Analysis Breaking Exclusive

Labour members pass motion demanding party stop rigging candidate selections

Motion condemns Starmer party’s attack on democracy

‘Democracy’ in Labour – often rigged before members even start to vote

Members of a Labour front-bencher’s local party passed a motion last week condemning the regime’s shameless rigging of party democracy and demanding to be allowed to select their candidates without interference.

Hornsey and Wood Green members voted strongly for the following emergency motion:

Selection of Candidates

HWG CLP notes the Labour Party’s assertion that it is a ‘democratic socialist party’ (Clause IV). HWG CLP further notes that Keir Starmer stated in February 2020:

‘The selections for Labour candidates needs to be more democratic, and we should end NEC impositions of candidates. Local party members should select their candidates for every election.’

HWG CLP agrees with this statement, and strongly believes that it should be the democratic right of constituency members to choose their prospective candidates and regrets that this is not being acted upon.

Keir Starmer’s statement on 15th February 2023 regarding Islington North [where Starmer is blocking former leader Jeremy Corbyn from standing as a Labour candidate], the imposition of shortlists in Wakefield, Bolton North East, and other constituencies, and the suspension or expulsion of very good potential candidates prior to selection processes commencing are all contrary to this democratic principle.

HWG CLP calls on the NEC to confirm that the selection of candidates is the democratic right of local Labour Party members and must be upheld. In Solidarity.

The motion, no doubt cautiously worded because of the regime’s readiness to punish members for speaking out against its misdeeds, triggered ludicrous responses from a few right-wingers – including the husband of one key Starmer adviser, who tried to argue that it was ‘anti-democratic’ for the ‘CLP’ to follow its own standing orders and hold a vote on whether the motion was in order before a vote on the motion itself was held.

Starmer’s lackeys have routinely been put in direct charge of selection processes in areas considered to be likely to select a candidate who isn’t a Starmer clone – and in many cases have rigged longlists to exclude the candidates local members prefer, leaving them with no choice but to choose which of the approved drones will stand for election.

Keir Starmer expects the country to believe that he will push power away from himself and out to the regions – but he won’t even allow Labour members to exercise the democracy to which the party’s rules entitle them.

SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.

If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.


  1. But under the previous administration didn’t Corbyn’s team, much to the consternation of many CLPs, manipulate the selection process to enable them to impose candidates on CLPs against their will.

    1. But…

      As usual, you’re first up and spouting the same old shite, again, mister one-member-one-vote.

      The ONLY question of democracy during Corbyn’s tenure that you SHOULD be complaining about – or at least putting under scrutiny – is the one of you NOT getting YOUR vote on the second referendum.

      …Oh, and how that reached the conclusion it did, i.e. the questionable selection of centrist/right wing delegates to conference, and who DID get a vote..

      1. is anything that I have said above untrue?

        It hasn’t been corroborated with any firm evidence. Steve hilling has asked you for it.

        Are the issues you were asked about going to remain unaddressed again, hmmm, mister omov?

      2. Toffee, I’ve been researching obsessional behaviour. I am lucky enough to be a member elected trustee of a local mental health charity. We have a brilliant library and I have been given a ticket to the NHS mental health units library. I have also spoken to some experts. I had no idea how serious this condition is. A consultant suggested that a long stay in a relaxing, enriching environment together with heavy duty electric therapy and high doses of anti psychotic tranquillisers, forced sedation and deep reprogramming could be beneficial. He added that a Caribbean Island might do the trick although he did say that nothing in that field of treatment is always successful. Empathy and TLC helps. X

    2. I’m sure they probably did. That’d be why Starmer promised more democratic selection, hence the quote from him in the motion (the second paragraph):

      ‘The selections for Labour candidates needs to be more democratic, and we should end NEC impositions of candidates. Local party members should select their candidates for every election.’

      ‘More democratic’ selections were promised in that statement, not less democratic, not as democratic as they were under Corbyn. More democratic. And that’s a promise that hasn’t been delivered.

      The whataboutery regarding the Corbyn regime is disingenuous, and irrelevant to the motion – we were promised more democracy, and the motion lists where people haven’t had that opportunity. The previous administration, flawed or not, undemocratic or not, doesn’t alter the fact that Starmer hasn’t delivered the promise that ‘local party members should select their candidates for every election.’

      Sorry – a bit of a long reply.

      1. SteveH – I usually fundamentally disagree with what you say, but you appear to be no fool & will contest your corner admirably but………….why do support a leader who has broken every promise he has ever made and seeks to maintain control by preventing debate and expelling anyone who disagrees with him? There is an ‘F’ word used to describe any poltical system based on authoritarian control which is far from Voltaire’s definition of a healthy democracy. No debate and no questions, how can anyone with any integrity and intelligence accept that they must always do as they are told. Personally, I like to make up my own mind and not be told what I must believe or leave the Party.
        You know as well as anyone that Labour’s 20 point lead in the opinion polls must be seen in the context of the ‘cost of living’ crisis and anyone will do as long as they’re not Tory (by name), especially when you have the support of that ‘Purveyor of Truth’, Rupert Murdoch.

      2. The clue is the date – September 2019 when chaos reigned not just
        for Labour but throughout the country.

        I remember demonstrating against Johnsons illegal prorogation of
        Parliament at the end of August 2019. This prorogation was later
        declared illegal and Johnson accused of lying to the monarch. The
        object of this was to get Brexit passed without any deal
        whatsoever. Any MP of conscience was (1) concerned and
        (2) exhausted at the shenanigans and trying to prevent Johnson
        making a mess of things .. Several local candidates looked hollow
        eyed during that Autumn – not all sitting MPs sit on their butts
        while campaigning is going on – there were many who went out
        during the cold rainy evenings canvassing during the months leading
        to the Election as were the local activists .. including myself.

        The Labour Party was split – firstly because of the lies about Corbyn’s
        antisemitism*** and secondly because of the idiot wheeze of having a
        second referendum and the confused way it was presented. Starmer
        was responsible for some of this in his stupid and inept way.

        Corbyn was always in favour of local parties making a choice of candidate
        and NOT the NEC. Before the 2017 GE when there was very little time to
        select candidates there was a vote by the NEC as to the best and speediest
        way to chose candidates. Corbyn wanted the NEC to make a short list – and
        the local party to make the final choice but instead the NEC chose the
        candidate by reading through the applications of all possible candidates
        and chosing one. This is the way the unfortunate Jared O’Mara was chosen –
        end not the lie that he had been personally picked by Corbyn.
        I have just read a post disagreeing with this and they are correct probably
        EXCEPT in the case of the 2017 GE. There was lot of info here
        about this at the time O’Mara was gaoled ..

        I hope that answers the question for you Steveh

        *** Has anyone seen the recent JVL post about the antisemitic attack
        on Jewish members of Corbyn’s Constituency who death threats were issued?
        Although there was enough evidence to discover who it was – no
        conclusion was reached and the police couldn’t make headway either ..
        Starmer evidently thinks antisemitism important only when it suits his

  2. Off topic;

    Britain’s Economic Model Is Crumbling, but Its Politicians Don’t Want to Face Reality by Daniel Finn in Jacobin

    Thatcherism and austerity have had a devastating impact on British society, with stagnant wages and declining life expectancy. There’s a crying need for radical change, but no mainstream political force is offering to deliver it.

    The piece largely exposes both Mandleson and Watson for the devious scumbags they both are, and how they manipulated Brexit for their own ends with the People’s Vote.

      1. Thanks PW. A good read. Wasn’t familiar with the website but have bookmarked the home page. Looks like there’s a few more interesting articles on there 👍.

  3. Contrary to SteveH’s accusation, the NEC under the dearly-departed Jeremy Corbyn NEVER openly enforced a PPC candidate on a CLP. In every single case, even when the NEC drew up a ‘long-list’ of PPC candidates (to shorten the time required), the selection of the ultimate PPC was – in every case -the choice of the CLP alone

    So, under Corbyn the NEC co-operated with, and never went against, the democratic practices of the party.

    A special arrangement was imposed in Oct 2019 to allow the NEC to facilitate a faster selection.

    1. You know as well as I do, Q, that if the wee beaut had the evidence of selection rigging/impositions, it’d have been plastered about this thread like shit in a wind tunnel within that very first post, and most likely across the entire thread.

      He hasn’t, and it wasn’t.

      If he can’t get away with outright lies, he obfuscates; when that too, fails, he tries to cover his arse with pathetic excuses such as that he was: ‘Merely making the point that….’

      And when that one’s been instantly dismissed, he hides.

    2. qwertboi – Could you explain how the process that you have described above differs from the current one.

      1. Well, essentially the ‘new’ Oct ’19 process (outlined here) still applies and lends itself to be misused and abused by bad (antidemocratic) leadership and NEC. If swawky’s exclusive disclosure is true, then surely the members motion would suggest that the likes of Akehurst on the NEC and Sir Keior might be abusiing the formerly faultless system?

  4. They won’t listen. Your voice is irrelevant. They only want you for one day.

    Anyone who votes for labour deserves all they get.

    Slightly off topic. Anyone in contact with Joseph? It’s been a while

    1. Was thinking about Joseph meself the other day, with Bolton’s ground getting a name change to The toughsheet stadium after their new sponsors.

      Been wanting to rib him about that 😋

      Hope he’s alright. Good arl’ stick is Joseph 👍😉

      1. Probably a toilet paper company given how things are going.

        Stay safe Toffee

      1. Yer, been a while since either popped up. Like Joseph, I hope both are OK.

        And a special mention for arld McNiven; refractory sod he could be – and usually was.

        But someone I’d gladly get the ale in for, despite any previous altercations..👍

  5. I see that Starmer still refuses to do his job.

    He even agrees with the Conservatives now before he knows what they propose to do!

    Yesterday’s Guardian reports:

    “Labour said it would support the government whatever it decided about fighter jets. The party leader, Keir Starmer, said: “We are not going to politically divide on this. We will support the government in the decision it takes.”

    (“UK will not send Typhoon Jets to Ukraine says Wallace” by Dan Sabbagh and Aletha Adu.

    Still, Jonathan Freedland praises him for attacking the Labour Party and then states:

    “…Except Starmer can also cite his record at the Crown Prosecution Service.”

    I am not at all sure that that would be a good idea.

    1. Anyone voting Labour in a GE is potentially supporting another Iraq war.

      Be in no doubt Starmer will stand ‘shoulder to shoulder’ with any US administration. And he won’t give a flyin’ fcuk what members, Labour voters, or the wider electorate think.

      1. Pledges…

        If say, he joins a war against Iran, that will almost certainly be an illegal war with no UN mandate…

        4. Promote peace and human rights

        No more illegal wars. Introduce a Prevention of Military Intervention Act and put human rights at the heart of foreign policy. Review all UK arms sales and make us a force for international peace and justice.

        Like abolishing the unelected HoL, he can’t do it anymore, because of err,.wait for it … Covid?!

        It makes no sense why Covid prevents the implementation of pledges that are fiscally neutral.

      2. This is much, much more than a war with Iraq. From elsewhere on the web;

        “German author and politician Christoph Horstel says Russia has the legal right to invade Germany in self-defense, but Moscow won’t because it is not aggressive.

        “It’s very clear we’re made to lose here,” Hörstel, who is based in Berlin, Germany, said on Tuesday while speaking on Press TV’s “SPOTLIGHT” program.

        “I said in the past that Germany is a guaranteed loser in the next war against Russia,” he added.

        “And be careful about this. We signed the Two Plus Four Treaty. We had the NATO-Russia act. And we violated both of them very thoroughly. Russia would have the legal right to invade Germany on a very short red telephone notice to Washington, Paris and London, saying, ‘Look, guys, we’re coming, that’s self-defense. That’s allowed,’” he stated.

        On September 12, 1990, the foreign ministers of the Federal Republic of Germany, the German Democratic Republic, France, Russia, the UK and the US signed the Two Plus Four Treaty that sealed the foreign policy aspects of reunification.

        “So this is the situation here. Russia is not coming because they are not aggressive. The aggression sits solely and exclusively with Washington. And the Europeans know it but they are so corrupt; they’re more afraid of their Washingtonian leaders than their own voters and populations. That’s the dirty fact here,” he lamented.”

        Add in fuel and food…

        Good to see many in labour trying to continue this madness. Gunships now…

      3. Andy, heavens above. He would go to war with Iran if he was told to. That would not be the same as Iraq, Libya 🇱🇾 or Afghanistan.

  6. Well this is interesting.
    William Burns (CIA Director) met Sergey Naryshkin (FIS director) in November 2022 – the only meeting of senior government officials from the US and Russia in the past 12 months.
    He (Burns) has now commented on the meeting, during which he said that Naryshkin was “insolent”.
    Now doesn’t that tell us a lot about how the US, or at least Burns, views international relations?
    It is a clear demonstration of a view which places the US as the senior party and the others as the ones who have to take the instructions.
    I admit that I am surprised by such language. Burns was US ambassador in Moscow in an earlier incarnation. That should have meant that he was a diplomat. Shame that he hasn’t mastered diplomacy.

    1. Meanwhile, it’s on its way back…

      The government is setting up a job centre league table and will give £250 bonuses to staff who get the most people into work.

      It is part of a pilot scheme in 60 job centres aiming to get more Universal Credit claimants into employment.

      The government said it is right to reward staff when they help people secure work.

      But the PCS union said the scheme was “gimmicky” and would not help address the “poverty pay” of job centre staff.

      According to an internal Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) document seen by the BBC, officials want to test whether financial incentives for job centre teams “drive better outcomes”.

      Seem to remember the pcs complaining that their £25 m&s vouchers (for sanctioning people) were: “A small carrot” now it’s the poverty pay of jobcentre staff – who drive people into abject penury on behalf of the toerags.

      But let’s go back to the article…

      Staff will be set targets, or what the document calls “into work stretch aspirations”.

      Staff at the top performing job centres each month will receive £250. The next best performing staff will get £125 each.

      The pilot will also make it compulsory for Universal Credit claimants who have been on the benefit for thirteen weeks, to visit a job centre every weekday for a fortnight for “intensive support”. Failure to attend could lead to sanctions.

      “Failure to attend”…Covers a myriad of sins, that one.

      Failure to attend….Being 40 seconds late.

      Failure to attend…Having not received any instruction via post or email.

      …And this will definitely be their miserable get out clause excuse when the jcp capos aren’t hitting their targets, or when little Johnny needs new school shoes.

      Again, back to the article….

      The union’s DWP Group President, Martin Cavanagh, said the pilot would increase the likelihood of claimants being sanctioned due to missed appointments.

      He said the government was ”hell-bent on making it more difficult for people to claim benefits” and warned the pilot would increase the risk of poverty for jobseekers who fell foul of it.

      “Asking more customers to travel more often into job centres does nothing to help our staff or their workloads,” he added.

      Ah! At last! An acknowledgement of the difficulties of claimants being forced to jump through more hoops than a bloody circus act to get their pittance…..Quickly followed by a complaint about JCP/DWP staff’s workloads.

      This is NO different than the disastrous and totally inept “workfare” programme. It will do ZERO to ‘help’ people back onto work, and like the workfare programme, will end up being LESS feasible and financially viable than having done nothing at all and left the claimant to find work through their own endeavours.

      But still….Claimant = parasite who MUST be punished.

      As long as their arses face the ground, they’ll NEVER get it right.

      1. Some questions occur;

        – how much it would cost each individual claimant on Universal Credit to attend these 10 sessions over two weeks?

        – what proportion of their income – increasingly squeezed via eye watering rent, fuel and food increases – does this represent?

        – can they actually afford to do this?

        – will they be have to go without food or heating or fail to pay bills to afford these imposed transport costs?

        – would it not be more cost effective for every single claimant to simply camp out in the job centers for the entire fortnight rather than to travel every day? It would save on on heating and energy as well as transport costs.

        – given the number of people actually in employment who are in receipt of Universal Credit will they be financially reimbursed for their lost wages incurred for having to take two weeks off work to attend these sessions?

        – what if they lose their jobs as a result?

        – who will do their jobs whilst they are attending these sessions?

        – will the employers be compensated (with public money of course)?

        – will that compensation, if given, come from the money to be ‘saved’ or will there be a separate pot?

        – will the training in these sessions attended by people employed who are in receipt of Universal Credit include training on how to take industrial action to get a wage which makes it worth their while going to work to earn a living which their wage levels are clearly not enabling them to do so?

        – has Saint Keir raised similar critical questions to those posed above and proposed something more effective or is he running with a policy position of support for this? (Answers to this question should be fast forwarded to the ‘Caribbean’/Hermitage Berkshire).

      2. Shouldn’t bother anyone. Labour is not the party for claimants.

    2. Goldbach, sadly there are very few diplomats left. None of those that are are in NATO, EU. Bullying, sanctions (starvation) and threats should not be part of a diplomats arsenal.

  7. Does anyone here live in London?
    I have just heard that the Stop the War meeting at the Bolivar Hall yesterday included, amongst the speakers, Clare Daly. Wish I could have been there to hear her, someone who’s not afraid to say it like it is.

    1. Meanwhile, petition in Germany to stop sending weapons is nearing 700,000 signatories.

      1. The European Council on Foreign Relations (this is a “think tank” not an EU organisation) has published the results of a survey seeking people’s views on Russia. I have seen the chart on John Helmer’s website but can’t find the original yet.
        The percentages of people surveyed who regarded Russia as an “adversary with which we are in conflict” were:
        GB 65% [does not include NI, and Scottish opinion is under represented]
        US. 55%
        EU9. 54%
        Turkiye 8%
        China. 5%
        India. 4%
        You will notice the term EU9. This is because only 9 EU states were included in the survey, including Poland, Estonia and Romania and excluding France, Germany, Italy, Portugal and Spain, where other data seem to indicate that a lower %age would be more likely to agree.
        Despite the incessant beating of the war drums, there appears to be a surprising level of desire for peace. We must hope.

    2. Contrast this event with twenty years ago.

      Not to mention Clare Daly with the self-referenced Socialist Campaign Group of Labour MP’s who have fell into line with The Official Narrative:

      “unlike previous demonstrations over the two decades since, STWC was unable to enlist the support of a single prominent “left” figure in the Labour Party or trade union bureaucracy to speak from the stage, such has been the lurch to the right of these layers. Many of Labour’s Socialist Campaign Group (SCG), a rump of around 30 MPs, openly support the shovelling of military weapons by the NATO powers to Kiev to fight the war against Russia to the last Ukrainian soldier.

      Among these are former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn’s shadow chancellor John McDonnell; and other Corbyn supporting Labour MPs; Nadia Whittome; Clive Lewis; Rachael Maskell; Lloyd Russell-Moyle and Ian Lavery. These are supporters of the Ukraine Solidarity Campaign, which has the backing of four senior union leaders: Gary Smith, GMB General Secretary; Barbara Plant, GMB President; Mick Whelan, ASLEF General Secretary and Chris Kitchen, National Union of Mineworkers General Secretary.

      The silence of other leading Corbynites on the war such as SCG secretary Richard Burgon in the face of the rabid warmongering Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer who boasts that Labour is the “party of NATO” is politically criminal.

      McDonnell backed a statement by the Ukraine Solidarity Campaign last week which declared, “A democratic, lasting peace for the peoples of Ukraine and Russia requires the defeat of Russia’s brutal imperialism” and demands “the gifting to Ukraine of all the surplus UK military equipment due to be replaced, especially the 79 Challenger tanks, 170 Scimitar reconnaissance vehicles, all Warrior infantry fighting vehicles, Typhoon fighter aircraft”.”

      1. Dave, Retirement,fishing and gardening would be considered hard work by the distinguished GS of the NUM.

  8. I wondered what the neocons’ next move would be.
    Looks like they’re having a go at starting a “colour revolution” in Mexico.
    Let’s see how it pans out.

  9. I had to look up what a ‘colour revolution’ is. Wiki told me that
    Colour revolution (sometimes coloured revolution)[1] is a term used since around 2004 by worldwide media to describe various anti-regime protest movements and accompanying (attempted or successful) changes of government that took place in post-Soviet Eurasia during the early 21st century—namely countries of the former Soviet Union, and the former Yugoslavia.[2] The term has also been more widely applied to several other revolutions elsewhere, including in the Middle East, the Asia-Pacific region, and South America, dating from the late 1980s to the 2020s….”

    gb’s insight (above) is spot on: Some colour revolutions are started by the US in a misguided and arrogant effort to protect itself and its power base (its unipolar ‘authority’!

    1. Yugoslavia endured 28 days and nights of NATO aerial bombardment. Hardly the same as using underhanded methods usually associated with colour revolutions. There are exceptions and all dirty measures are accepted. Pick of the pops, ones that are climbing the charts, Haiti, The Soloman Islands, Thailand, Taiwan and always there Venezuela 🇻🇪 and Cuba 🇨🇺. Keep your eyes out for a couple of outsiders in Eastern Europe. Pakistan done deal or so Bucky and the boys think. Let’s put Franco Africa to one side as Mali 🇲🇱 has done, but lots of independently minded nations with valuable resources. Who knows, Nuland, Blinken?

  10. Guardian : Starmer says he would put increasing growth ahead of raising taxes as means of funding public services.

    And if his special sauce ,magic ‘growth’ beans don’t have the desired outcome, then what, more austerity?

    Quacks like a Tory, walks like a Tory, has policies and associates with Tories… what is he?

    Why don’t he and Reeves just go join the Tories, so Britain can have something resembling a democracy, you know, with an actual choice in a general election?

      1. Starmer whipped Labour MPs to vote for Johnson’s hard Brexit deal, he didn’t need to they had an 80 seat majority – he has zero credibility.

        Btw, You aren’t the same Steve H, who through some twisted logic, blames Corbyn for Brexit are you? The one that ignores it was Cameron and the Tories long obsession to get the UK out of the EU, not Labour’s?

      2. Andy – I’m guessing there is a reason why you neglected to mention that the only other alternative on offer besides Boris’s Deal was a No Deal Brexit and that Keir had clearly stated that he would do all he could to stop a No Deal Brexit and the resulting chaos and damage that would have caused. Who apart from the Tories would have gained from Labour voting for No Deal.

      3. If Corbyn had even hinted at supporting the crappy ‘oven ready’ deal Johnson was pushing, the pro-EU PLP would have been screaming at him for selling out.

        Of course Starmer could have rejected Johnson ‘s deal as a bad one. By stating they want to keep their options open on possibly renegotiating single market access and customs union, or joining EEA EFTA.

        By voting for Johnson’s deal and saying the subject is forever closed, like some dictator, he’s screwed Labour needlessly. Why can’t you accept this?

      4. Starmer and the PLP, Change UK , Lib Dems etc had the option to hold out and force the Tories to remove Johnson. There were enough Tory MPs +Labour + SNP who wanted a softer Brexit to get one if they really wanted that.

        The truth is, many MPs were more bothered about preventing Corbyn getting any credit than they were about preventing Brexit.

        The rest of the EU must think the UK deserves this mess due to the crappy, selfish politicians it has.

      5. Andy – You appear have confused your time-lines a little, the situation you have describe above was prior to the 19GE when Johnson didn’t even have an overall majority and when Corbyn was leader. But then Corbyn capitulated and agreed to a general election and lost 60 seats. The situation you have described above no longer existed and the Tories could do more or less anything they liked with an almost unassailable majority of 80.

      6. Corbyn agreed to a general election? What are you talking about?

        The SNP, Change UK (independent group) and Swinson’s Lib Dems stated they would vote for Johnson’s December general election.

        LABOUR WERE GOING TO BE OUTVOTED BY THAT LOT, so Corbyn had NO CHOICE BUT TO AGREE, otherwise it’d look like were running scared and they’d be FORCED TO THE POLLS ANYWAY.

        THAT IS FACTUALLY WHAT HAPPENED. I think you need to get the historical facts straight. Jeez SteveH, I thought you were politically informed?

  11. Lol , even Bilderberger, Davos WEF, centre-right man Ed Balls in laying into Starmer and his stupid mission statements as too vague and too wishy-washy to inspire the electorate.

    I really hope this version of Nu New Labour gets K.O’ed thru the voter apathy this crappy offer so richly deserves.

    Anyone voting for this flim-flam reheated Blairite BS, is a dolt.

    Twitter’s ‘Cold War Steve’ aka Christopher Spencer, should concentrate as much on Starmer’s hideous party of rougues.

      1. To adapt the words of Chris Hedges for the UK.

        The UK political system, as many Corbyn supporters discovered, is immune to reform. The only effective resistance will be achieved through acts of sustained mass civil disobedience eg. boycotting general elections.

        The Labour party, like the Conservative party, have no intention of halting the assault on our civil liberties, the expansion of imperial wars, the coddling of the City of London, and the impoverishment of workers. As long as the Labour party and Conservatives remain in power we are doomed.

      2. Andy – Or to put it more succinctly, you are desperately trying to come to terms with being a member of an ever shrinking political minority who nobody is listening to.
        You are living in La-La-Land, sustained mass civil disobedience? Unless you can offer the electorate a credible alternative you are very unlikely to attract anyone let alone the masses to your cause.
        As for boycotting elections, isn’t that simply an admission of defeat, the last refuge of those who already know they have lost the argument and more to the point will anybody notice.

      3. You honestly think what Starmer is doing is popular because of anti-Tory opinion polls?

        If a large chunk of the 12.8 million and 10.2 million who voted for Corbyn’s programme in 2017, and 2019 withhold their support, then the Labour HQ RW thickheads will get the message.

        Ideally I’d like Corbyn to wake up stopping begging to these creeps and realise Labour want nothing to do with him, retire ,and become the President of a PJP party, that runs against RW members of the PLP.

      4. Andy – As I said above you are living in La-La-Land, you literally have nothing to offer the electorate. We both know that isn’t going to happen and even if it did all it would achieve is another Conservative win

      5. From your link:

        “I’m still struck by how many children leave school without the skills they are actually going to need for the jobs they are likely to be doing

        Really, keef?

        I’m (dumb)struck by how many kids are leaving school as hungry as they started it that day; in no small way thanks to you and your shithousery.

        I wonder if keef the Messiah is gonna provide a couple of oafs to go with those five missions…And yes, I’m aware it’s five loaves and two fishes but this is keef were talking about.

      6. Toffee – Did you see what happened to The Schools Bill and did you see what happened to the latest attempt to pass a separate School Meals Bill. Is there a reason that given your keen interest in this you haven’t even mentioned the lead that Sadiq Khan has taken on this.

  12. STeveH – Corbyn had no option of not agreeing with
    the date of the 2019 Election because he did not
    have the majority in Parliament for anything else.

    If the LibDems had supported Corbyn – there could have
    been a vote of no confidence leading to a “minority” Govt with
    Corbyn leading it during the early part of that year. However they
    would only agree that there should be such a Govt if someone else led it.
    A new Govt taking over not only has to have a prospective Leader – they also need a
    “skeleton” Cabinet with major posts filled such as Chancellor, Home
    Secretary, Foreign secretary ..

    1. HolbyFanMw

      SteveH must be terribly ill-informed about UK politics?

      As you say ,Corbyn literally had no choice in the matter once Swinson’s Lib Dems and the SNP said they would vote FOR Johnson’s December election. If Corbyn had said no – he and Labour would have been forced to the polls regardless. All voting against would have done is making them look like they were running scared.

  13. No doubt revisionist political historian, SteveH, also believes Luciana Berger was forced out by ‘abuse,’ and her imminent deselection by her CLP had nothing to do with her decision.

    Sadly there are lots as gullible as SteveH who believe Starmer’s rubbish.

      1. A fellow remainer? A perpetual shrieking nuisance that participated in overt anti-corbyn shithousery with all its untruths, which only assisted in perpetuating the myth of antisemitism, amongst all the other shithousery which ultimately got keef to the top of the greasy hair…sorry, poll?

        And you can’t stand the woman ?

        Why’s that then? 🤔

  14. Toffee – Did you see what happened to The Schools Bill and did you see what happened to the latest attempt to pass a separate School Meals Bill

    Someone’s forgotten who and what keef ORDERED the lords to ABSTAIN on.

    Is there a reason you fail to mention that?

    But do go on….

    Is there a reason that given your keen interest in this you haven’t even mentioned the lead that Sadiq Khan has
    taken on this.

    Did that over a week ago soft shite.

    The Toffee20/02/2023 AT 9:01 AM
    Meanwhile, I wonder if sadiq khan will be “proscribed” or suspended for “making policies on the fly”

    Giving schoolkids a bite to eat? How very dare he…

    Now shut the fuck up. Nonce case.

    1. Toffee – My apologies, I had obviously missed your valuable contribution. 😏

      As I pointed out at the time when the Tory’s ‘School Bill’ was in the House of Lords, it was reported in the media that Labour had abstained in The Lords on the LibDem’s motion because they had their own plans which they would have presented when the ‘Schools Bill’ reached the House of Commons. However in the meantime the Tories have announced that they have scrapped their ‘Schools Bill’.
      The Tories have used parliamentary procedures to crush a subsequent attempt to get a stand-alone ‘School Meals Bill’ passed. (did you post any comments when this happened?)

      Taking into consideration that
      ▪ the Tories have already given up on their ‘Schools Bill’ and dumped it,
      ▪ Labour have very limited parliamentary time available to them,
      ▪ what actually happened to the last attempt to get a stand alone ‘School Meals Bill’ through parliament,
      ▪ the Tories currently have a very substantial majority of 70+,
      ▪ in about 18mths Labour will probably be in power and able to enact any legislation they want to.
      what would you suggest that the Labour Party should do right now about free school meals that would result in a positive outcome?

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: