Off Topic Political Debate

I believe that Corbyn was elected to be leader of the Parliamentary Labour Party which he cannot be accused of doing at present. There is a huge difference between addressing a group in a community center and showing that you are speaking on behalf of the Labour Party in Westminster. I am not sure that many of his grass root supporters will be dashing to stump up £50 for a meal and a speech from him.

Both France and Greece elected leaders who said they could run the country without the pain of repaying debt. Greece has this week received another loan on conditions set, not by the leader but by outside countries. France has finally realised it needs to cut back on the expenditure as the companies that earn the wealth were unable under the high tax regime to provide enough. 36 new taxes have been imposed on people in two years, and now they wish to tax the benefits that people without work are given. Yesterday the government was saying it would need more time again to get the borrowing down because of the events in Paris, whereas a week ago they admitted they might miss the deadline again.

It is of little use looking back, it is a case of watching how a leader deals with the hand he has been dealt in the here and now. Even the members of the shadow cabinet in the UK have little idea what card Corbyn is likely to lay down next. It seems that when he does put one down he asking if he can pick it up again as it was a mistake.

 

Discourse on this forum mimics politics in general ..ie it seems like a meeting of accountants and bureaucrats ... The Labour Party / Socialists have a good message , but it needs to be delivered with passion and energy to stir up the masses . I like Corbyn , but his energy , drive and passion does not come across ...Current politicians are like clones , that goes for left , right and centre ...there are very few with character ...Buffoon Boris ( a very clever man ) being one of the few acceptions .

 

Unfortunately politicians do not have to stand on boxes and deliver to the masses any more (not sure if any of our present politicians could do that) - the reason that Corbyn does not come across is probably because it is via the media - and Corbyn has not learned how to work with them yet.

 

I like both Corbyn and Livingstone. I also very much admired Wedgie Benn and Michael Foot. To me they all have characteristics so much lacking in most of our politicians - honesty, integrity and conviction. Sure they all have defects too but show me a politician who does not. Livingstone was a fool yesterday to use a general insult about disabled people to attack a colleague and should have been old enough and wise enough to realise he had made a mistake and apologise without having his leader tell him to. So far Corbyn has not shown the ability - perhaps the desire to lead his parliamentary colleagues - maybe he dislikes most of them as much as they seem to dislike him - and feels he has the "people" on his side so can risk a degree of confrontation to try to steer the party towards his way of thinking.
I bet if there were a set of dinners at the weekend and voters could choose which to attend Corbyn's would be the most popular.

 

Frenchie - it is the rank and file from the party which will be expected to canvass on the streets at elections, without their support then you have nothing. If the parliamentary party (all 200 of them) is not doing what the Party as a whole (300,000 +) wants then it is obvious which has to change. Corbyn is more of a democrat than he is a leftie - ie. he wants to run the party as a 'bottom up' party where the rank and file have more influence over policies - in my opinion anyone who does not agree with this does not belong in the party. This is not to say that we will see a repeat of the witch hunts and purges of the Kinnock era but in the opposite direction - but rather that Corbyn will transfer power downwards where it belongs.

 

The question is Leo.....If there were a set of dinners at the weekend what would be on offer at each ? Would we have to eat Lentil soup at Corbyn's ?

 

So if the people in the local parties are not happy with their MP because he/she is not following Corbyn's ideas, then we can expect to see a rash of deselections taking place. Let us wait and see if there are any, a few, or a whole landslide of them.

 

I fear that we will see deselections in the future but it will not be because MPs are not following Corbyn's policies, but rather that MPs who are not doing what their own constituency members want will be removed. I see no problems with this. The Labour Party has seen this type of thing in the past particularly under Kinnock and Blair. At the end of the day constituency members should choose their own candidates and that is right and proper in a democratic party.

 

A spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down - and lentils are worse than medicine

 

I am probably showing my political agnosticism but I think Labour, Conservative and Liberals all need to go back to the people they most want to represent and take soundings about what policies are wanted by them Blair took Labour to political success - but the cost was to move so far away from the Party's roots that it was not recognisable as a left wing party (sorry Yorkie but I think that is how socialism and ordinary working class based policies should be described) We need such a party as most of us were not born to a life of riches but we come from a section of the "masses". However I also think it is the duty of a political leadership to do just that and "lead" their core supporters. Without that racism, homophobia, religious intolerance and other evils are less likely to be overcome - in a timely manner at least.
I think Corbyn is trying to do just that. He has principles and is basically left wing and wants to create a government that is caring and operates with those principles. Other leadership candidates like Andy Burnham did not inspire me - he was just another opportunist seeking to get power for its own sake.
The Conservatives strike me as a totally lost party, they are paid for by a rich elite and so have to give them their reward. Yet I actually believe (most won't) that David Cameron really would like a fair society that does care for people but one where benefits are seen as necessary short term solution for those in need rather than a lifestyle choice which many - including the majority of the Press imply is endemic for some. The Conservatives will believe in rewarding richly those who strive for betterment - accepting more inequality than many of us are comfortable with. They do however need to understand what their core values are and then present those positively and with conviction - rather than as seems to be the case at present short term expedients.
Liberals - I don't know where to start.

 

Leo.......what about the Green Party, we feel neglected here !

 

My post was too long already without bringing in UKIP, Plaid Cymru, SNP and Greens and the others
For what it's worth the Greens appear to be a bottom up party so do not have an out of touch leadership.
You perhaps though should not take that as my endorsement of the policies that they do have

 

A lot of people who voted for the above parties should have a natural home with Labour . From day one I fully believed Ukip was set up to dilute the Labour vote and let the Tories in ...this divide and rule tactic worked a treat in the last election . At the time of it's formation , I worked as a gardener for one of the parties leading backroom financial supporters / administrators ...he was a true blue , anti labour man .
The Labour parties rank and file is now a very "broad church" ...it is going to be near impossible to keep all sections of the party happy ..What do the well off , well educated chattering classes have in common with those millions who have been poorly educated , struggle to heat their homes or put meals on their tables ?
The millions of apathetic non voters are not going to be motivated by ideology , but rather a vision for a much better / fairer Britain . Blair did it in part with his mantra "Education , education , education" ..and my council estate kids fully benefitted by getting into and recently graduating from Oxford .
It's always going to be a tough job leading the Labour Party ...a glorious , re energising vision please Mr . Corbyn .

 

The Conservatives have not lost their way, indeed they were recently elected with gains of 24 seats after clearly setting out their intended policies in their mandate. They are bravely tackling urgent needed reforms in union ballots, the NHS, excessive welfare budget and most of all, the deficit.
I would suggest it is good timing to take on these controversial issues whilst The Labour Party is in disarray and a long time before the next election.

The reason why so many voted for them is they are the only political party trusted by the electorate with the economy. Interest rates are low, unemployment is down and growth is better than most countries. The electorate also remembered the financial incompetence of the last Labour government.

Regardless of their undoubted qualities, it is unfortunate from a PR angle that the Prime Minister and The Chancellor of the Exchequer are former Eton boys. Maybe somebody like David Davis at the helm would portray the modern Conservatives in a better light. To somehow criticise them as a party for the toffs only is ridicules which is why they received over 11 million votes.

Long may Corbyn and his lefty mates stay in power to ensure there is no credible alternative to the Conservatives.

 

As a current conservative party member I can state that the party do come back to the membership to quiz and act on the issues of concern. This contact and interaction with the grass roots means the party is lead by and reflects the members views. I would have thought the labour party was the same or maybe not? When it comes to parliamentary candidates I've just received the polling documents for candidate selection for the Scottish parliamentary elections ie the candidates will be selected by the membership nott imposed, surely this is the right way in democracy. My family have been staunch labour for generations and in no way am I from an elite or privileged background but do believe that the party are attempting to resolve the economy to give the possibility of a long term future for generations to come. The energy policy is the first balanced one I can ever remember with the right emphasis on clean secure supply. The public sector is working well and efficiently and we have good employment rates with great opportunity for all to start their own businesses. Major infrastructure prjects are advancing well including school replacements, roads and rail projects. Military spending is focusing on the right areas to best counter current threats. The European question is a difficult one, I still believe we should stay in but cannot accept uncontrolled migration, this is as bad for genuine migrants as it is for native citizens, the bad apples need to be separated and even Europe is coming to that realization so I see some concessions coming our way as Briussels moves to a more UK way of thinking...

 

Strangely I remember the Conservatives winning the election. Did better than even they expected. Got more votes by two or three millions over the next highest party so have a right to govern under our non proportional system. Still does not impress me that overall such a low percentage of those who could have voted did vote for them - does not make anyone feel confident that they are hugely popular - simply more popular than a very poor Labour opposition. I like your phrase "clearly setting out their intended policies" I wonder if you conducted a poll on whether they "clearly" said they would cut tax credits for working families whether people would agree with you - especially as Cameron implied the opposite to a question on question time. Still they did say they would cut £24m or some such figure from welfare so I suppose perhaps people could have known that benefits were an easy target. Like your use of bravely ackling urgent reforms in union ballots -not sure how that is brave. Overall though I agree that unions, NHS, welfare and the budget deficit were all issues to be tackled. Your "good timing" might be seen by some as a cowardly way of tackling issues while they know the opposition is in disarray as you term it.
To apologise for having a leader who has a good education and high IQ is unnecessary in my book - do I want the leader of a country to be an uneducated tyrant - think Pol Pot and choose "No". It is inverse snobbery to decry well educated and rich people on those grounds alone - but if they fail to show any empathy with the population that is a different matter. I do not like career politicians any more than I like career teachers - experience in life outside politics is a real benefit.
Do you really want no "credible" opposition? Shame - that inhibits good democracy.

 

The Tories 'clearly' stated they would cut the welfare budget by £12 billion. It did not need much imagination to work out the areas where they would seek savings. The tax credit system was one of the worst designed by Brown to buy votes. All it does is to subsidise employers into paying less.

Tackling union reforms requires tremendous character and resolve like Thatcher showed. Unfortunately the present Tory government has a relatively small majority in which to operate, which will make reform fairly tricky. The union barons have stated they would use all means, even outside of the law. The going could get difficult if the promised chaos ensues.

My reference to 'good timing' is merely common sense in politics. I did not apologise for the current leaders but their privileged education is used as propaganda by some on the left, always forgetting the number of Labour ministers with similar backgrounds.

There is a need for effective opposition but my wish is to keep any socialist away from government, except maybe Frank Field, an excellent parliamentarian and sensible social reformer.

 

£12 billion - but we will not hit tax credits - and then they did - is in my view not "clear" - but for most of us it was a good guess
I'm not sure the unions need the attention they did in the 80's but as one who dislikes strikes I am not complaining
Common sense yes - brave no
Agree on education of leaders
I believe that an effective opposition strengthens a govenment

 

Well argued and I am interested to learn the degree of grass roots involvement. However, I am sure one of our number will give us the stats for the number of members of the Tory Party now compared to the 1950s.
I think what I meant about the Tories having lost their way was that I don't really understand what it is they really stand for now. They seem to be trying to claim that they are the party of the working man - yet that is difficult to present when the majority I would expect to think of Labour in that role. In fact due to Labour's fiscal and financial incompetence the Tories are probably right and just about everyone is probably more wealthy due to Tory policies than they would be under Labour. However it seems almost accidental and when the gap between rich and poor stretches ever greater under the Tories and when comparative wealth rather than actual wealth is for most people a real issue they seem unable to be convincing. The definition of poverty in the UK (and Western World) is ludicrous- yet the Tories do not turn round and denounce it. Real poverty exists in Asia, Africa etc - in the UK it is only relative poverty. I could say much more but it is only for me a feeling - not very factually based - the Tories do not seem to hav ethe degree of confidence I would expect them to have