Immigration policy and social policy are two different things. One might get affected by the other but to say you didn’t like his social policies is incorrect if the example you’re pointing to is his immigration policy.I think his purposeful goal to radically change Britain by mass immigration was a disaster for many reasons.
Immigration is a natural and healthy thing but I believe doing it so such scale and without adequate policy on integration, causes lots of social issues and often gives oxygen to the extremes.
There’s nothing wrong with encouraging immigration when it’s needed for specific jobs or there’s a lack of people but Blair’s policy was to tear down every obstacle possible, that controlled immigration.
100,000’s of people came as refugees who weren’t, as a specific example.
I think that eventually fed into a part of Brexit and why immigration became the main policy debate in the 2015 election.
If you’d have given the British public a referendum on mass immigration, it would have got a resounding no.
Secondary modern for me Alan, so yet again you are wrong. You do like to try and belittle someone with your cheap jibes dont you? Starmer will always be labelled a champagne socialist because he is one. A rich man living in London telling the rest of us how he can emphasise and be in touch with northern working class people. He showed how good he is at that with his self righteous views on Brexit. Those views went down really well with the northern labour voters last December didn't they? I dont dislike the bloke, hes seems nice enough but his main problem is he is out of touch with a large section of his natural voters and will be seen as champagne socialist by many many people including the sections of the press whether you like it or not. Nandy would have been more of a clean break imo.
Of course not - his leadership is my reason for joining. He didn't need my vote to get elected but his success will be reflected by a rise of at least one in Labour Party membership if their processing and verification of my application allows. Sadly I was unable to record the demise of Jezzer as the reason for re-joining but maybe the opportunity will present itself in due course. My welcome email from Jenny Formby was not appreciated though, hopefully she will an early casualty of the new regime - only 56.2% voted for him so there is a lot of weeding to be done.You joined to vote for Starmer?
Of course not - his leadership is my reason for joining. He didn't need my vote to get elected but his success will be reflected by a rise of at least one in Labour Party membership if their processing and verification of my application allows. Sadly I was unable to record the demise of Jezzer as the reason for re-joining but maybe the opportunity will present itself in due course.
Did you vote for Corbyn as well?Opportunity for what? You don't need to keep posting as if you're fighting a rearguard action. I've been a member for years and I voted for Starmer.
Did you vote for Corbyn as well?
In which case you are one of reasons I left the Party. Your vote is responsible for its current parlous condition.Yes.
In which case you are one of reasons I left the Party. Your vote is responsible for its current parlous condition.
Worth noting his distancing himself from remain since the GE and reinvention of himself as left of centre also. The bloke couldn't lie straight in bed, is prepared to say whatever he thinks will advance his career and I'm sure he will do very well.Secondary modern for me Alan, so yet again you are wrong. You do like to try and belittle someone with your cheap jibes dont you? Starmer will always be labelled a champagne socialist because he is one. A rich man living in London telling the rest of us how he can emphasise and be in touch with northern working class people. He showed how good he is at that with his self righteous views on Brexit. Those views went down really well with the northern labour voters last December didn't they? I dont dislike the bloke, hes seems nice enough but his main problem is he is out of touch with a large section of his natural voters and will be seen as champagne socialist by many many people including the sections of the press whether you like it or not. Nandy would have been more of a clean break imo.
Immigration policy and social policy are two different things. One might get affected by the other but to say you didn’t like his social policies is incorrect if the example you’re pointing to is his immigration policy.
You’ve answered a different question to the one asked.
Indeed, at least I voted for the right Miliband though, but it was Brown who really sold us down the red river.George, George, George, if you sit back and think it through, you'll find blame a little closer to home.
For me Blair's single biggest mistake was allowing Brown a free reign over the economy.That is absolutely true.
I thought Cameron’s austerity was too harsh and it changed society for the worse but then we had to get that deficit down.
Somewhere around Blairism is my economic position.
I think he kept the balance between the two well, if not slightly over egging the spending.
Oh and it’s worth pointing out the financial crash wasn’t his fault or anything to do with New Labour.
Where Blair falls down for me is social policy.
Still about members not voters for you then. The point is ex Labour voters like me may reconsider now, if that happens Labour may once again win an election and you know help people."Our"?
You a member George?
Still about members not voters for you then. The point is ex Labour voters like me may reconsider now, if that happens Labour may once again win an election and you know help people.
Indeed, at least I voted for the right Miliband though, but it was Brown who really sold us down the red river.
I've heard more sense from a tomato.
For me Blair's single biggest mistake was allowing Brown a free reign over the economy.