For those (like me) that didn't get the connection:
No brawl no resignation. No resignation, no Falkirk. No Falkirk no electoral reform.
next labour leader
- Thread starter sun_tzu
- Start date
No brawl no resignation. No resignation, no Falkirk. No Falkirk no electoral reform.
Someone's changed the wikipedia page to include H from Steps as the Shadow Sec. for Wales
Waiting for confirmation from a reliable source yet though
Waiting for confirmation from a reliable source yet though
I thought the way in which Thornberry dismissed the IRA discussion was in poor taste. What did she say..."People from Northern Ireland are known for having rubber necks, they're always looking backwards rather than forwards."
At least i think that was it.
McTernan came out the better on housing IMO, neither Thornnerry nor Jones were able to provide a satisfactory answer. It was mostly platitudes or policies which didn't even address the problem at hand.
So, you've got £185bn burning a hole in your pocket, and most productive use you can find for it is renationalisation?
I think that there has to be more honesty about this renationalisation proposals; it needs to be explained to the electorate how much it will cost to run these industries over the long term, whether their taxes will be rising as a result. Although one suspects that that there is an element of the grass on the other side seeming greener, bearing in mind the state of public satisfaction with British Rail as it used to be.
Last edited:
Socialist is one thing, but we aren't going to stop hearing about his request to "honour the IRA" until he's sacked or resigns. And who knows when that'll be.
Like me, I think many would point to East Coast Rail as what nationalised railways can be. Ran a major (maybe the major) rail route better than the private companies, ran at a profit whilst charging less for tickets and didn't cost the tax-payers a penny. The minority of those who don't support renationalisation may cite British Rail but it's not existed for 18 years now.
True. Has he reiterated that sentiment since he made it by the way? He tempered his statement (albeit not entirely to anyone's satisfaction) at the time but regardless of whether he's changed his mind it's public record and ready for any paper to bring up. Sadly it's no secret that leftist (relatively speaking) politicians will always draw more flak from the media than right-wing ones. Boris Johnson can call gay people 'bumboys', black people 'piccaninnies' and praise British colonialism in Uganda and at one point was a serious contender to be the next Tory leader. We'll see if McDonnell is given a second chance in the same manner.
Last edited:
Angela Eagle becomes Shadow First Sec. of State, and Lucy Powell Shadow Sec for Education.
edit - Woodcock rumoured for Shadow Work and Pensions which would be a real marker with regards to inclusion.
edit - Woodcock rumoured for Shadow Work and Pensions which would be a real marker with regards to inclusion.
*googles*
I now know one thing about her. She supports City. Thus, I cannot get behind this one.
Lucky for Cameron they don't wear Claret and Blue eh?
Go team!
When life gives you lemons... Pick them as your shadow cabinet
Whilst we're on the topic of pointless ministers (and a minister for religious relations or something of that sort is not a bad idea) can someone explain to me why the feck this is still a thing:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chancellor_of_the_Duchy_of_Lancaster
A city fan?! I'm voting monster raving looney party. #GetTheBertiesOutofOffice
He was 51 years old at the time, not like it was the impetuousness of youth that got to him. Unfortunately for me this really just confirms that Corbyn's judgement is god awful, either that or he's fully aware this won't last long and he wants to go out in a blaze.
And let's not pretend rightwing politicians don't get punished in the press for the things they say either. Boris would be found out if he was leader quickly as anything, which is why they'll pick Osborne to tap into the open net.
That would be bizarre. Can't see it at all.
Wonder if Eagle getting that job in addition to business will be his way around the "no women in top jobs" line.
Oliver Letwin still exists!
pretty much my reactionThat has been a hugely depressing part of that last few days. We had plenty of female candidates, for the leadership, deputy and mayoral bid. None of them came close.
In my view they were the stand-out candidates in each of those, too.
The mayoral one was really weird though. London went massively for Corbyn, and Diane Abbott basically says exactly the same things as Corbyn, but she came third with only 20% after 4 rounds. I personally doubt her son going to private school could be responsible for such a discrepancy...
Well, he does want to withdraw from NATO...
A Muslim candidate is definitely some form of progress
If we had Cooper, Creasey and Jowell the same people would be decrying a lack of racial representation.
What a moron.David Cameron
@David_Cameron
The Labour Party is now a threat to our national security, our economic security and your family's security.
The competition in the mayoral race was much more convincing than the competition in the leadership race (which was practically non-existent).
I've always found that the sort of people who don't themselves give a shit about representation or sexism suddenly grow some morals when it gives them to chance to criticize someone they don't like. I can sympathize with those who are truly bemoaning the lack of representation as it's something I would have liked to see, but he has every right to appoint people who have similar views to himself.
Throughout his campaign he's gotten attacked regardless of what he's done - if he got rid of Hilary Benn he'd be attacked for a lack of experience in a key role and a lack of continuity. If he didn't bring in Burnham in a top job he'd be attacked for not trying to unite the party. If he'd not appointed McDonnell he'd be handing over a key position to the centre, something he has absolutely no reason to do given his mandate. In my view it's unfortunate that, because of the central control of candidate selection under New Labour, few socialists came through during the era of women-only shortlists.
There's a panel of 4 woman Labour MPs on the BBC (under the headline 'where are all the women?') defending Corbyn and his selections, making the point that Angela Eagles is his number two and criticizing the likes of Cooper for ruling themselves out. There was also an interesting point from McDonnell that the perceived hierarchy of positions will not be a feature of a Corbyn shadow cabinet and that the cabinet will be far more a collection of equals with health and education being key positions.
Not what the media wants to hear though, they'd rather keep parroting the attacks.
Throughout his campaign he's gotten attacked regardless of what he's done - if he got rid of Hilary Benn he'd be attacked for a lack of experience in a key role and a lack of continuity. If he didn't bring in Burnham in a top job he'd be attacked for not trying to unite the party. If he'd not appointed McDonnell he'd be handing over a key position to the centre, something he has absolutely no reason to do given his mandate. In my view it's unfortunate that, because of the central control of candidate selection under New Labour, few socialists came through during the era of women-only shortlists.
There's a panel of 4 woman Labour MPs on the BBC (under the headline 'where are all the women?') defending Corbyn and his selections, making the point that Angela Eagles is his number two and criticizing the likes of Cooper for ruling themselves out. There was also an interesting point from McDonnell that the perceived hierarchy of positions will not be a feature of a Corbyn shadow cabinet and that the cabinet will be far more a collection of equals with health and education being key positions.
Not what the media wants to hear though, they'd rather keep parroting the attacks.
Last edited:
I honestly think the Tories will shoot themselves in the foot shouting down Corbyn. They could make these types of ludicrous claims against 'on the back foot' Ed but Corbyn won't shy away from giving honest answers and it'll make the Tories look weaker and weaker
If they have any sense they'll stay quiet, govern and let the right wing media run with it themselves.
If they have any sense they'll stay quiet, govern and let the right wing media run with it themselves.
It would help if he actually went on to the media and talked about it, rather than just hiding which is what he seems to be doing. Even Owen Jones is puzzled.
I keep reading that is exactly their strategy. Leak damaging bits and pieces to the press but avoid attacking Corbyn personally and do everything possible to appeal to centrist voters who will be uncomfortable with Labour's lurch to the left. Also make "security" a buzzword to remind people that under Corbyn they might feel insecure, both internationally (scrapping Trident, leaving Nato etc) and domestically (general visions of 80s dysfunction.)
I'm struggling to see all the uproar about Corbyn's selections from the gender POV. I was expecting to look at the list and see one female in an obscure position, but that's hardly the case. Health, education and business are all represented by females, and Diane Abbot's in there too. Yeah, it's largely dominated by men, but who cares if they're the best people for the job? If they're not, and aren't good enough, then there could be a cause for complaint, but until anything's actually been done I don't see the point in criticising Corbyn for the unbalanced gender within the party when he has actually put some females into decent positions.
I'm sure he will at some point, probably when he's got all the key positions locked down, but he'll need to get used to the 24-hour news culture. Getting your point in earlier than or at the same time as your detractors so it gets onto the news-cycle as soon as possible is more important than ever.
@Cheesy - agreed. It's criticism with a clear agenda from people who have done a lot less for gender equality than Corbyn has over the years.
Mind you, John McDonnell as Shadow Chancellor does seem like a more bizarre appointment.
Chris Bryant (Shad. Leader of the House) on the BBC admitting that the PLP is out of touch with the Labour Party at large and that it 'has a lot of learning to do' and needs to embrace a new, more democratic form of politics following Corbyn's victory. Also suggests the pro-Europe MPs have nothing to fear from Corbyn's leadership and that there is no credence to fears of the PLP being purged of moderates.
Last edited:
Caroline Flint the latest to go.
It's not really uproar, it's disappointment that after nearly a decade of continuous female presence in one of the established big jobs, we're back down to zero which, when the Labour parliamentary party is now over 40% female, is irritating. Granted, it wasn't made easier by plenty of talented women saying they wouldn't serve (though there was plenty of "you'd never have gotten a job anyway, Blairite" talk when they did so), and the overall shadow cabinet looks to have followed Ed's lead in being 50%+ female, but really all he had to do was appoint Eagle, more than qualified and experienced enough for the job, rather than the odious McDonnell. He wanted to stay true to his ideals, which is fair enough, but to expect no blowback from it is naive in the extreme.
Perhaps, but again, that largely depends on what is perceived as being the big positions. If you've only got four, then a woman not being in there is hardly ridiculous when we're only talking about a few particular positions. There's still plenty of major jobs being occupied by women such as health, education and business.
Although McDonnell's appointment does seem a bit mental: wasn't he sacked by Ken Livingstone for being too left-wing?
The biggest positions are well established - leader, shadow chancellor, foreign secretary and home secretary. I'd have more sympathy for the argument if he didn't have an easy way out in the form of a qualified and willing appointment in Eagle. But John McDonnell it is. Yeah Ken said he cooked the books whilst at the GLC.Perhaps, but again, that largely depends on what is perceived as being the big positions. If you've only got four, then a woman not being in there is hardly ridiculous when we're only talking about a few particular positions. There's still plenty of major jobs being occupied by women such as health, education and business.
Although McDonnell's appointment does seem a bit mental: wasn't he sacked by Ken Livingstone for being too left-wing?
Just as long as someone can do the job I couldn't care less if they were male or female. Just be good.
A lot of tedious sexist claptrap today, I gave up listening.
I can't take her seriously. She talks like a child. I don't think this is remotely fair of me, and it shouldn't matter, but I can't get past it...
Just seen the full list - happy with it overall. Great to see Lisa Nandy get a shout. Dissappointed that so many from the centre and right ruled themselves out but, as Watson predicted, their attention-grabbing 'look how much we all hate Corbyn' move has been undermined by others who are willing to serve.
That's quite something.
Stella Creasy was offered the chance to attend cabinet, but only when discussing "youth affairs". Emily Thornberry not offered anything despite nominating him and telling others not to refuse posts.
This will all be a disaster for Labour I'm guessing. I've been a member for a long time, but don't know what to think now.