Topic: Next Labour leader

[Circa1892]

to keep you happy do they need to be linked to the LFI then ?

Why the fuck have you decided that’s the connective?

[killer-heels]

Looking around what remain of the PLP you can put together a decent shadow cabinet based on this. People like Cooper, Benn, Jess Phillips, Lisa Nandy and Dan Jarvis have all got something about them and they've got to be in and around the top jobs. I think the public looked at some of the no-hopers in the previous shadow cabinet and didn't see a viable government. Burgon and Abbott have absolutely no business being in there and people were shrewd enough to see that they were only there because of loyalty and not ability.

What would probably also help if whoever forms the next shadow cabinet can agree to not mention the Israel/Palestine issue. It's an issue that 99.5% of the country doesn't give a flying fuck about, they don't understand it, it's just not of interest to them and they've seen the Party tear itself apart over it whilst they watch on, baffled.

What exactly has Jarvis got that makes him ready for a front bench role?

[SP]

What exactly has Jarvis got that makes him ready for a front bench role?

Name checked in the MCU.

[Dr. Beaker]

[quote ]. Burgon and Abbott have absolutely no business being in there and people were shrewd enough to see that they were only there because of loyalty and not ability.


[/quote]You can't really make that sort of comment until youve tried to walk a mile in Diane Abbott's shoes.

[killer-heels]

Name checked in the MCU.

Where, if I remember rightly, he got battered.

[RobinHood]

What exactly has Jarvis got that makes him ready for a front bench role?

Was an officer in the Army and also has Mayoral duties in his part of the world so clearly used to being in leadership situations and isn't going to be dodging a scrap. One of the few survivors from the red wall so clearly liked an respected by his constituents otherwise he'd be on the scrap heap.

[killer-heels]

Was an officer in the Army and also has Mayoral duties in his part of the world so clearly used to being in leadership situations and isn't going to be dodging a scrap. One of the few survivors from the red wall so clearly liked an respected by his constituents otherwise he'd be on the scrap heap.

He probably survived thanks to a split in the Brexit party/Tory vote. Dont really care about his background, hardly seen or heard anything from him or looked into his mayoral duties.

[west_london_red]

Looking around what remain of the PLP you can put together a decent shadow cabinet based on this. People like Cooper, Benn, Jess Phillips, Lisa Nandy and Dan Jarvis have all got something about them and they've got to be in and around the top jobs. I think the public looked at some of the no-hopers in the previous shadow cabinet and didn't see a viable government. Burgon and Abbott have absolutely no business being in there and people were shrewd enough to see that they were only there because of loyalty and not ability.

What would probably also help if whoever forms the next shadow cabinet can agree to not mention the Israel/Palestine issue. It's an issue that 99.5% of the country doesn't give a flying fuck about, they don't understand it, it's just not of interest to them and they've seen the Party tear itself apart over it whilst they watch on, baffled.

Agree the whole Palestine and Israel subject is best avoided as most people don’t care, but I certainly don’t remember it being bought up that much outside of the anti-Semiticism debate. Yes, sections of the grass roots are a bit obsessed, and it’s been a big subject in the past for people like Corbyn but it’s not something that gets brought up that often.

[Mutton Geoff]

Was an officer in the Army and also has Mayoral duties in his part of the world so clearly used to being in leadership situations and isn't going to be dodging a scrap. One of the few survivors from the red wall so clearly liked an respected by his constituents otherwise he'd be on the scrap heap.

He is also an Alumni for the school i have just retired from

[OneTouchFooty]

Was an officer in the Army and also has Mayoral duties in his part of the world so clearly used to being in leadership situations and isn't going to be dodging a scrap. One of the few survivors from the red wall so clearly liked an respected by his constituents otherwise he'd be on the scrap heap.

He's basically hidden away since Brexit happened, not piped or spoken out about the clusterfuck of the past 3 years in any meaningful capacity like most of the other "red wall" MPs who've rolled over for Brexit to try and keep their seat. Hardly leadership material.

[killer-heels]

He's basically hidden away since Brexit happened, not piped or spoken out about the clusterfuck of the past 3 years in any meaningful capacity like most of the other "red wall" MPs who've rolled over for Brexit to try and keep their seat. Hardly leadership material.

Dont think anyone is advocating him to be the leader to be fair. His background could help sooth any fears over Labour patriotism if he was in the shadow cabinet but ultimately all anyone really knows about him outside his constituency and mayoral region is his background and the fact that he hasnt produced anything in parliament that has had an impact.

[Yorkykopite]

I like Jarvis because he's a socialist soldier. That bloke Attlee, who they go on about, was a socialist soldier too. Last but one Allied infantryman to evacuate the beaches at Gallipoli indeed. Denis Healey at Anzio. Tony Crosland the paratrooper. Labour is better for having such men in responsible positions.

[Sangria]

Agree the whole Palestine and Israel subject is best avoided as most people don’t care, but I certainly don’t remember it being bought up that much outside of the anti-Semiticism debate. Yes, sections of the grass roots are a bit obsessed, and it’s been a big subject in the past for people like Corbyn but it’s not something that gets brought up that often.

Wasn't it above Brexit in the 2017 conference discussions?

[west_london_red]

Wasn't it above Brexit in the 2017 conference discussions?

Yes, but the post I was responding to mentioned the shadow cabinet specifically. The conference debates are proposed by the membership and CLPs, not the shadow cabinet.

[Sangria]

Yes, but the post I was responding to mentioned the shadow cabinet specifically. The conference debates are proposed by the membership and CLPs, not the shadow cabinet.

Considering that Corbyn, early on in his reign, neglected a senior Labour meeting to attend a gathering on Cuba, professionalism and common sense is hardly a given. See also the background of a number of the inner cabal in the British Communist Parties, with Milne being expelled from one for being too much of a Stalinist, and Murray being a member as recently as 2015. That they're not in the shadow cabinet isn't an argument against, as we've seen on numerous occasions shadow ministers being overruled by "a Labour spokesperson".

[west_london_red]

Considering that Corbyn, early on in his reign, neglected a senior Labour meeting to attend a gathering on Cuba, professionalism and common sense is hardly a given. See also the background of a number of the inner cabal in the British Communist Parties, with Milne being expelled from one for being too much of a Stalinist, and Murray being a member as recently as 2015. That they're not in the shadow cabinet isn't an argument against, as we've seen on numerous occasions shadow ministers being overruled by "a Labour spokesperson".

I’m not sure what your arguing exactly. We’ve gone from talking about the shadow cabinet and avoiding too much talk of Israel and Palestine, to people who are not in the shadow cabinet and the British Communist Party.

[Sangria]

I’m not sure what your arguing exactly. We’ve gone from talking about the shadow cabinet and avoiding too much talk of Israel and Palestine, to people who are not in the shadow cabinet and the British Communist Party.

Don't you think that the inner cabal has a substantial part in ensuring what the agenda of the Labour party is? We've already seen on numerous occasions how senior shadow cabinet ministers have been overruled by "a Labour spokesperson".

[redmark]

Agree the whole Palestine and Israel subject is best avoided as most people don’t care, but I certainly don’t remember it being bought up that much outside of the anti-Semiticism debate. Yes, sections of the grass roots are a bit obsessed, and it’s been a big subject in the past for people like Corbyn but it’s not something that gets brought up that often.

I think the problem is that it infects the party, seen for (too) many as a fundamental fault line on which to judge individuals (see Geoff's view that the next leader should not be linked to LFI). It's the ultimate source of modern antisemitism in the party and poisons other areas of party infighting and public perception - soft on terror, 'friends' of Hamas, connections to Palestinian supporters who ('unfortunately and unknowingly') turn out to be Holocause deniers, awkward alliances with reactionary and conservative countries or groups in the UK and elsewhere.

Labour MPs are routinely harassed (online and at events) for being linked to LFI - which is accused of being a tool of the Israeli government/embassy, along with their friends in the media, to weaken the Corbyn project because Israel doesn't want a Labour government which is friendly to the Palestinian cause. This is deranged. Firstly, of course, it combines two of the most persistent antisemitic tropes (secretly controlling politics and the media). But secondly, why on earth would Israel worry about the view of the UK government? The USA is the arbiter of Israel-Palestine. It vetoes anything at the UN it doesn't like (consistently, and regularly). Israel doesn't need a friendly UK.

It may surprise Geoff to know that I do oppose illegal Israeli settlements, occupation, destruction of infrastructure, theft of Palestinian productive land, harassment of Palestinians by extremist settlers and some actions of the IDF. However - to be blunt - I'm sick of it effectively defining the Labour party. Whatever the Labour party's position on Israel-Palestine is, its future will be decided elsewhere. Many European countries are more supportive of the Palestinian position than UK governments have been historically - it has no effect. Why should the UK suffer the consequences of the issue suppressing Labour party domestic policy and organisational energy?

The Labour party should be broad enough to encompass robust supporters of the Palestinian cause (and critics of Israel) as well as friends of Israel - providing that support is for groups and actions within international law and which are in accordance with party rules. Not support for illegal occupations, and not support for organisations whose charters demand the destruction of Israel. And then the party needs to STFU about the subject, because it will still be there to be sorted out in 50 years and it won't be the UK that does it.

[Mutton Geoff]

I think the problem is that it infects the party, seen for (too) many as a fundamental fault line on which to judge individuals (see Geoff's view that the next leader should not be linked to LFI). It's the ultimate source of modern antisemitism in the party and poisons other areas of party infighting and public perception - soft on terror, 'friends' of Hamas, connections to Palestinian supporters who ('unfortunately and unknowingly') turn out to be Holocause deniers, awkward alliances with reactionary and conservative countries or groups in the UK and elsewhere.

Labour MPs are routinely harassed (online and at events) for being linked to LFI - which is accused of being a tool of the Israeli government/embassy, along with their friends in the media, to weaken the Corbyn project because Israel doesn't want a Labour government which is friendly to the Palestinian cause. This is deranged. Firstly, of course, it combines two of the most persistent antisemitic tropes (secretly controlling politics and the media). But secondly, why on earth would Israel worry about the view of the UK government? The USA is the arbiter of Israel-Palestine. It vetoes anything at the UN it doesn't like (consistently, and regularly). Israel doesn't need a friendly UK.

It may surprise Geoff to know that I do oppose illegal Israeli settlements, occupation, destruction of infrastructure, theft of Palestinian productive land, harassment of Palestinians by extremist settlers and some actions of the IDF. However - to be blunt - I'm sick of it effectively defining the Labour party. Whatever the Labour party's position on Israel-Palestine is, its future will be decided elsewhere. Many European countries are more supportive of the Palestinian position than UK governments have been historically - it has no effect. Why should the UK suffer the consequences of the issue suppressing Labour party domestic policy and organisational energy?

The Labour party should be broad enough to encompass robust supporters of the Palestinian cause (and critics of Israel) as well as friends of Israel - providing that support is for groups and actions within international law and which are in accordance with party rules. Not support for illegal occupations, and not support for organisations whose charters demand the destruction of Israel. And then the party needs to STFU about the subject, because it will still be there to be sorted out in 50 years and it won't be the UK that does it.

again you want to conflate anti zionism and opinions about the inhuman treatment of the people on the west bank for example as some sort of AS frankly it is complete bollocks i have no hate for any jewish person but i do have a ongoing hatred for governments in Israel that flout international law , steal land and treat other people with a total lack of humanity and because of that i could never support anyone who supports the murderous Israeli government and you know what other than i here i guess many voters and members would agree with me! 

[Alan_X]

I'm sure voters were equally baffled at the Left's obsession with Apartheid.

What?

[Alan_X]

I think the problem is that it infects the party, seen for (too) many as a fundamental fault line on which to judge individuals (see Geoff's view that the next leader should not be linked to LFI). It's the ultimate source of modern antisemitism in the party and poisons other areas of party infighting and public perception - soft on terror, 'friends' of Hamas, connections to Palestinian supporters who ('unfortunately and unknowingly') turn out to be Holocause deniers, awkward alliances with reactionary and conservative countries or groups in the UK and elsewhere.

Labour MPs are routinely harassed (online and at events) for being linked to LFI - which is accused of being a tool of the Israeli government/embassy, along with their friends in the media, to weaken the Corbyn project because Israel doesn't want a Labour government which is friendly to the Palestinian cause. This is deranged. Firstly, of course, it combines two of the most persistent antisemitic tropes (secretly controlling politics and the media). But secondly, why on earth would Israel worry about the view of the UK government? The USA is the arbiter of Israel-Palestine. It vetoes anything at the UN it doesn't like (consistently, and regularly). Israel doesn't need a friendly UK.

It may surprise Geoff to know that I do oppose illegal Israeli settlements, occupation, destruction of infrastructure, theft of Palestinian productive land, harassment of Palestinians by extremist settlers and some actions of the IDF. However - to be blunt - I'm sick of it effectively defining the Labour party. Whatever the Labour party's position on Israel-Palestine is, its future will be decided elsewhere. Many European countries are more supportive of the Palestinian position than UK governments have been historically - it has no effect. Why should the UK suffer the consequences of the issue suppressing Labour party domestic policy and organisational energy?

The Labour party should be broad enough to encompass robust supporters of the Palestinian cause (and critics of Israel) as well as friends of Israel - providing that support is for groups and actions within international law and which are in accordance with party rules. Not support for illegal occupations, and not support for organisations whose charters demand the destruction of Israel. And then the party needs to STFU about the subject, because it will still be there to be sorted out in 50 years and it won't be the UK that does it.

Totally pointless mate. Beautifully argued as ever. I’m happy to confess that you and Yorky make these points far better than I do but I am just fucked off with the stupidity of it. 

Like you I oppose what the Netenyahu government are doing. But some of the people that Corbyn and his merry band support aren’t against the policies of the current Israeli government - they want the extermination of the Jews in Palestine and the obliteration of Israel as a country.

[Yorkykopite]

I think the problem is that it infects the party, seen for (too) many as a fundamental fault line on which to judge individuals (see Geoff's view that the next leader should not be linked to LFI). It's the ultimate source of modern antisemitism in the party and poisons other areas of party infighting and public perception - soft on terror, 'friends' of Hamas, connections to Palestinian supporters who ('unfortunately and unknowingly') turn out to be Holocause deniers, awkward alliances with reactionary and conservative countries or groups in the UK and elsewhere.

Labour MPs are routinely harassed (online and at events) for being linked to LFI - which is accused of being a tool of the Israeli government/embassy, along with their friends in the media, to weaken the Corbyn project because Israel doesn't want a Labour government which is friendly to the Palestinian cause. This is deranged. Firstly, of course, it combines two of the most persistent antisemitic tropes (secretly controlling politics and the media). But secondly, why on earth would Israel worry about the view of the UK government? The USA is the arbiter of Israel-Palestine. It vetoes anything at the UN it doesn't like (consistently, and regularly). Israel doesn't need a friendly UK.

It may surprise Geoff to know that I do oppose illegal Israeli settlements, occupation, destruction of infrastructure, theft of Palestinian productive land, harassment of Palestinians by extremist settlers and some actions of the IDF. However - to be blunt - I'm sick of it effectively defining the Labour party. Whatever the Labour party's position on Israel-Palestine is, its future will be decided elsewhere. Many European countries are more supportive of the Palestinian position than UK governments have been historically - it has no effect. Why should the UK suffer the consequences of the issue suppressing Labour party domestic policy and organisational energy?

The Labour party should be broad enough to encompass robust supporters of the Palestinian cause (and critics of Israel) as well as friends of Israel - providing that support is for groups and actions within international law and which are in accordance with party rules. Not support for illegal occupations, and not support for organisations whose charters demand the destruction of Israel. And then the party needs to STFU about the subject, because it will still be there to be sorted out in 50 years and it won't be the UK that does it.

Very good stuff.

[Mutton Geoff]

Totally pointless mate. Beautifully argued as ever. I’m happy to confess that you and Yorky make these points far better than I do but I am just fucked off with the stupidity of it. 

Like you I oppose what the Netenyahu government are doing. But some of the people that Corbyn and his merry band support aren’t against the policies of the current Israeli government - they want the extermination of the Jews in Palestine and the obliteration of Israel as a country.

that is total bollocks and you know it, nobody is arguing for getting rid of Israel they simply want Israel to stop and i use this word on purpose creating a ghetto like scenario on the west bank and stop for example using tanks to deal with protestors armed with just stones as seen within the last year, you talk about other regimes like syria leader who again i condemn for his actions but you fail to see that Israeli governments for decades now have led an inhumane and murderous policies in their region, if anybody else acted like them , they would be liable to UN sanctions with teeth and or a peace keeping force sent in to curb their illegal and inhumane actions! Therefore anyone in the leadership race who supports Israel i could not and frankly will not support, so given that it is better that the person is not in the LFI or for that matter not a card carrying supporter of Hamas

[Sangria]

that is total bollocks and you know it, nobody is arguing for getting rid of Israel they simply want Israel to stop and i use this word on purpose creating a ghetto like scenario on the west bank and stop for example using tanks to deal with protestors armed with just stones as seen within the last year, you talk about other regimes like syria leader who again i condemn for his actions but you fail to see that Israeli governments for decades now have led an inhumane and murderous policies in their region, if anybody else acted like them , they would be liable to UN sanctions with teeth and or a peace keeping force sent in to curb their illegal and inhumane actions! Therefore anyone in the leadership race who supports Israel i could not and frankly will not support, so given that it is better that the person is not in the LFI or for that matter not a card carrying supporter of Hamas

Alan was talking about people that Corbyn and his like support being for the disappearance of Israel, not Corbyn himself. Which they do. You talk of LFI and card-carrying members of Hamas. Unless they're actually members of Likud, then the most anyone can be is friends with card carrying members of Likud. Which would be the same relation Corbyn and his ilk have with card carrying members of Hamas. Or Hezbollah, or other assorted groups who claim an existential threat to Israel.

If friendship with Likud is enough to void one's pretence to worthy leadership of the Labour party, does the same degree of friendship with Hezbollah and their like confer the same invalidation? Did it matter that Corbyn has this kind of friendship with these groups? I don't remember significant members of New Labour cultivating this level of friendship with Israeli parties, outside their duties as ministers, that Corbyn did with groups wanting to delete Israel.

[killer-heels]

Clive Lewis has entered the race and from the looks of what he is proposing its likely he will appeal to much of the hard left in the party.

[hide5seek]

Dont think anyone is advocating him to be the leader to be fair. His background could help sooth any fears over Labour patriotism if he was in the shadow cabinet but ultimately all anyone really knows about him outside his constituency and mayoral region is his background and the fact that he hasnt produced anything in parliament that has had an impact.

Smoothing over patriotism problems would be solved by Clive Lewis. He's also from the left of Labour, but pragmatic with it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnJem92ElK0&t=687s

[Yorkykopite]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/19/clive-lewis-joins-race-to-be-labour-leader-pledging-to-unleash-party?CMP=share_btn_tw

"Clive Lewis has declared his candidacy for Labour leader, with a pledge to go further than Jeremy Corbyn in giving party members a say on policy and the selection of MPs......."

No need to read any further. That should be enough to persuade everybody not to vote for the guy.

[ShakaHislop]

He's basically hidden away since Brexit happened, not piped or spoken out about the clusterfuck of the past 3 years in any meaningful capacity like most of the other "red wall" MPs who've rolled over for Brexit to try and keep their seat. Hardly leadership material.

He made a Burnham-esque call for immigration control in late 2016, but yes, since then he's been anonymous.

Clive Lewis has entered the race and from the looks of what he is proposing its likely he will appeal to much of the hard left in the party.

He wouldn't be my favourite for the role but resigning from the Shadow Cabinet in order to vote against triggering Article 50 is a credit to him.

[The Gulleysucker]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/19/clive-lewis-joins-race-to-be-labour-leader-pledging-to-unleash-party?CMP=share_btn_tw

"Clive Lewis has declared his candidacy for Labour leader, with a pledge to go further than Jeremy Corbyn in giving party members a say on policy and the selection of MPs......."

No need to read any further. That should be enough to persuade everybody not to vote for the guy.

He was also a member of the secretive Palestine Live facebook group, the one that included Holocaust deniers and some very anti semitic people.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/mar/08/labour-suspends-party-members-in-antisemitic-facebook-group

Not good.

[Alan_X]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/19/clive-lewis-joins-race-to-be-labour-leader-pledging-to-unleash-party?CMP=share_btn_tw

"Clive Lewis has declared his candidacy for Labour leader, with a pledge to go further than Jeremy Corbyn in giving party members a say on policy and the selection of MPs......."

No need to read any further. That should be enough to persuade everybody not to vote for the guy.

Oh for fucks sake... Win the leadership, lose the country...

Round and round and round we go...

[oldfordie]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/19/clive-lewis-joins-race-to-be-labour-leader-pledging-to-unleash-party?CMP=share_btn_tw

"Clive Lewis has declared his candidacy for Labour leader, with a pledge to go further than Jeremy Corbyn in giving party members a say on policy and the selection of MPs......."

No need to read any further. That should be enough to persuade everybody not to vote for the guy.

Reading comments to Corbyns tweets,  Please hand over the mantle to someone with your values and princibles Jeremy, you've done a marvellous job.

[redmark]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/19/clive-lewis-joins-race-to-be-labour-leader-pledging-to-unleash-party?CMP=share_btn_tw

"Clive Lewis has declared his candidacy for Labour leader, with a pledge to go further than Jeremy Corbyn in giving party members a say on policy and the selection of MPs......."

No need to read any further. That should be enough to persuade everybody not to vote for the guy.

Great. Positioning himself as the Momentum/membership candidate, with RLB as the union leaders' candidate? A split between those two factions wouldn't go amiss...

[west_london_red]

Great. Positioning himself as the Momentum/membership candidate, with RLB as the union leaders' candidate? A split between those two factions wouldn't go amiss...

Remains to be seen if all of the potential candidates can get the 20 MPs to back them for the contest as a lot of them might be appealing to the same section of MPs.

[west_london_red]

Reading comments to Corbyns tweets,  Please hand over the mantle to someone with your values and princibles Jeremy, you've done a marvellous job.

Twat on Twitter makes stupid comment shocker :p

[redmark]

Remains to be seen if all of the potential candidates can get the 20 MPs to back them for the contest as a lot of them might be appealing to the same section of MPs.

10% under new rules.

[west_london_red]

10% under new rules.

That’s 20 MPs isn’t it?

[The Real Rasta]

Why the fuck have you decided that’s the connective?

To be fair to Geoff I’m pretty sure Yorky at some point has said the next leader should be preferably be a member so I don’t think it’s an outrageous question and without getting into the ins and outs of the Israel/Palestine issue, I think he is right that it should be somebody that is neither a LFI member or overtly for the Palestinian cause purely from an infighting perspective and putting an end to the AS issue.


For me Starmer is hands down the stand out candidate but I do wonder if he is maybe a little too dry for the general public.

[Yorkykopite]

To be fair to Geoff I’m pretty sure Yorky at some point has said the next leader should be preferably be a member so I don’t think it’s an outrageous question and without getting into the ins and outs of the Israel/Palestine issue, I think he is right that it should be somebody that is neither a LFI member or overtly for the Palestinian cause purely from an infighting perspective and putting an end to the AS issue.

That's being unfair to Geoff - and certainly to me. I know I've never said that because I don't believe it. More than that I don't ever think about it.

The post in question was a rather long one that didn't mention Israel at all. Geoff's response - a typical one I have to say - was to ignore everything I said in favour of something he imagines he really meant.

Best not encourage him, or that kind of practice, I feel.

[The Real Rasta]

That's being unfair to Geoff - and certainly to me. I know I've never said that because I don't believe it. More than that I don't ever think about it.

It has been said, if it wasn't yourself then my apologies, I'm happy to stand corrected on that point if you say it wasn't.

The post in question was a rather long one that didn't mention Israel at all. Geoff's response - a typical one I have to say - was to ignore everything I said in favour of something he imagines he really meant.

Best not encourage him, or that kind of practice, I feel.

Geoff is certainly guilty of this at times but so are you, while he does sometimes lash out and cross the line, you and others have also been quite snidey and crossed the line with him and other posters too over the years in the various politics threads we have had, so I don't really think anybody can claim innocence and it certainly isn't a one sided affair.

[redmark]

That’s 20 MPs isn’t it?

21 I read they had to get.