 8:09 am ·
Just like the membership chose our current leader they’ll also democratically select the next one.
And how many members will there be, both at the time slimy’s elected, and a year after?
Because I reckon (I’ll bet my last penny on it, in fact) that at the time slime’s ‘elected’ there’ll be less members than at peak Corbyn membership, and even less after a year, going on comments further down this thread, with people saying they’ll let their memberships expire.
So much for all your crowing about your 70% wanting a 2nd ref…Which was never put to the test because of the undemocratic action of the man you want elected as leader.
Went well at the election, just as predicted, didn’t it?
But without any trace of irony or hypocrisy, you’ll then have the brass neck to say its what the party wanted and voted for.
So much then, for your pathetic oneupmanship about you being a member and me not….Because you’re gonna turn MORE people away from the party when slime’s ‘elected’. It’ gonna be a rather exclusive and undesirable clique that you’ll be part of…Not that it isn’t now, mind.
And so once again, you’re gonna see what happens when you want your own way all the friggin’ time. The only gripe is that you’ll STILL refuse to see how fucking idiotic you’ve been.
So the establishment can regain the control it’s had for decades.
Labour party was formed about 100 years ago, and you can bet after it’s first victory, it was infiltrated. Wasn’t obvious, but was enough to flunk elections (Kinnock for example. Who went on to become very rich, very quick. Also, ermin…) Experience prior to Kinnock is poor, but I’ll bet you can find the now obvious throws through Labours history (postwar government was an anomaly).
You’re either at the table or on the menu. Sir Starmer is most definitely at the table. Corbyn was most definitely not.
NVLA – But wasn’t it Corbyn who (twice) invited Keir Starmer to join him at the table.
This table is considerably larger and more important than any government. This is the table owned by Rockefeller et al.
Is it really?
Because the toerags have de piffle…
The importance of not turning up to the meeting and deliberately avoiding the admittance of foreign money in his election campaign shows what a sleezy character we have foisted upon us by the PLP.Theres nothing democratic in a power grab by outside unknown money men.
Joseph – Do you have any evidence to support your assertion that he has hidden donations from the Parliamentary Standards Committee, if so you have a duty to report it.
He was also way, way out in front of the others on nominations from the CLPs.
SO what !
It does not make him the right choice , and if those CLPs nominations was anything like mine , we were swamped by newly joined eligible membership votes , many faces whom I never seen at ANY meetings before turning up to vote . The RWingers were well organised and won .
Does it not deeply concern you that the majority of RW bastards in the PLP are overwhelmingly pro Starmer , does that not set any little alarm bells ringing or are you happy with the RWing choice ?
But hay ho , when not if , Starmer looses the next election , we can call for his removal and to stand down in favour of a better choice , that’s assuming of course he wins this leadership election first .
Evidence , well SteveH his recorded and released donor amounts so far , if memory serves correctly , they all came to about 100K , no names given of course , but the numbers just don;t add up ,, why …. because just ONE rich barrister mate of his in London , I read , donated £120K !!
You are flogging the proverbial dead horse here mate , your “chosen one ” is letting you down and more so will let us all down in Labour , or is that the idea ?
rob – It is my understanding that newly joined members were not entitled to vote in the CLP nominations process, as for your complaint about the RW in your constituency being organised and getting their vote out what sort of admission is that about the LW’s competence in your CLP. You can’t have it both ways.
SteveH if you read my post I did say they were newly joined and eligible ,don’t know about your CLP but here as soon as COrbyn said he was going , there was a large upswing in new memberships . Entrists per chance , no doubt . All hoping for a neutered ineffective Labour party representative of , dare I use a clichéd euphemism , champagne socialists ( uggh how I hate that ) .
Next meeting , AGM , not a soul of the new brigade present , just the usual soldiers volunteering again to do the work of the offices in CLP..I draw my own conclusions on that .
rob – Although you may not have been aware of it there was a restriction on those eligible to vote
https://skwawkbox.org/2020/01/13/labours-full-guidelines-for-constituency-leadership-nomination-meetings/
“ELIGIBLE MEMBERS
As per Chapter 2; Clause II; 4 of the Labour Party Rule Book only those members who have passed their 8 week provisional period of membership at the relevant date shall have the right to attend and vote at CLP meetings. For these purposes, the relevant date agreed by the NEC is date on which the meeting is due to take place. Members who joined between 6 September and 12 December 2019 – and who are therefore subject to the NEC decision to extend the provisional membership period during the General Election – will be entitled to attend and vote, providing they have eight weeks continuous membership at the time of the meeting.
NO the LW organisation in my CLP was CRAP I am the first to admit that one , not by my doing as I WAS fucking well there mate , but there were others who in a fit of pissynes over a stupid internal dispute decided not to attend . Fucking kids , despite my and others attempts to get them there .
All the same the number of RW unseen before members NEW was immense ( by our standards ) . It bought it home to me just how much rot there is in my CLP , AND that is the very POINT Ive been making and trying to get YOU to understand .
Just because a majority of CLPs are nominating Starmer does not make him the right choice for a Socialist Labour party . His record and actions ARE the most important factors in decision making .
You may be happy with those votes he has passed in favour of . I am not .
Just listen to yourself vene in your response to RH
as you said ….
“I can’t agree wholeheartedly with SteveH’s support for Starmer “
I can’t wholeheartedly agree with my own support for Keir Starmer, I am however convinced that given what’s on offer then he’s the least worst option.
That conviction that Starmer is the least worst option is flawed and you have been presented many times by many of us on here with the evidence of his actions and yet you still refuse to see that his election will be the death of any Socialist ideals in the party.
I wish you well in the present circumstances comrade but rest assured that should Starmer win then I will at every opportunity remind you of your voting intentions should you make comments here on the inevitable purge of the Left that he will for sure enact .
Just as I will remind you of your support for a Remain vote that costs us the election and 52 seats in our heartlands
Its a shit hand dealt to us but there is no need to make an even shittier choice from that .
rob – Thanks for your courteous, considered and informative reply. I guess we’ll just have to respectfully agree to differ.
That we will SteveH , that we will .But for me , we appear to be now on 2 different sides of the isle so they say .
The Labour Party under any of the leadership contenders… is no longer a party I can fight for or vote for, especially Keir Starmer & Lisa Nandy, There are three votes in my household & we have voted for Richard Burgon for Deputy & will not vote for anyone for Leader, We are deadly serious about this, the party as it stands today is not the party I have been fighting for under Jeremy Corbyn, as soon as the contests are over we are cancelling our memberships, I have already cancelled regular donations to the party. I wish everyone on here all the very best & please keep safe.
Quite right, hilary772013. I too will just let my membership run until it lapses in September. The Labour Party is about to be recaptured by the neoliberal, corrupt, careerist, Labour Right , the very people who supported, and introduced under Blair, the privatisation by stealth of our NHS that has fatally fragmented it and left it so unfit for purpose that hundreds of thousands of unnecessary dead will result from its inability to cope with the coronavirus plague over the next three months alone.
The politically bankrupt Labour Party has no useful function in UK society now – other than to support the Tories and make hand-wringing excuses for the disastrous consequences of the last 40 years of neoliberalism – not the coronavirus plague itself, but our clearly evident inability as a society to deal with it in a coherent, pre-prepared and equipped, way. Remember , the now crumbling Italian health service was far better equipped than we are to counter the virus !
hilary772013 and jpenney, I agree. I already let my membership lapse by cancelling my standing order, not that that will bankrupt Labour.
Only one Johnson screw-up too many can get labour elected now.
The Tories can lose the next election but Labour can’t win it – and acceding to government by accident with any of these fools as leader would be a pyrrhic victory for the many at best.
Johnson can even point to the amount the Tories are spending “on saving the people” as being far more than Labour spent “on saving the bankers” and the electorate will hail them as saviours.
Even as austerity bites harder than ever, and it will – unless we’re still dying long after the rest of the world has beaten it, or Brexit bankrupts UKPLC, I think the Tories win.
Oh gawd! The sheer repetitive, limited and irrelevant assertions that seem now to be overwhelmingly the standard fare of Slwawkbox.
” one [of] the most influential of the ‘new left media’,”
I fear not. Within the gap between the majority of contributors here and the nefarious activities of the Israel Lobby at the centre of the Labour Party are the vast majority of members and supporters.
“The politically bankrupt Labour Party has no useful function in UK society now”
I also have my doubts, but as sure as eggs is eggs, the description fits the continual hyperbole of what is scribbled here – as if chips on shoulders were a sufficient basis for a political programme.
I can’t agree wholeheartedly with SteveH’s support for Starmer – but the lack of any counter-argument (as well as degrees of dissension/agreement) other than recitation of tired old exaggerated hate tropes is a sad reflection of the limited perspectives here.
Meanwhile the Tories, the Panicking Bog Roll Numpties and the Brexiteer Tory supporters walk away with the competition for the doziest brains in the nation.
RH – “I can’t agree wholeheartedly with SteveH’s support for Starmer “
I can’t wholeheartedly agree with my own support for Keir Starmer, I am however convinced that given what’s on offer then he’s the least worst option.
”I can’t wholeheartedly agree with my own support for Keir Starmer, I am however convinced that given what’s on offer then he’s the least worst option.”
Oh, just WHO are you trying to kid? Anyone taking the bother to read your ramblings would bet quite safe in the certainty that you’d vote for starmer, regardless of the quality of the opposition – unless it was mandelson, or bliar himself..
Stop insulting people’s intelligence.
Toffee – On the contrary I have continually reassessed the qualities of all the candidates throughout the leadership elections process and I will continue to do so for the next week until I cast my votes next weekend.
So far I haven’t seen anything from the other 2 candidates to change my original assessment of the leadership candidates but I am currently reconsidering my voting preferences for the deputy leadership. I will also be spending some time this week reading through the information that I have collated about the NEC candidates so that I can make an informed decision about these important appointments.
No candidate is ever perfect (not even Corbyn) so it is always a process of weighing up each candidate’s pros and cons.
Meanwhile, in the absence of having your own vote, please feel free to rant on about how other people’s voting.
I’m missing the wonderful Jeremy Corbyn as leader already – and he hasn’t even gone yet.
His boots will be unfillable by whichever candidate wins.
Yep me too and I recon that will go for many 100,000 of the membership.
What could have been ……. if only the bastards in the PLP ( now smirking with joy at a Starmer leadership prospect ) had supported the Labour Party .Lets not forget them and at the fist oportunity kick them out .
Yup, 100% agree. The membership has to be TRUER to the Corbyn Project than it has been. We need to keep a critical eye on our Labour MPs – and distrust is a very healthy attitude.
The Party is ours – and we need to guard it jealously…
An extract from a recent YouGov Poll
In fact, [only] a quarter of those with a vote would back Corbyn if he stood again (but Starmer would still win)
If Jeremy Corbyn had decided to stand for leader again he would have received 28% of voters’ first preferences. His votes come primarily from RLB supporters – she receives just 8% of first preferences when Corbyn is in the contest, compared to 27% when he is not.
Corbyn’s 28% is enough to put him in second place on first preferences, although he still trails Keir Starmer’s 40% of the vote by a wide margin.
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/inlineimage/2020-02-28/If%20Corbyn%20stood-01.png
Couple of points
1. Its a YouGov run poll , enough said !
2. Refer to point 1.
Ok looking at this more seriously
its 1323 of Labour selectorate ( whoever they are and what geographical area they were from ) ,it was completed for SKY NEWS , a great friend of the Labour Left !
The spread of 1323 included just 97 left wingers from Momentum . the vast majority of the 1323 ( 1061 ) voted REMAIN at the EU election , so hardly imo unbiased against Corbyns original intention to respect the leave vote ,
251 were affiliate members ( JLM by chance ,, who knows ?? )
248 were members prior to 2015 ( hence pre Corbyn )
, 201 were members newly joined ( 2019 post Corbyn defeat )
now do I need to go further in demolishing the bias of this so called poll SteveH
Disinformation as you said don’t help , please go find one from Survation , then I’ll listen , but all the polls in the World cannot change simple historical facts and Starmers past actions give the truth as to the character of this man.
One of many was his actions as DPP in the Julian Assange case ,, you can’t get away from facts with polls Steve , you just can’t mate .
I have no idea how many new members have joined since our GE defeat and none of us know where their loyalties lie (Corbyn got a big boost from new members in 2015) maybe they are all joining to vote for RLB. However the rest of the proportions seem to be roughly on track and consistent with the results from the likes of Survation.
I have decided already. EVEN if – as certain people here are confident – Sir Kidder Starmer DOES win, I. WILL NOT leave the Party, and will from day 1 continuously proclaim that he is a bad leader to my mind and that my loyalty to the party (NOT Sir Kidder) is assured only because it contains wonderful people like Richard Burgon, Ian Lavery and Jeremy C
Food for thought qwertboi, I will be waiting till the Sept Conf ( should it take place?) to see what happens
If , as I suspect , there it becomes increasingly clear which way the party is heading then I either become an insurgent and as Mandrake Mandelson did , work every day to undermine Starmer ,big deal as to what I could achieve but should a better replacement for Momentum happen , maybe Zionist Lansman gets the boot , or whatever I’d join that and in solidarity with the many , then there might be a chance to stop the rot .
Or just quit and join Left Unity or such and try and help build that as a viable alternative to Starmers Labour in my area . At least in that type of organisation I believe that it wouldn’t have this crap of ” broad Church” but 100% socialist and that’s it .
Be interested to know thoughts on this dilemma from anyone else on here ?
The members are the party.
The 2019 conference was a vibrant , optimistic for the future and the only hope for the future for the many. The Tolpuddle Martyrs event shows that there are many likeminded people who need political representation.The only way to change is to remain like JC.The bubble of neoliberalism has burst again-perhaps a Phoenix will arise but not quite yet.
Here a measure of Starmers team and the man , just received email from one
Carolyn Harris MP begging for ,,, yep you guessed it MORE MONEY FOR STARMER , Christ we are in the middle of this crisis and he’s still campaigning for MORE MONEY ,RBL has pulled all campaigning and has asked for all efforts to go into unity and helping protect our people , even bloody Nandy has done the same and folks still think he’s the right choice …. fuck me !
I received the email you have highlighted yesterday afternoon and I received an email from Nandy at 14:40 today requesting contributions.
Can we get permission from the NEC to invite Miko Peled to address the next Labour Conference, or would it be seen as being anti-Semitic to invite an ex-General in the Israeli Defence Force;& whose father was a signatory of the Balfour Agreement to explain why he supports the basic human rights of the Palestinian people. A test for the Labour Party, to see if the ‘establishment’ really believe in Freedom of Speech.
Catch 22 brilliant !
Steve h.
Your remain hopes & dreams are over and we’re leaving the eu. Unluckily for you, starmer cannot change that no matter how much you desperately want it to be the case.
It’s not happening, so WHY do you persist in making a case for the bliarite careerist?
You claim to be a corbynomics supporter get you continuously bang the starmer drum. You did so when he was undermining both Corbyn and the party by the six unattainable tests and bulldozing through the 2nd ref remain option despite no vote being taken to renege on the policy to respect the ref result.
You supported starmer then. Not Corbyn.
Time after time starmer has proven himself bliarite. That makes your claims to be a corbyn supporter either laughable and/or downright annoying to everybody.
Your mask slipped a long time ago.For your own sake, give up the pretence. You’re embarrassing yourself.
Or are you really so thick as to not be able to listen to and heed sensible advice?
Toffee – Why are you still obsessing over Brexit, it may have escaped your notice but we’ve already left. There are far more relevant and pressing issues to deal with for now.
As for the leadership election, in less than 2 weeks we’ll all know for certain whether the majority of the Labour Party’s membership agrees with you or myself.😉
I’m not obsessing over brexit, that’s just part of the reason the toerags are in and labour isn’t.
What’s THE major factor that turned people off labour in the first place?
Was it more money for the NHS? For Schools? For Plod?
Err, nope.
Oh, then was it the end of multinationals not paying their way? The re-nationalisation of rail & utilities? Perhaps it was scrubbing student dent?
But I very much doubt it.
So c’mon…..out with it?
Just WHAT made people shun the party in droves at the last election, given they had a quite large lead in the polls until slimeball starmer started grumbling ever louder about reneging on a party promise to respect the referendum result?
It was YOU and your precious 70% ignoring repeated warnings about imposing a 2nd ref with remain option as policy.
Not that the 2nd ref/remain idiocy ever backed up by a vote to (legitimately) pass it as policy – Oh, no siree.
(The ONE weapon thatcher had against Scargill is that there was NO VOTE to strike so it lacked legitimacy. Look how that ended…And all because there wasnt a vote on strike action which the NUM would probably have won.)
Your version of democracy insists you don’t need take a vote if someone plucks a number from their arse and insists it’s reality. And in the event a vote IS indeed taken, if it doesn’t go YOUR way, the result is invalid.
With gobshitery on such a colossal level infesting the party as was/is, then it’s small wonder people fucked off in droves; even less wonder that they’ll continue to do so when it’s back to the shite old days of tory-lite bliarism under slimeball.
What will you have to say to Hilary772013, David McNiven and jpenney (plus the 000’s of others no doubt) who have stated they’ll let their memberships expire if slime’s elected?
Good riddance? Gonna make your same idiotic claim that their voices won’t count – as you do to me?
You need to stop eating them mushrooms, lad.
Toffee – Accuracy has never been your strong point.
Not that the 2nd ref/remain idiocy ever backed up by a vote to (legitimately) pass it as policy – Oh, no siree.
Even BrexitCentral disagrees with you.
The Labour Party conference yesterday agreed a policy on Brexit that would see a future Labour government negotiating a new deal with the EU, which would then be put to the country in a referendum against the option of Remain. However, the party will go into any forthcoming general election without a position as to how it would campaign in its proposed referendum: that would be decided after any such general election by a special one-day party conference.
https://brexitcentral.com/labours-brexit-policy-text-of-the-motions-backed-by-the-party-conference/#menu
🥱
Ffs , just how much more imbecility are you capable of?
Where and when was the VOTE taken to make the 2nd ref policy? You claimed you had the backing of 70% but where’s the result of any ballot on that matter?
Oh, that’s right – there ISN’T one because YOU did NOT get to VOTE on it.
Everyone else gets it, what’s so difficult that you’re the one having difficulties comprehending that?
Toffee – Well thanks for the imbecilic rant in direct contradiction of the evidence. As you are well aware this is how all Labour Party policy is decided, at conference via a vote of elected delegates.
It isn’t my fault that yet again your nonsense has been shown up for what it is, it’s not the first time and I’ve no doubt it won’t be the the last.
Democratic logic according to steve h the mushroom eater.
Democratic vote undertaken for referendum = NOT OK… Unfair & (probably) illegal
Democratic vote taken for party leadership = ok
OMOV on reselection = ok
RW stitching up of delegate entry/representation to conference = NOT ok
OMOV on 2nd ref – NOT democratic as we’ve already got 70% favour.
Undemocratically ‘elected’ delegates voting for 2nd ref option MOST DEFINITELY OK.
You’re NOT having all ways to suit, spoilt cryarse.
That was a reply to Joseph’s question a loooong way back up the thread..
Joseph OKEEFE 21/03/2020 at 1:15 am ·
”Whats more the point why would a knighted champion of the establishment and the monarchy wish to be the leader of the democratic socialist Labour party?”
Because the toerags have de piffle.
Until a vaccination is available the only defence the country has is herd immunity,
There is no evidence any significant numbers will die over and above normal winter flu
This is all about managing scarce resources after 10 years of cheap and nasty Tory party scumbag Austetity
Doug 22/03/2020 at 10:47 am
There is no evidence any significant numbers will die over and above normal winter flu
FFS wake up – “Italian officials say a further 739 coronavirus patients have died in a single day, taking the total number to 4,825”.
During normal flu season the vulnerable are encouraged to have flu vaccine, which usually anticipates the strain most likely to emerge, this lowers the death rate. The legitimate virologist will only know the outcome in hindsight. The mathematic
Modeling used. DC, CMO ,CSO and the SAGE(sic) group failed to realise real world application(I hope) if otherwise the answer is beyond belief.
Ridge on Sunday
Jeremy Corbyn discussed his legacy as Labour leader, the party’s leadership elections and the government’s response to coronavirus.
◾ Asked if he thinks that the NHS is prepared for a crisis like this: “No I don’t… We are not prepared for it, we were not prepared for it, and surely this is a message that we have to properly fund our public services.”
◾On testing NHS staff: “The rate of testing we’re doing in this country is far too low… Even all NHS staff haven’t been tested – let alone care staff.”
◾On measures of support: “I welcome a large part of the economic package the government produced on Friday… But for the self employed it is very difficult.”
◾On the self-employed: “If they’re told to stay home, and all they can access is benefits through universal credit… They are going to go out.”
◾On what more needs to be done: “The government has got to give a message or a signal about raising statutory sick pay and about the self-employed.
◾On the scale of the investment: “The amount of money that has now been found to invest in our economy is great, it’s huge and it’s what I was condemned for asking for to deal with austerity and poverty in Britain three months ago.”
◾He added: “Of course it’s a different time, but we just have to recognise as a society that ten years of austerity has left us a bit vulnerable.”
◾On the longer-term impact of the crisis: “The principle of caring for everybody in our society is now absolutely centre stage… I think as a society we’re going to be stronger at the end of this not weaker.”
◾On parliament: “Parliament should remain in session – it’s very important that we have the chance to put questions to the government and of course there’s legislation that’s going to come up on Monday.”
◾On his legacy as Labour leader: “We’ve changed the agenda on the economy, we’ve changed the agenda on social justice, changed the agenda on green industrial revolution and environmental sustainability.”
◾On the election: “We had unprecedented attacks made against us… Obviously I am very disappointed by the election result. In the end, the 2019 election was the Brexit election.”
◾To Labour members voting for the next leader: “Think through who’s going to carry through the anti-austerity agenda but also think through the need to strengthen democracy within our party.”
◾On his work after he officially steps down on April 4th: “I am not disappearing from anywhere.”
◾Asked if he has a shadow cabinet role in mind, he said only:”I have always spent my life trying to deal with issues of human rights and justice around the world and that is something, whether I have a position is not important.”
https://labourlist.org/2020/03/sunday-shows-we-are-not-prepared-for-coronavirus-says-corbyn/
‘I have always spent my life trying to deal with issues of human rights and justice around the world…’ says Starmer. Yet the reality is he voted for the austerity, making the poor pay for the follies of the rich. He also wants the poor who fiddle the benefits to be sentenced to ten years in gaol. while saying nothing about the bankers and thieves who screwed the economy for billions in the first place and were bailed out with impunity. He also refused to allow Sweden to drop their case against Assange even though they had no evidence for any crime so the US could keep in the embassy ready for when they raided the embassy and dragged him and imprisoned him, just for telling the truth about US war crimes. He’s quite happy for Assange to be extradited. If you’ve followed Craig Murray’s reporting on the court case, you would know just how corrupt the system is against him, and how unfair his trial here is. He’s not even allowed out of the high-security box he’s in to hear what’s being said at his trial – he can’t hear the proceedings very well and he’s not being allowed to hear them. It’s a sham, but Starmer is happy with the process. Starmer doesn’t know what human rights are. If he becomes leader it’s all over for the left and those who believe in justice, fairness, social justice and a moral foreign policy. He supports Israel committing all their crimes and says nothing about the US and UK helping the Saudis to bomb the hell out of Yemen so they can reinstall a puppet dictator. And in these times of emergency he says nothing about the US refusing to lift the illegal sanctions on Iran, Syria, Venezuela and others so they can buy the medicines and equipment they need which is leading to far more deaths especially in Iran. God help us if he becomes leader. Game over for those who want real change for possibly several decades.
Such a course of action that you intend is exactly what they are hoping for.
😕?