Wirral Cllrs Yvonne Nolan and Sue Mahoney deselected by Labour – after demonstrating against deselection of Nolan’s carer for not attending enough out-of-ward door-knocking sessions. Nolan and her carer have been replaced by imposed right-wingers
The deputy leader of Wirral Council, Rock Ferry councillor Yvonne Nolan, will stand against Labour as an independent after the party deselected her for protesting against the deselection of her partner and carer, Cllr Chris Davies, because the party decided his caring responsibilities should not prevent him attending high numbers of campaigning sessions in other wards. Cllr Nolan needs a wheelchair after suffering a stroke shortly after her election in 2019.
After deselecting Davies, the party imposed Tony Murphy on the branch party as the new candidate. Murphy is the husband of Sheila Murphy, the right-winger imposed on the Liverpool party as ‘Liverpool officer’ despite campaigning for the discredited and now-defunct ‘Funny Tinge party’ of Tory and right-wing Labour defectors, Change UK.
Nolan and Birkenhead Labour candidate Sue Mahoney protested against the party’s discrimination against disabled people and their carers – and were then interrogated by party functionaries who claimed they, rather than Labour’s discrimination, had brought the party into disrepute.
They were then told that they had been deselected as candidates, despite Nolan’s strong record as deputy and acting leader and the short time remaining until polling day – and the party immediately parachuted the right-wing CEO of the local Chamber of Commerce in as her replacement. She has announced today that she will stand as an independent.
Cllr Davies told Skwawkbox:
This stinks. Not only have they discriminated against a disabled person and her carer – protected categories under equalities law – by not taking into account the reasonableness of their demands for additional campaigning, but they’ve done so in order to replace the deputy council leader with a business figure, who I’m sure won’t take long to set eyes on the council leadership.
Despite the stroke, Yvonne ran the council for a long time and this is how they thank her. But there are so many ex-members here that are disgusted with how the party is behaving that there’ll be lots of people out knocking on doors for her between now and the vote.
Skwawkbox understands that ‘Liverpool officer’ Sheila Murphy has been campaigning in Wirral, despite not doing so being a condition of her readmittance into the party because of her attacks on Wirral Labour members shortly before leaving to support ‘Tinge‘.
The treatment of Yvonne Nolan is yet another episode in the appalling discriminatory and anti-democratic record of the Labour party under Keir Starmer, including seizing control of selections in various places including Liverpool, just across the Mersey from Wirral.
Those interested in campaigning for Cllr Nolan can find her contact information here.
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.
Starmers ratings are are starting to going dawn things can only get better
Really, have you seen the latest polls?
https://twitter.com/DeltapollUK?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
264
Doug – Here are some more numbers that you can add to your collection.
Starmer’ personal polling :
Satisfied 31%
Dissatisfied 51%
I can cherry-pick polls, as well.
26
George – Yes you can but the big difference is that unlike you and many others on these pages I don’t need to cherry-pick individual polls or even individual questions from polls. Instead of cherry picking I prefer to point to charts like the one below that give a much clearer picture over a period of time
https://mcusercontent.com/ceb437017cd651e33813473af/images/da5d6c6a-1896-3f97-eb30-009401ff844b.png
George – Or I can post links to lists of of polls that show consistent trends and a consistent Labour lead over a long period.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#2023
Some of us don’t need to desperately cling onto cherry picked results.
And your response has got precisely what to do with the substantive arguments put to you steveH?
Once again you have nothing other than playing the man rather than the ball.
And what is really tragic, pathetic and pitiable, is that you are incapable of realising how lame and stupid your total absence of self-awareness is making you look.
It does nothing for your case or argument. It simply shows you up as an empty vessel lashing out like a spiteful child – projecting your own behaviour onto anyone and everyone because they’ve shown you up for what you are are.
Do you seriously think that you are persuading anyone of anything with this one dimensional approach?
The kindest thing anyone here could do for you steveH is to phone the Samaritans on your behalf.
Oh dear!
Stand by your beds, Quasimodo’s on his way through, again…….
THE POLLS! THE POLLS!
…..brandishing opinion polls like they were the Delphic Oracle; the Tablets of Stone from Mount Sinai; and a miricle cure for piles rolled into one.
The thing about opinion polls is that they register at a point in time or points within a specified time period what people BELIEVE and how they FEEL about something as a way of attempting to predict in what way they may or may likely act in a given scenario.
Unlike those driven by partisan feelings public opinion analysts and professional polling organizations take a more rational approach and normally are very careful to point out that their findings apply only at the time the questions were asked and that the results do not predict the outcome of elections.
This is because, (a) as Dirty Harry Callahan observed ‘opinion’s are like arseholes, everyone’s got one’ and (b) opinions, at least in the real world, change as a result of a whole plethora of variable factors
In viewing the results of any public opinion poll(s), it’s useful to ask some pertinent questions such as:
1. Who Was Interviewed? The accuracy of any poll depends on the degree to which the characteristics of the people being interviewed is really similar to those of the group they are supposed to represent.
2. Under What Conditions Were The Interviews Conducted? Unclear, biased, or emotionally charged questions will produce misleading answers and weaken the accuracy of the results of a poll.
eg: How do you feel about candidate X? or, You are planning to vote for candidate Y, are you not? would be suspect.
Or, if those polled are asked to choose from a given set of responses in answering a question, there must be an acceptable number of alternatives from which to choose. eg suppose those being polled are required to respond to a question … either “yes” or “no.” This practice would eliminate the possibility that some of the people may truly be “undecided” and consequently distort the accuracy of the poll’s results.
And polls conducted by telephone or through mail aren’t as reliable as personal interviews because that methodology is unlikely to be able to control for who really participates in the poll, the number who respond, and possible misinterpretation of the questions.
3. When Was the Poll Conducted? The more current the poll, the more likely it is to produce meaningful and useful results. A poll taken 18 months before an election will not be as accurate as a poll taken during election week.
4. Who Conducted the Poll? What’s the reputation and performance record? eg: Polls conducted by groups with an obvious interest in the results should be held suspect until proven otherwise.
5. What was the Percentage of Error?
Right now you might just as well examine the entrails of a chicken nugget from KFC or the end product of a busted tea bag.
Because, as someone pointed out on this site the other week, a majority of voters are so underwhelmed by the absence of meaningful choice – you can have any brand of Cola but water is not going to be allowed on the menu – polls are telling us that the actual thinking majority want something entirely different.
As matters stand, the approximately 18+ million majority who voted non of the above with their feet in 2001 could well smash the 20 million/40% plus mark next time around.
And with Starmer collecting albotrosses around his neck like a natural Jonah the assumptions being made here are about as reliable as vows of chastity in a house of ill repute.
Indeed, the number of demographics he and his useful idiot acolytes are pissing off are mounting by the day.
– Party members – the majority of whom did (past tense) ALL the campaigning donkey work. TICK
– Anyone defined by these extreme centerists as ‘not one of us’ – a class of demographic which incorporates not just the left, non-Zionist Jews, and large parts of the BAME demographic but also large sections of the non-managerial and non-professional classes. TICK
– Women (approximately 51% of the voting populace). See here, for example – https://archive.ph/97zNV TICK
Starmer may even struggle to hold his own constituency given that this demographic is so pissed off with him they are planning to stand against him. And there is every liklihood he will not be the only NU-New-Labour yesterday’s man to face such a challenge.
– Voters, particularly those in the ‘red wall’ seats whose primary concern is National Sovereignty who are not impressed with and are deeply suspicious of someone they see taking their orders from the World Government Davos/WEF crowd. TICK
If this bollocks is all you’ve got steveH you are pissing in the wind. You’ll be telling us next that pigs can fly.
Best for you to stay off the Ganja for a while eh.
Dave, Lots of the working class find him distasteful for a variety of things; issues such as piss-ups during convid house arrest, not supporting strikers, his treatment of parental concerns about sex education, closeness to the Tories, whether we like it or not, illegal immigrants, and a dismissive attitude to inflation and rising costs of living. There’s more but we have so little time, 2years. Ah yes, he doesn’t know the meaning of ‘opposition’.
That’s quite an extensive list, alexanderscottish..
…But it’s far from exhaustive.
His attitude towards hungry kids, abused kids, the disabled, the unemployed, the strikes…
…His continuing open support of toerag policies (AND his bragging about it). His volte face on brexit. His obvious dislike of dissent of any sort, coupled with his shithousery in eliminating it.
His total shithousery when confronted by elderly women in bistros who confront him with a few home truths show what he’s about. Hasn’t got the stones to come back with an explanation, instead being terrified into a cowardly silence. Yet he’s only too willing to have his lickspittles do his snidey, shithouse bidding on his behalf.
Worse than a jumped-up corporal i.e. Your mate in the barrack room….Until an officer shows up.
…But most of all, its that fucking nasal drawl of his that gets on my ball hairs. Like he shoved a kazoo up each nostril as a toddler and they still haven’t been removed.
Oh, and his cuboid-head.
…And that greasy quiff. To
Dave – “If this bollocks is all you’ve got steveH you are pissing in the wind.
……and yet my 2 brief comments about Labour consistently leading all the polls for over a year prompted you to write over 800 words. 🤔
I do hope that you managed to impress yourself this time? 🙄
Here’s a couple of ⭐⭐⭐for your efforts. Why don’t you print the stars and then carefully cut them out so that you can proudly wear them on your chest. At least you can feel assured that there is proof positive that you must be somebody’s hero. (you’ve got at least one like)
What a detestable set of bastards Starmer and the right wing are !
Its what’s called unnatural justice johnsco –
what else do you expect?
Since this form of justice includes no
safeguards – it mounts up to NO justice.
Despicable…but then Wirral labour group/council has form for mistreatment of the disabled, as former rock ferry councillor and frankenfield devotee morag mclaughlin well knows.
They just can’t help themselves. Keep peddling the lies. No wonder ever more are leaving — 382k paid-up members now:
Lisa Nandy ‘antisemitism’ interview falls apart under examination
https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2023/04/04/lisa-nandy-antisemitism-interview-falls-apart-under-examination/
And there’s more:
Keir Starmer Cannot Stop Lying
Remember when they slaughtered Corbyn for referring to (some organisation with terrorist links – hamas, possibly?) as “our friends”
Corbyn:
*Wasn’t after a top position with the aforementioned organisation.
*Wasn’t plotting against them or their leadership/hierarchical structure in any way, and
*Wasn’t even a member (although the way the MSM and RW political classes went after him, you’d have thought he was head of spectre ffs)
Keef, on the other hand, was, was and IS**.
**Apart from being head honcho of spectre, obviously. Nevermind 007, even dangermouse’d outwit that useless gobshite.
It is unfortunate that fhose without a Party are prohibited from using any label except independent. It would be preferable for onlookers if a local Party label could be registeded, ie ‘Wirral Domocratic Alternative’, ‘Wirral Independent Labour’ etc.
Felicity – There is some minor provision to do this for parish council elections. In reality though there is little option but to either stand under the flag of a ‘collective political party’ that encourages this (such as the TUSC) and register an appropriate ‘description’ along the lines that you have suggested that could then be used on the ballot paper or register as a political party. Otherwise you are stuck with using ‘Independent’.
I’m sure that you can appreciate why there are very strict rules surrounding any candidate descriptors that are used on a ballot paper.
If you dig around this site you will find all the info you need.
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/how-register-your-political-party
Does that mean if (say) 29 PPCs in 29 different constituencies labelled themselves as “Independent”, and then all added the words (say) ” bananas and cream” in their communication with citizens (and maybe even all used the same artwork/logo when they mention b+c), then as long as a ‘bananas and cream project’ had never been registered as a political party (‘collective’ or actual), then no regulations would have been broken?
Me, I love bananas and cream.
qwertboi – This appears to be the guidance, such as it is. Work it out for yourself
How we assess your identity your marks
The law says that we will register your identity mark unless in our opinion it does not meet certain tests. We therefore have to assess your identity marks against those tests.
We look at how the proposed identity marks can be used on ballot papers, including the different ways in which they can be used on the ballot paper at different elections, and the need for every voter to be able to cast their vote with confidence.
We will register your identity mark unless in the Commission’s opinion it:
is the same as another registered or protected identity mark which is on the same register
is likely to result in voters confusing it with another party identity mark that is already registered or protected
is likely to mislead voters as to the effect of their vote
is likely to contradict or hinder instructions or guidance given for voting
is obscene or offensive
contains certain prohibited words
contains more than six words
is not in Roman script
is likely to amount to an offence if published
As a guide, we are unlikely to register your identity mark if it:
is, or contains an acronym or abbreviation that is not well known and widely used and not spelt out
is a description that does not identify your party
links in any way to online material or contains reference to online content, such as a Twitter hashtag or a QR code
in most cases, if it contains a reference to a person’s name
is an emblem that contains text which cannot be read at the size emblems appear on ballot papers (2cm square) – at this size, we suggest that any text in an emblem is at least 1.2mm in height
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/full-guidance/how-register-your-political-party
I know! Guidance like that is as useful as a chocolate tea pot – a real “Mr. Rules” job. Not clear, is it? I suspect the electoral commission would even admit it’s all very subjective and that its application is sometimes a matter of opinion.
At lest the 6 words rule is quantifiable and therefore precise.. “Bananas and cream” 3 words, “project”, one. Should be ok then. Change the words to “peace and justice” and it might be different.
qwertboi – It looks to me as if you are trying very hard to manufacture concern where there is none. Surely Jeremy would have researched this before he named his ‘project’.
We don’t even know whether Jeremy will be standing yet. Any future that the PJ Party may or may not have is still a big unknown and I suspect the future of both Jeremy and the PJ Party will remain shrouded in mystery for some time yet. At the very least until it is too late (again).
Here’s some good news for UK democracy that is very bad news for some foreign governments.
Standards committee calls for ban on APPGs accepting funding from foreign governments and review of parliamentary pass-holders
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/apr/05/push-to-crack-down-on-foreign-states-influence-over-mps-cross-party-groups
Like the USA and its corporations, for example.
“Here’s some good news for UK democracy that is very bad news for some foreign governments.”
Informative read, stevieh lad, ta But the guardnog is likely misrepresenting the issue here. APPG’s are never known to be funded by foreign governments (despite what Transparency International says). That’s not to say they’re not, of course, but no-body knows. APPGs are mostly funded by a dirty pool of money originating from corporates and the billionaires who own them. Think tanks, NGOs, pressure groups and the like are seen to be major financers. Dirty money from dirty sources.
And Transparency International, the authority the Covid-enableing guardnog cites, is funded by the same charlatans and criminals that fund the APPGs: the World Economic Forum, numerous companies that are convicted of corruption offences, billionaire-backed NGOs and the likes of Freedom International and the supposedly ‘liberal’ (but actually neo-liberal) The Economist. It has been accused of an “Elite Bias” and is, in my opinion, as trustworthy as Sir Keir Rodney Starmer is honest (i.e. not very).
Sir slippery slimy starmer has flip flopped over 3 dozen time a dossier surgested sir slippery will say anything if the politics suits him,His lies are coming back to haunt him Daily Express Torys will start to publish as much dirt on slimy as it gets closer to a G/E next the Aljesera files then the Ford report and not forgetting the WRONG KIND OF JEWS he has expelled its started to come out now and it will be a pleasure to see this slimebag get destroyed Tory’s are ruthless when it comes to power
Here’s another one for the collection:
https://archive.ph/97zNV
Dave, powerful stuff. Do you think that Headroom will ever listen or just educate himself a bit more. Forensic, my #%$!
Is anybody surprised that Starmers Labour can’t get candidates to stand in 185 wards when good decent Labour members like these are treated like dirt and deselected by Starmers Labour. Who wants to volunteer themselves for that sort of hurt upset and reputional damage ? Nobody.
It will be even worse when it comes to a General Election – it is local activists who do the campaigning for PPCs – and with Starmers Labour expelling/deselecting/ suspending people wholesale and with members walking away in disgust who is going to knock on doors and get the vote out for PPCs. Nobody.
Every person targeted by Starmers Labour for an unjust sanction is part of a community – frequently they are people of standing in the community. The community will therefore become aware of Starmers Labours on going vicious and vindictive campaign against the Socialists Anti Zionists and independent thinkers and nobody is going to vote them into power in Downing St.
Starmer knows this but as he is succeeding in his (sole) remit i.e. to completely neuter the party he’s happy with this. In any case he’ll have a permanent place on the gravy train soon-a seat in the house of Lords -beside Lords McNicholl, Mandleson and Mann etc.
Smartboy – Only185 Wards? You might have had a point if Labour weren’t standing significantly more candidates this year than they did in 2019 when most of these seats were last up for election. In 2019 Labour failed to stand a candidate in over 2,000 council seats.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_Kingdom_local_elections#Campaigning
The Conservatives stood candidates in 96% of the available seats, Labour contested 77%, the Liberal Democrats 53%, the Green Party of England and Wales 30% and UKIP 16%. [out of A total of 8,886 seats]
Reply to Steve H
There is as you know a difference between wards and seats and the fact is that there is a shortage of people willing to stand in 185 wards for ,in my opinion, the reasons I have given.
I am pleased to note that you do not dispute validity of the rest of my post about Starmers vindictive purges, his remit to neuter the party and his eventual permanent gravytrain place in the House of Lords,
Smartboy – Are you having a laugh?
Whatever the internal machinations of Wirral Labour it’s interesting to note that Cllr Nolan (in her health committee capacity) is, after almost two weeks, the ONLY councillor from any or no party to respond to a request from local campaigners to stop collaborating with the American so-called integrated system. She won’t but at least replied. Where are the others? https://www.facebook.com/groups/defendournhs/permalink/9046792745394487