As I understand it, both are still members of the Labour party but have had the whip withdrawn from them as MP's, in other words they don't represent labour at Westminster, can still act as independent members but their membership still remains intact.
I don’t like her politics, but that’s not a reason to kick her out. She suspended from the party, so I believe keeps her seat in the house but loses the party whip, and becomes an independent MP , KS can’t get rid of her, he’s dependent on the investigation findings. At least he suspended her whilst the investigation goes ahead. It’s what RS should have done to Raab whilst his investigation was taking place.
2 different aspects one has a defence the other doesnt[ [ to help Raab instigated the inquiry and made his position clear, the inquiry is far from clear and certainly not 100% as most claims thrown out and as 1 media report said "it is difficult one to call as it adds additional aspects to what bullying is" ] KS has stated it is anti semitism... and his ruling pre event is anyone doing it automatically loses the whip! SO rightly so down comes the hammer ...splatt! I am all for not guilty until the finality is declared ... I myself not read the stuff she stated but would have said a bit harsh to act so instantly on such an issue of racism .. again which I have no time for, but sometimes an attempt to make a statement can go awry.. she says has had to face racism all her life ... and I dont doubt that.
What she said was antisemitic, she has said it was herself, she apologised and disassociated herself from it, said it was a first draft, that was sent in error. She apologised for any Hirt caused. KS didn’t have to suspend her, the point is anyone being investigated should be suspended, it’s not an admission of guilt as you suggested, it allows the investigation to go ahead unhindered, it’s how most industries behave.
I see it as parallel to a criminal investigation. Everyone KNOWS she’s guilty, but she doesn’t get punished without a fair trial - no matter how compelling the evidence is against her. It’s just following process and I don’t have an issue with it. I do think it should have happened years ago as I stated earlier - after her IRA supporting speech though.
I hope people realise that Abbot and her kind may go but the electorate in the constituency’s that they and their type represent won’t change, and those people are also largely racist and particularly anti Semetic
nurses strike.... I have mentioned previously, in my opinion that this Pat Cullen seems to have her own agenda! A challenge to the .gov to come to the table ... not to say OK this is what? .... but to boost her own selfish ego at having dictated to the .gov,do as I say or else! The judge Mr Justice Linden ordered the RCN to pay the costs of the hearing, saying the union had showed "a high degree of unreasonableness", the outcome was "inevitable" and "instead of grasping the nettle and conceding" it had forced the case to court. After the hearing, the RCN's general secretary Ms Cullen said: "They [the government] have won their legal battle today. But what this has led to is they have lost nursing and they've lost the public. "They've taken the most trusted profession through the courts, by the least trusted people." this comment shows her attitude and lack of understanding of the situation. Half the nurses voted accept, her members had a majority?? saying no but in the big picture it was accept!? She has cost her union members £000's of pounds in court fee's. She knew the rules but decided to ignore them, to MAKE A POINT ..I defeated the .gov: "a high degree of unreasonableness", does seem to be the brush that paints the nurses [RCN] banner picture
I'm fed up to the back teeth of these public sector strikes. Reduce they're gold plated pensions which will fund a big salary increase now and ffs make them retire when everyone does. Let them come into the real world.
I read it the other way, the government by taking the nurses to court have alienated them rather than trying to get them on their side. In the long run it could backfire and make the nurses more determined. A high degree of unreasonableness certainly exists in the government that’s for sure .
Or alternatively they may all decide to quit, or go to Australia on far better pay and conditions and leave our NHS even more up the creek than it already is. Some rebalancing of their pensions to improve their pay now and moving forward maybe is an answer, but if there are no negotiations that’s never go to happen. The government needs to stop being an ass and get around the table and negotiate rather than trying to appear tough.,
please log in to view this image IMAGE SOURCE,EPA Image caption, General Secretary of the Royal College of Nurses Pat Cullen with nurses outside the High Court in London The answer to his question is Pat CULLEN your leader! think I missed post reply to the picture bit The rules of strikes was made clear by making them "law" yonks ago .. Pat Cullen was told the strike was illegal to do 48 hours as the law to protect both sides as the law stated. This law / rule was agreed by both sides as other unions have stuck to it. RCN is out on a limb as more and more NHS groupings / members agree to the offer ... remember the days of RED KEN? well Cullen seems to have own agenda ... now narrowly backed up by a slim majority of RCN members being on her side! In the bigger picture more realistic most of the other unions covering agree to the offer and just want to get on with it.
Cullen and the union actually recommended the last offer be accepted, the rank and file voted to turn it down. But don’t let the facts get in the way.
You accused Cullen of having an agenda, and that most other unions accepted the offer. The RCN along with Cullen recommended accepting the offer as well, it was the members that voted against it, so hardly Cullen having an agenda, just standing up for what her members had instructed her to do . I was merely pointing out your post was inaccurate….again. I would suggest it’s you that has an agenda !!
