Can someone explain what's actually happening today?
Simon Kirby Labour just held a vote to determine how to hold its vote on whether to allow its members to vote for someone we might vote for. #democracy
My prediction, FWIW, is that George Osborne will not be in the next cabinet.
To use a topical phrase "regime change" is I suspect on the cards and all the Leadsomites "she's continuity Cameron" are going to look even more foolish, if that's possible.
''What the upshot of all this is at the next general election is anybody's guess but UKIP should be very seriously thinking about the possibility of holding the balance of power. ''
If May lasts that long.
Ok - are you IDS/Bill Cash/Andrea/John Baron, etc, etc. We have a right to know...
Can someone explain what's actually happening today?
Simon Kirby Labour just held a vote to determine how to hold its vote on whether to allow its members to vote for someone we might vote for. #democracy
Mr. Borough, I agree, but the rules seem to indicate pretty strongly (to me, at least*) that Corbyn should automatically be on the ballot.
*Disclaimer: I am not on the National Executive Committee of the Labour Party.
That's my sense of it too, although I have not subjected it to much scrutiny or thought. The extracts from the letter of Corbyn's lawyers sounded pretty bullish, and suggests this will be in the courts within a few days (or even tomorrow) as he seeks an injunction to prevent the contest proceeding until a substantive court hearing takes place (which could be weeks off). I think he might get his injunction, as a later payment of damages to him if the contest proceeds but a court later finds in Corbyn's favour, is going to be scant compensation for being wrongly stripped of a likely winning place on the ballot.
Labour and Corbyn - the gifts that keep on giving...
As far as he is concerned, he has the overwhelming support of the membership - and thus the damage to unity comes from 172 traitors in the PLP
I'll say it again, even if he isn't on the ballot paper, 300,000+ members will write CORBYN on the ballot - and vote for it. Whoever is declared the "winner" will have no authority - except over the MPs. Who will all be deselected. Pretty much the entire Labour Party in Westminster will be different after the next election - except those who were prepared to nominate Jeremy.
Labour splits, but it's a negotiated split in which Continuity Labour and Provisional Labour pre-agree an electoral pact not to field candidates against each other.
Corbyn gets to remain Continuity Labour leader, but Provisional Labour gets to choose a new leader of the opposition.
They agree to fight the next general election on a joint manifesto which is simply "we will build a progressive consensus in Parliament to change the electoral system to PR, then immediately dissolve parliament".
Once PR is in place, the two Labours can then divorce completely without fear of being wiped out.
Can someone explain what's actually happening today?
Charlie Falconer on the brink of resigning .... Michael Gove on the brink of the sack .... (Ooppps .... too early JackW ... sod it !!) Theresa May on the brink of Number 10 Downing Street. Jezza on the brink of the Law Courts.
The Labour vote would have to be Corbyn loyalists in order to walk away from the Labour party if Corbyn is not on the ballot. The EU is just one issue - and in any case, a big reason as to why so many Labour voters voted for Brexit is due to the issue of immigration. Who advocates freedom of movement and is incredibly pro-immigration? One Jeremy Corbyn is, the guy you claim is closer to the average voter than the PLP are. The PLP want the Labour party at this stage to be a party committed to attaining power via parliamentary democracy, as @SouthamObserver explained so eloquently in his piece yesterday, that I really recommend you read. All fractions of the PLP have turned on Corbyn - from the right of the party to the centre-left. That kind of debunks your idea that this is all about the preservation of a Blairite centre-ground ideology. This is basically about the survival of the Labour party.
Fwiw, opinion polls put Corbyn's approval rating among Labour voters at around 60% -- that's not great for the standards of a normal party leader, since they should be getting near-universal support from their own supporters if they want a hope of winning over voters from other parties - but, when we're talking about a potential split in the party, it does rather suggest that the MORE THAN HALF of current Labour voters who approve of him WOULD walk away if he was ousted, no?
In any case, voters wouldn't have to particularly like Corbyn to support a breakaway party -- they would just have to think he was a lesser evil than continuity Labour led by Angela Eagle. And the referendum does show that the PLP are further away from heartlands opinion than Corbyn is -- I don't think the EU is just "one issue", it encapsulates the whole of the Labour moderates' worldview, and it was utterly rejected by Labour seats.
As if the EU encapsulates Labour moderates' whole view. Where on earth is the basis for this exactly? As I said before the very reason why Labour voters voted for Brexit is because of concerns regarding freedom of movement. The man you claim is close to Labour voters' political perspective is incredibly pro-freedom of movement and has far more left-wing views, than even the socially liberal PLP that you claim is miles away from the average Labour voter. As for Labour voters, back in April 2015 polls showed Ed Miliband scoring as a 81% of Labour voters 'approving' of him. Does it mean 81% of Labour voters would walk away from the party if Labour had deposed of Ed Miliband? No, it doesn't in my opinion. https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/vojtflusz6/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-180415.pdf#page=3
Labour splits, but it's a negotiated split in which Continuity Labour and Provisional Labour pre-agree an electoral pact not to field candidates against each other.
Corbyn gets to remain Continuity Labour leader, but Provisional Labour gets to choose a new leader of the opposition.
They agree to fight the next general election which will consist of a manifesto that is simply "we will build a progressive consensus in Parliament to change the electoral system to PR, then immediately dissolve parliament".
Once PR is in place, the two Labours can then divorce completely without fear of being wiped out.
I can't see the public being very keen on this idea somehow. How do the 2 parties decide who gets what seat? There is also no guarantee that all the voters for the 2 parties would vote as directed with some splitting off to the LDs or Greens
Mr. Borough, I agree, but the rules seem to indicate pretty strongly (to me, at least*) that Corbyn should automatically be on the ballot.
*Disclaimer: I am not on the National Executive Committee of the Labour Party.
That's my sense of it too, although I have not subjected it to much scrutiny or thought. The extracts from the letter of Corbyn's lawyers sounded pretty bullish, and suggests this will be in the courts within a few days (or even tomorrow) as he seeks an injunction to prevent the contest proceeding until a substantive court hearing takes place (which could be weeks off). I think he might get his injunction, as a later payment of damages to him if the contest proceeds but a court later finds in Corbyn's favour, is going to be scant compensation for being wrongly stripped of a likely winning place on the ballot.
Labour and Corbyn - the gifts that keep on giving...
NEC's legal advice is that any challenge from either side will fail.
I think it's clear the NEC are voting on whether they want Corbyn to be leader and not what the laws actually say.
The laws of this are clear, Corbyn is not a challenger so doesn't need nominating. But they want rid of him, so who cares about pesky things like that?
Can someone explain what's actually happening today?
Charlie Falconer on the brink of resigning .... Michael Gove on the brink of the sack .... (Ooppps .... too early JackW ... sod it !!) Theresa May on the brink of Number 10 Downing Street. Jezza on the brink of the Law Courts.
Can someone explain what's actually happening today?
Charlie Falconer on the brink of resigning .... Michael Gove on the brink of the sack .... (Ooppps .... too early JackW ... sod it !!) Theresa May on the brink of Number 10 Downing Street. Jezza on the brink of the Law Courts.
Only 3 of those are realistic, Charlie isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
Can someone explain what's actually happening today?
Charlie Falconer on the brink of resigning .... Michael Gove on the brink of the sack .... (Ooppps .... too early JackW ... sod it !!) Theresa May on the brink of Number 10 Downing Street. Jezza on the brink of the Law Courts.
If he's denied a place on the ballot, will he and 15 other Labour MPs resign their seats in the Commons? They can't just take this lying down, surely.
That will be a small price to pay in comparison to what could happen if Corbyn wins the leadership again.
Yeah, along with most of the Labour membership, and atleast half of Labour's current vote. That's what the PLP are prepared to let happen if it means they get one of "their own" installed.
You seriously think that half of Labour's current vote would walk away if Corbyn were not leader?
What sane person with an ounce of foresight or understanding would want to become Labour leader right now in such circumstances?
I think it's clear the NEC are voting on whether they want Corbyn to be leader and not what the laws actually say.
The laws of this are clear, Corbyn is not a challenger so doesn't need nominating. But they want rid of him, so who cares about pesky things like that?
This is my point about the current Labour party. It's precisely the same attitude that got them into the Iraq war too.
"It's illegal, top lawyerly advice" "Oh never mind the law".
And the same mentality that allowed the likes of Damien Mcbride to flourish.
As far as he is concerned, he has the overwhelming support of the membership - and thus the damage to unity comes from 172 traitors in the PLP
I'll say it again, even if he isn't on the ballot paper, 300,000+ members will write CORBYN on the ballot - and vote for it. Whoever is declared the "winner" will have no authority - except over the MPs. Who will all be deselected. Pretty much the entire Labour Party in Westminster will be different after the next election - except those who were prepared to nominate Jeremy.
It's possible. But honestly I really don't think it's going to happen. I honestly don't think the vast majority of the 300,000 really will care that much. They'll move on.
Jezza is an unmitigated disaster for the Labour Party but I cannot read those rules in any way other than that he doesn't need to obtain signatures. This will get nasty.
As if the EU encapsulates Labour moderates' whole view. Where on earth is the basis for this exactly? As I said before the very reason why Labour voters voted for Brexit is because of concerns regarding freedom of movement. The man you claim is close to Labour voters' political perspective is incredibly pro-freedom of movement and has far more left-wing views, than even the socially liberal PLP that you claim is miles away from the average Labour voter. As for Labour voters, back in April 2015 polls showed Ed Miliband scoring as a 81% of Labour voters 'approving' of him. Does it mean 81% of Labour voters would walk away from the party if Labour had deposed of Ed Miliband? No, it doesn't in my opinion. https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/vojtflusz6/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-180415.pdf#page=3
With respect, have you actually spoken to (m)any Leave Labour voters?
Immigration was one of the big factors (although on that score, Corbyn and the PLP "moderates" are exactly the same, since the PLP still want to stay in the EU and keep freedom of movement anyway). But other big factors were how much people hated the "career/Establishment politicians" who were leading the Remain campaign, how people were sick of the economy screwing over the little guy, and just generally a scream for ANY change from the terrible status quo. If Labour goes back to a career politician, not promising any real changes from the status quo and sucking up to big businesses, with their main campaigning issues being total fringe issues like feminism, it follows to expect it to fare similarly to the Remain campaign which also based its platform on that.
But the PLP "moderates" probably know all that secretly, and they're not even bothering to CLAIM they would be more electable than Corbyn anymore - all they want is to preserve their own ideology even if that comes at the cost of a Remain-style electoral meltdown.
I think it's clear the NEC are voting on whether they want Corbyn to be leader and not what the laws actually say.
The laws of this are clear, Corbyn is not a challenger so doesn't need nominating. But they want rid of him, so who cares about pesky things like that?
Exactly. The rules were explicitly changed to clarify that the sitting leader did not need nominations. But they are pretending the rules say something else because they do not like what they actually say.
If he's denied a place on the ballot, will he and 15 other Labour MPs resign their seats in the Commons? They can't just take this lying down, surely.
That will be a small price to pay in comparison to what could happen if Corbyn wins the leadership again.
Yeah, along with most of the Labour membership, and atleast half of Labour's current vote. That's what the PLP are prepared to let happen if it means they get one of "their own" installed.
You seriously think that half of Labour's current vote would walk away if Corbyn were not leader?
What sane person with an ounce of foresight or understanding would want to become Labour leader right now in such circumstances?
I've levelled up to zero on Angela Eagle.
This is a complete hospital pass. Who else will want it ?
As far as he is concerned, he has the overwhelming support of the membership - and thus the damage to unity comes from 172 traitors in the PLP
I'll say it again, even if he isn't on the ballot paper, 300,000+ members will write CORBYN on the ballot - and vote for it. Whoever is declared the "winner" will have no authority - except over the MPs. Who will all be deselected. Pretty much the entire Labour Party in Westminster will be different after the next election - except those who were prepared to nominate Jeremy.
It's possible. But honestly I really don't think it's going to happen. I honestly don't think the vast majority of the 300,000 really will care that much. They'll move on.
It seems that if Corbyn can't get the 50 odd votes to be on the ballot he could resign and then stand as a candidate requiring only 30 odd votes.
Would that allow for a legal challenge in the interim, or are the two mutually exclusive. Would be delicious if the Supreme Court ruled in Corbyn's favour!
Jezza is an unmitigated disaster for the Labour Party but I cannot read those rules in any way other than that he doesn't need to obtain signatures. This will get nasty.
The courts will back the NEC. The storm will die down in a few months...
Martyn Rowe This must be the 1st time in history a political party is fixing it so the members can't vote for the person they want to win #LabourNEC
Lots of those "members" he is talking about are uncivic dishonourable opponents of Labour who joined the scheme to game the system to the party's disadvantage.
Fwiw, opinion polls put Corbyn's approval rating among Labour voters at around 60% -- that's not great for the standards of a normal party leader, since they should be getting near-universal support from their own supporters if they want a hope of winning over voters from other parties - but, when we're talking about a potential split in the party, it does rather suggest that the MORE THAN HALF of current Labour voters who approve of him WOULD walk away if he was ousted, no?
No, it's far worse than 60% now:
We don't have much recent polling of the general public but that of YouGov of union members out today is instructive.
Taking the group that, short of the Labour membership, you would expect to be most supportive of Corbyn in the wider public, his rating is thus: Labour 2015 voters who are members of a trade union affiliated to the Labour Party: Corbyn doing well 41%, badly 57% Labour on course for Government in 2020: on course 30%, not on course 63% Labour win in 2020 if Corbyn remains: likely 29%, unlikely 63% Labour win in 2020 if Corbyn replaced: likely 43%, unlikely 40% Corbyn should at the next general election: lead Labour 33% stand down before 58% Corbyn at a Labour leadership election: vote for 45% not vote for 42%
And taking all who are members of a trade union affiliated to the Labour Party: Corbyn doing well 33%, badly 63% Labour on course for Government in 2020: on course 23%, not on course 68% Labour win in 2020 if Corbyn remains: likely 24%, unlikely 69% Labour win in 2020 if Corbyn replaced: likely 34%, unlikely 49% Corbyn should at the next general election: lead Labour 32% stand down before 58% Corbyn at a Labour leadership election: vote for 35% not vote for 38%
If this is what a group who could be expected to be supportive of a Labour leader think, goodness knows how dire his polling is amongst the general public now. I suspect that we'll have a lot of polling on that by the weekend.
Jezza is an unmitigated disaster for the Labour Party but I cannot read those rules in any way other than that he doesn't need to obtain signatures. This will get nasty.
The courts will back the NEC. The storm will die down in a few months...
The courts will say it is the internal matter of the Labour Party. Therefore, whatever, NEC says , goes.
Jezza is an unmitigated disaster for the Labour Party but I cannot read those rules in any way other than that he doesn't need to obtain signatures. This will get nasty.
The courts will back the NEC. The storm will die down in a few months...
But the intent of the rule change at conference was clear, to make it so only challengers required the nominations.
I tend to agree with those who think the rules do not require the person being challenged, that is the incumbent, to be nominated but ffs, how can you possibly lead the party in Parliament when 3/4 have already passed a no confidence motion in you and 50 are not prepared to back you? This is through the looking glass, it really is.
So am I right in thinking that whatever happens today Theresa May is the winner. If Corbyn is on the ballot he wins the election and it's hideous for Labour. If he's not on the ballot he takes them to court, momentum go nuclear and it's hideous for Labour.
Jezza is an unmitigated disaster for the Labour Party but I cannot read those rules in any way other than that he doesn't need to obtain signatures. This will get nasty.
The courts will back the NEC. The storm will die down in a few months...
The courts will say it is the internal matter of the Labour Party. Therefore, whatever, NEC says , goes.
Which implies the Courts can't make judgement on any contract law, since it is an internal matter to the contracting parties.
As far as he is concerned, he has the overwhelming support of the membership - and thus the damage to unity comes from 172 traitors in the PLP
I'll say it again, even if he isn't on the ballot paper, 300,000+ members will write CORBYN on the ballot - and vote for it. Whoever is declared the "winner" will have no authority - except over the MPs. Who will all be deselected. Pretty much the entire Labour Party in Westminster will be different after the next election - except those who were prepared to nominate Jeremy.
It's possible. But honestly I really don't think it's going to happen. I honestly don't think the vast majority of the 300,000 really will care that much. They'll move on.
Most will find another student protest to bother. The rest will concentrate on their own parties – like the Ukip in Plato's case or in Pulpstar's case the Greens/Liberals.
So am I right in thinking that whatever happens today Theresa May is the winner. If Corbyn is on the ballot he wins the election and it's hideous for Labour. If he's not on the ballot he takes them to court, momentum go nuclear and it's hideous for Labour.
"This is a party in freefall, but those facts make no impression on Labour’s new members. Professor Tim Bale has surveyed them and finds 77% who joined after Corbyn became leader believe he will win the next general election. Denial, delusion, magical thinking, call it what you will, they believe it."
As far as he is concerned, he has the overwhelming support of the membership - and thus the damage to unity comes from 172 traitors in the PLP
I'll say it again, even if he isn't on the ballot paper, 300,000+ members will write CORBYN on the ballot - and vote for it. Whoever is declared the "winner" will have no authority - except over the MPs. Who will all be deselected. Pretty much the entire Labour Party in Westminster will be different after the next election - except those who were prepared to nominate Jeremy.
It's possible. But honestly I really don't think it's going to happen. I honestly don't think the vast majority of the 300,000 really will care that much. They'll move on.
That could happen, perhaps - it's the sort of thing that Twitter could make possible. Does write-in have any place in the Labour constitution? I would suspect not, I've only previously heard of it in the context of America.
With respect, have you actually spoken to (m)any Leave Labour voters?
Immigration was one of the big factors (although on that score, Corbyn and the PLP "moderates" are exactly the same, since the PLP still want to stay in the EU and keep freedom of movement anyway). But other big factors were how much people hated the "career/Establishment politicians" who were leading the Remain campaign, how people were sick of the economy screwing over the little guy, and just generally a scream for ANY change from the terrible status quo. If Labour goes back to a career politician, not promising any real changes from the status quo and sucking up to big businesses, with their main campaigning issues being total fringe issues like feminism, it follows to expect it to fare similarly to the Remain campaign which also based its platform on that.
But the PLP "moderates" probably know all that secretly, and they're not even bothering to CLAIM they would be more electable than Corbyn anymore - all they want is to preserve their own ideology even if that comes at the cost of a Remain-style electoral meltdown.
Yes, I have. Most of my family votes Labour. I know Labour, Conservative, and even UKIP leavers. All of whom voted leave because of immigration. All of whom saw the economic problems affecting them, and potentially their children as connected to immigration. Did they dislike career politicians? Yes. But that's voters from all politcal parties, tbqh. Not just Labour. This isn't about going back to a career politician leading Labour. This isn't about installing a Blairite as the new Labour leader. This is about getting someone in - regardless of whether they are from the soft left of the party, or the right - who actually cares about winning elections. Who sees Labour as a political party, and not some meaningless social movement. Who takes into account the views of the membership, but does not hold the entire party hostage to each and everyone of their views. PLP moderates want to preserve the Labour party, as do the rest of the PLP. What they do not want is Leftist militants taking over the party, because once that happens there is no going back anymore.
So am I right in thinking that whatever happens today Theresa May is the winner. If Corbyn is on the ballot he wins the election and it's hideous for Labour. If he's not on the ballot he takes them to court, momentum go nuclear and it's hideous for Labour.
Momentum will be swotted away a la Militant in a few weeks if Watson has pulled this coup off. He hasn't yet so we can't get ahead of ourselves.
Jezza is an unmitigated disaster for the Labour Party but I cannot read those rules in any way other than that he doesn't need to obtain signatures. This will get nasty.
Agreed. Don't get the assumption that the courts will concur with the NEC
Any common sense reading of the rules finds in Jezbollah's favour. But IANAL and maybe there is some precedent which assists Labour.
As far as he is concerned, he has the overwhelming support of the membership - and thus the damage to unity comes from 172 traitors in the PLP
I'll say it again, even if he isn't on the ballot paper, 300,000+ members will write CORBYN on the ballot - and vote for it. Whoever is declared the "winner" will have no authority - except over the MPs. Who will all be deselected. Pretty much the entire Labour Party in Westminster will be different after the next election - except those who were prepared to nominate Jeremy.
I tend to agree with those who think the rules do not require the person being challenged, that is the incumbent, to be nominated but ffs, how can you possibly lead the party in Parliament when 3/4 have already passed a no confidence motion in you and 50 are not prepared to back you? This is through the looking glass, it really is.
Equally, how can you possibly lead a party in the country when the vast majority of its 600k members want someone else?
So am I right in thinking that whatever happens today Theresa May is the winner. If Corbyn is on the ballot he wins the election and it's hideous for Labour. If he's not on the ballot he takes them to court, momentum go nuclear and it's hideous for Labour.
No! Peter Oborne wrote a devastating critique in the Middle East Eye - it's game over for May..
I tend to agree with those who think the rules do not require the person being challenged, that is the incumbent, to be nominated but ffs, how can you possibly lead the party in Parliament when 3/4 have already passed a no confidence motion in you and 50 are not prepared to back you? This is through the looking glass, it really is.
Jezza is an unmitigated disaster for the Labour Party but I cannot read those rules in any way other than that he doesn't need to obtain signatures. This will get nasty.
The courts will back the NEC. The storm will die down in a few months...
The courts will say it is the internal matter of the Labour Party. Therefore, whatever, NEC says , goes.
Which implies the Courts can't make judgement on any contract law, since it is an internal matter to the contracting parties.
No, it means the courts can't make judgements on contract law when the contract defines who the separate arbitration panel is for resolving disputes.
Most contractees would not be stupid enough to choose a nakedly political outfit as the impartial arbitrators, but this is the Labour Party we are talking about.
Jezza is an unmitigated disaster for the Labour Party but I cannot read those rules in any way other than that he doesn't need to obtain signatures. This will get nasty.
Agreed. Don't get the assumption that the courts will concur with the NEC
Any common sense reading of the rules finds in Jezbollah's favour. But IANAL and maybe there is some precedent which assists Labour.
As if the EU encapsulates Labour moderates' whole view. Where on earth is the basis for this exactly? As I said before the very reason why Labour voters voted for Brexit is because of concerns regarding freedom of movement. The man you claim is close to Labour voters' political perspective is incredibly pro-freedom of movement and has far more left-wing views, than even the socially liberal PLP that you claim is miles away from the average Labour voter. As for Labour voters, back in April 2015 polls showed Ed Miliband scoring as a 81% of Labour voters 'approving' of him. Does it mean 81% of Labour voters would walk away from the party if Labour had deposed of Ed Miliband? No, it doesn't in my opinion. https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/vojtflusz6/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-180415.pdf#page=3
With respect, have you actually spoken to (m)any Leave Labour voters?
Immigration was one of the big factors (although on that score, Corbyn and the PLP "moderates" are exactly the same, since the PLP still want to stay in the EU and keep freedom of movement anyway). But other big factors were how much people hated the "career/Establishment politicians" who were leading the Remain campaign, how people were sick of the economy screwing over the little guy, and just generally a scream for ANY change from the terrible status quo. If Labour goes back to a career politician, not promising any real changes from the status quo and sucking up to big businesses, with their main campaigning issues being total fringe issues like feminism, it follows to expect it to fare similarly to the Remain campaign which also based its platform on that.
But the PLP "moderates" probably know all that secretly, and they're not even bothering to CLAIM they would be more electable than Corbyn anymore - all they want is to preserve their own ideology even if that comes at the cost of a Remain-style electoral meltdown.
No, what they want is for Labour to continue being a party whose primary focus is on winning power through parliamentary elections. There is nothing else that unites the broad band of Labour MPs who are from all parts of the party, except the hard left (and maybe Andy Burnham)
So am I right in thinking that whatever happens today Theresa May is the winner. If Corbyn is on the ballot he wins the election and it's hideous for Labour. If he's not on the ballot he takes them to court, momentum go nuclear and it's hideous for Labour.
Yes, but Theresa's got her own problems (namely Brexit)
Comments
Does anyone believe that?
Doh! My mistake - I do apologise. From a dollar fifty to around a dollar thirty is around 13%.
LOL...
Seriously I fear for the conservatives under May. I really do. But then it looks like the moulds of British politics are being shattered anyway.
Corbyn was elected leader by the membership on a 60% vote share less than 12 months ago...
"A traditional family life is now a political handicap"
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/07/traditional-family-life-now-political-handicap/
Labour just held a vote to determine how to hold its vote on whether to allow its members to vote for someone we might vote for. #democracy
@hugorifkind: I've also found a column Corbyn wrote in the Morning Star in 2006, supporting a secret ballot when MPs choose a speaker.
@hugorifkind: Pretty sure I used to be cooler than this. Fuck.
Labour and Corbyn - the gifts that keep on giving...
Labour splits, but it's a negotiated split in which Continuity Labour and Provisional Labour pre-agree an electoral pact not to field candidates against each other.
Corbyn gets to remain Continuity Labour leader, but Provisional Labour gets to choose a new leader of the opposition.
They agree to fight the next general election on a joint manifesto which is simply "we will build a progressive consensus in Parliament to change the electoral system to PR, then immediately dissolve parliament".
Once PR is in place, the two Labours can then divorce completely without fear of being wiped out.
Michael Gove on the brink of the sack .... (Ooppps .... too early JackW ... sod it !!)
Theresa May on the brink of Number 10 Downing Street.
Jezza on the brink of the Law Courts.
"Watson has stitched it up", texts senior loyalist.
Beaten by the ultimate union fixer. Oh, the irony of it all.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3686476/A-win-Remain-Larry-cat-stay-Downing-Street-David-Cameron-hands-Theresa-Prime-Minister.html
Personally I think the rules mean Corbyn should be on automatically.
Keiran Pedley @keiranpedley Jul 10
Why I think Corbyn should not automatically make the Labour leadership ballot
Anyway, anyone would think he doesn't actually want a Labour government.
The laws of this are clear, Corbyn is not a challenger so doesn't need nominating. But they want rid of him, so who cares about pesky things like that?
Calls of nature getting urgent?
To consult with their spiritual advisors?
The rules mean he should be, but he wishes for something else that isn't what the rules say.
#awkward
This must be the 1st time in history a political party is fixing it so the members can't vote for the person they want to win #LabourNEC
"It's illegal, top lawyerly advice"
"Oh never mind the law".
And the same mentality that allowed the likes of Damien Mcbride to flourish.
Immigration was one of the big factors (although on that score, Corbyn and the PLP "moderates" are exactly the same, since the PLP still want to stay in the EU and keep freedom of movement anyway). But other big factors were how much people hated the "career/Establishment politicians" who were leading the Remain campaign, how people were sick of the economy screwing over the little guy, and just generally a scream for ANY change from the terrible status quo. If Labour goes back to a career politician, not promising any real changes from the status quo and sucking up to big businesses, with their main campaigning issues being total fringe issues like feminism, it follows to expect it to fare similarly to the Remain campaign which also based its platform on that.
But the PLP "moderates" probably know all that secretly, and they're not even bothering to CLAIM they would be more electable than Corbyn anymore - all they want is to preserve their own ideology even if that comes at the cost of a Remain-style electoral meltdown.
Charlie Falconer calls. I'm asking for my case to be seen before Corbyn's at the NEC, he tells me. Gonna be a long night.
This is a complete hospital pass. Who else will want it ?
Names in a little black book.
He's the only point of stability in the past three weeks, and so clearly he is orchestrating everything.
We don't have much recent polling of the general public but that of YouGov of union members out today is instructive.
Taking the group that, short of the Labour membership, you would expect to be most supportive of Corbyn in the wider public, his rating is thus:
Labour 2015 voters who are members of a trade union affiliated to the Labour Party:
Corbyn doing well 41%, badly 57%
Labour on course for Government in 2020: on course 30%, not on course 63%
Labour win in 2020 if Corbyn remains: likely 29%, unlikely 63%
Labour win in 2020 if Corbyn replaced: likely 43%, unlikely 40%
Corbyn should at the next general election: lead Labour 33% stand down before 58%
Corbyn at a Labour leadership election: vote for 45% not vote for 42%
And taking all who are members of a trade union affiliated to the Labour Party:
Corbyn doing well 33%, badly 63%
Labour on course for Government in 2020: on course 23%, not on course 68%
Labour win in 2020 if Corbyn remains: likely 24%, unlikely 69%
Labour win in 2020 if Corbyn replaced: likely 34%, unlikely 49%
Corbyn should at the next general election: lead Labour 32% stand down before 58%
Corbyn at a Labour leadership election: vote for 35% not vote for 38%
If this is what a group who could be expected to be supportive of a Labour leader think, goodness knows how dire his polling is amongst the general public now. I suspect that we'll have a lot of polling on that by the weekend.
"This is a party in freefall, but those facts make no impression on Labour’s new members. Professor Tim Bale has surveyed them and finds 77% who joined after Corbyn became leader believe he will win the next general election. Denial, delusion, magical thinking, call it what you will, they believe it."
Any other names who might come out the woodwork for a tilt ?
A nice own goal from Momentum's hard core thugs.
The man cannot be reasoned with, David.
Most contractees would not be stupid enough to choose a nakedly political outfit as the impartial arbitrators, but this is the Labour Party we are talking about.
Neither has a snowball's chance in hell.