The EU debate - Part II

And that's democratic?

Those MP's were democratically elected to parliament by their constituents.

 

They were selected as candidates by the local CLP and so when the next election comes around the CLP can select someone else if the sitting MP does not support their views. The problem with UK politics is that the centre has moved to the right since 1997 and even moderate socialist policies are now viewed as extremely left wing and demonised in the mainstream media.

 

But if they aren't representing their constituents - as Angela Eagle isn't, and certainly my MP Kevin Brennan isn't, then surely we should have the democratic right to replace them with someone who will represent the will of the people. Especially when these MPs are working on behalf of a strategic coup organised by Alastair Darling's PR company and funded by people like HSBC, Max Mosley and other rich organisations. Surely democracy is more important than the vested interests of those few?

These constituents overwhelmingly voted Corbyn in, the majority of these constituencies and their members (called CLPs) support Corbyn yet their MPs are acting against their constituents wishes in trying to oust the leader their own constituents chose a little over 10 months ago!

 

You'll be waiting a very long time for a Labour government of any description. So it doesn't really matter much what you want, thanks in large part for Corbyn and the bunch of deluded entryists who voted for him.

If the man can't command even the grudging respect of his MPs he can't command anything. I remember when Michael Foot was leader of the Labour party. He led it to electoral disaster but at least he had sufficient support in the PLP to form a shadow cabinet. And at least he was a man of genuine principal; I'm not convinced for a moment that Corbyn is even that. Seems to me he's wedded to doctrine, not principal.

 

How do we know that they don't represent the views of their constituents?

The constituents voted for The Labour Party, as I'm sure many of them have done for generations. I don't see Corbyn as the major factor in the decision for the majority of them. I'm sure most still voted Labour when Blair was leader.

 

Hence the rise in popularity of UKIP,...

 

Are you a member of the Labour party? And if so, for how long have you been a member?

 

You can't say the the constituents voted Corbyn in. The constituents voted their MP's in prior to Corbyn being elected as leader of the Labour Party.

Deselecting MP's based on the fact that they collectively have zero faith in Corbyn as a leader is a ridiculous idea full stop.

 

The constituents voted in the Labour leadership contest - so I think it's fair to say that they chose him. They've also voted to support him and the MPs are acting against their wishes, so as the MPs aren't working in their interests, then surely it's a democratic right to be able to deselect them and select someone who does work in their interests.

Can't see what's ridiculous about that at all.

 

Constituents elected their MPs. The Labour Party membership elected Jeremy Corbyn. That's two seperate, though possibly overlapping, electorates. So it's not true when you say "the constituents voted in the Labour party leadership contest".

 

Most labour votes are not socialists, so kicking out the MP for a Marxist will mean no Labour MP in your area

 

Yes, only recently signed up as a full member, but I've been an affiliate member since 2001 via Unison. What irks me about the whole leadership debacle is that being an affilate member, I voted for Corbyn and that democratic process has been undermined by the PLP. They are basically saying 'screw the membership and the democratic process'.

 

And those MP's have betrayed the party membership by staging a coup to try and oust the democratically elected leader. The Labour party isn't just about the members of Parliament, it's much broader, it's about the local counsellors, the volunteers, the party membership and the trade unions. The Labour membership extends to around 600,000 people and they have been stiffed by 172 MP's

 

they should look across the pond for inspiration, they need a grandstanding bullshitter.

 

It's also about the individual MP's constituents - the voters! They elected were elected by the people of their constituency. Without them, the voters, there would be no party.

It's a paradox to advocate democracy on one hand for Corbyn, and dismiss it for the people who really matter, the voting public.

 

The constituents voted for those MP's but I would argue that they were voting for the Labour Party rather than the individual personalities of those MP's. For example if Hillary Benn was standing as an independent candidate, do you think those constituents who voted Labour in his electoral ward would have voted for him or for another Labour candidate ?

Regarding the leadership of the party, it's one member one vote. The Labour party is defined by its members, and they (we) voted for Jeremy Corbyn by a massive landslide. He was given a huge mandate by the membership and the PLP have tried every dirty trick in the book to try and oust him.

 

Problem Labour have is JC is just not going to win the 2020 Election, he has no charisma and in this day and age you need it.

 

I prefer to vote for my politicians based on their policies rather than how much they arse lick the media.

 

Yes, I'd agree. But in many constituencies you're dealing with people who've voted Labour for generations. They voted Labour when Blair was its leader, they vote Labour now. To me, it's not the leader, it's tradition - especially amongst the older voters. How long that would continue under Corbyn, I have serious doubts about.

Already, as we've seen from the dramatic rise of UKIP, a large section of Labour vote that doesn't buy into the policies of the current Labour Party. 3.3mill voted for UKIP at the last GE - a lot of those former Labour voters.

I understand all that. There is the question of the £3 members - some of whom are blatantly Tory - but I'd still maintain my view that Corbyn is completely and utterly unelectable.

Apart from his policies from the 1970's, he's got the personality of a dead fish!...

 

Your first point applies equally to what I was saying before about Labour voters voting for the Labour candidate, rather than voting for a specific parliamentary candidate. As for the tradition of voting Labour, the party membership has swelled since Corbyn was elected, with many of those being young voters now engaged in politics, as he actually represents them. The apathy among people, especially young people towards politics was alarming, but understandable. Their argument was 'why bother voting, they are all the same and none of them have my interests at heart'. With Corbyn, there is actually a party leader who will challenge the establishment, hence why they are so scared of him and running this smear campaign that is unfolding now.

People (the media) keep saying Corbyn is unelectable, but he was elected by the party membership by 250,000 members, since he's been leader the party have won 4 by elections, 4 mayoral elections and they've pushed back cruel Tory policies like abolishing the working tax credit scheme, so Corbyn is effective as leader. True, he's not the average arse licking media savvy politician, but surely that is a refreshing thing ? Do we really want another PR managed, bullshitting leader who serves up platitudes to the masses to then suck up to big business when they are in power ? **** that, we've had decades of that bollocks and look where it's got us. Poverty increasing, Students with massive debts, a crumbling NHS, massive cuts to public services and all the while the rich get richer and Corporations gain even more power.

For me it's time to ditch the status quo about what politics 'should' look like and to ditch this idea that 'personality' is more important than policies. Politics isn't an episode of X-factor, about who is the best looking, best dressed entertainer. It's about the serious nature of the policies that affect every area of our lives.