Labour / Tory Party meltdown Referendum fallout

cibaman said:
De-selection is a very bad idea for the Corbynistas. It will just push the breakaway group's numbers up to the 150 mark. Making them the official opposition and Corbyn's mob the minority party.
Click to expand...

If -when de-selection takes place it would be the local CLP's decision based on how they feel their MP has represented their wishes, prior to a GE.
It would then be for those de-selected to decide if they want to form a new party, stand as an independent or not stand.
A parliamentary party so out of touch with the members cannot continue, though if - when Corbyn is re-elected it will be interesting to see how many of the 172 change sides (blaming intimidation from the progress faction)
 
law74 said:
CLP's decision based on how they feel their MP has represented their wishes
Click to expand...
Silly me I thought the MP was the constituency MP and represented the voters, not a few self appointed members that have paid their £3.Thats the problem Labour party members have got this democracy thing backwards, it should be elected mps first, self appointed, self indulgent members second.
As a labour voter I'm sick of members giving us an incompetent opposition, leading to another Tory government down the line.
 
blueparrot said:
Silly me I thought the MP was the constituency MP and represented the voters, not a few self appointed members that have paid their £3.Thats the problem Labour party members have got this democracy thing backwards, it should be elected mps first, self appointed, self indulgent members second.
As a labour voter I'm sick of members giving us an incompetent opposition, leading to another Tory government down the line.
Click to expand...

It wasn't the members that abstained on the welfare cuts bill or the last austerity budget
 
blueparrot said:
Silly me I thought the MP was the constituency MP and represented the voters, not a few self appointed members that have paid their £3.Thats the problem Labour party members have got this democracy thing backwards, it should be elected mps first, self appointed, self indulgent members second.
As a labour voter I'm sick of members giving us an incompetent opposition, leading to another Tory government down the line.
Click to expand...

Pay your 3 quid and have your 'say' then.
 
stonerblue said:
Pay your 3 quid and have your 'say' then.
Click to expand...
That's my point why should somebody that's paid £3.00, have more of a say than somebody elected ? The vast majority of people have no interest in joining a party.
The vast majority of people expect the MP to represent everybody in a constituency. Not to belong to those that paid £3.00 or whatever price it is.
I don't pay my £3.00 because I have better things to do I don't expect to need to buy my say. There is no guarantee that those that do pay £3.00 are even Labour voters I'm sure some aren't.
 
blueparrot said:
That's my point why should somebody that's paid £3.00, have more of a say than somebody elected ? The vast majority of people have no interest in joining a party.
The vast majority of people expect the MP to represent everybody in a constituency. Not to belong to those that paid £3.00 or whatever price it is.
I don't pay my £3.00 because I have better things to do I don't expect to need to buy my say. There is no guarantee that those that do pay £3.00 are even Labour voters I'm sure some aren't.
Click to expand...
The temptation for Tory voters to pay 3 quid to keep Corbyn must be immense.
 
law74 said:
If -when de-selection takes place it would be the local CLP's decision based on how they feel their MP has represented their wishes, prior to a GE.
It would then be for those de-selected to decide if they want to form a new party, stand as an independent or not stand.
A parliamentary party so out of touch with the members cannot continue, though if - when Corbyn is re-elected it will be interesting to see how many of the 172 change sides (blaming intimidation from the progress faction)
Click to expand...
Were you around in the 1980's when Militant stuffed the CLP's with members to de-select MP's snd councillors that it felt were too right-wing? That's not democracy; it's a purge.

A party leader has to have the confidence of a significant majority of his or her MP's otherwise they can't function either as a leader or as a party. And they have to be able to command the confidence of the electorate at large, or at least enough of them to ensure they win elections. The members of a party expect to have a say of course and are important for providing the foot-soldiers who run campaigns but they're the least important part of the triumvirate. An MP is responsible to his constituents not his members. Kinnock actually went to war with a large group of his party's membership, with the support of much of the PLP, and in doing so, made the party electable again.

Fascist groups like Momentum risk sending the Labour party back to the 1980's.
 
Some silly woman of a Labour MP on Sunday Polictics embarrassing herself - what's wrong with Labour, they are all over the place
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
Were you around in the 1980's when Militant stuffed the CLP's with members to de-select MP's snd councillors that it felt were too right-wing? That's not democracy; it's a purge.

A party leader has to have the confidence of a significant majority of his or her MP's otherwise they can't function either as a leader or as a party. And they have to be able to command the confidence of the electorate at large, or at least enough of them to ensure they win elections. The members of a party expect to have a say of course and are important for providing the foot-soldiers who run campaigns but they're the least important part of the triumvirate. An MP is responsible to his constituents not his members. Kinnock actually went to war with a large group of his party's membership, with the support of much of the PLP, and in doing so, made the party electable again.

Fascist groups like Momentum risk sending the Labour party back to the 1980's.
Click to expand...

I remember the right wing of the party ignoring the rules of the party to parachute in candidates against the wishes of the CLP (just ask eagle), & expelling people that they disagreed with, often again against the rules of the party.
 
law74 said:
I remember the right wing of the party ignoring the rules of the party to parachute in candidates against the wishes of the CLP (just ask eagle), & expelling people that they disagreed with, often again against the rules of the party.
Click to expand...

My constituency too. The exact quote from Blair was "no more local heroes". So I've got a London-centric MP who feels an email is sufficient to keep his constituents happy, who also very rarely attends his own constituency meetings other than to jibe losing candidates within the reason. When he's losing a debate he demeans the person who's debating.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
law74 said:
If -when de-selection takes place it would be the local CLP's decision based on how they feel their MP has represented their wishes, prior to a GE.
It would then be for those de-selected to decide if they want to form a new party, stand as an independent or not stand.
A parliamentary party so out of touch with the members cannot continue, though if - when Corbyn is re-elected it will be interesting to see how many of the 172 change sides (blaming intimidation from the progress faction)
Click to expand...

The breakaway group wouldn't wait until just before the election, for de-selection to actually take place. The threat of de-selection would be enough. Once more than 50% of Labour MPs are prepared to breakaway, they become the official opposition. Corbyn and his mates would be relegated to the backbenches. After a couple of years the breakaway group would become established in the public eye as "real" Labour. Corbyn gets his wish to become leader of a pure protest movement.
 
cibaman said:
The breakaway group wouldn't wait until just before the election, for de-selection to actually take place. The threat of de-selection would be enough. Once more than 50% of Labour MPs are prepared to breakaway, they become the official opposition. Corbyn and his mates would be relegated to the backbenches. After a couple of years the breakaway group would become established in the public eye as "real" Labour. Corbyn gets his wish to become leader of a pure protest movement.
Click to expand...
You are correct although you've out left one important part, namely the net reduction in the number of overall seats between these two factions after the next general election, under FPTP, as the left of centre votes gets split.
 
blueparrot said:
That's my point why should somebody that's paid £3.00, have more of a say than somebody elected ? The vast majority of people have no interest in joining a party.
The vast majority of people expect the MP to represent everybody in a constituency. Not to belong to those that paid £3.00 or whatever price it is.
I don't pay my £3.00 because I have better things to do I don't expect to need to buy my say. There is no guarantee that those that do pay £3.00 are even Labour voters I'm sure some aren't.
Click to expand...

So let's you've voted your local MP in long before the leadership issue crops up. You may not have even given it a second thought. A year down the line your MP has decided to pursue a course of action directly opposite to the one you want. Your MP is no longer representing you, right?
Not being a fee paying member of the party means you now have zero chance to influence the decision of the MP you elected to represent you.
 
mat said:
My constituency too. The exact quote from Blair was "no more local heroes". So I've got a London-centric MP who feels an email is sufficient to keep his constituents happy, who also very rarely attends his own constituency meetings other than to jibe losing candidates within the reason. When he's losing a debate he demeans the person who's debating.
Click to expand...
I don't think many would have an issue with an MP like that being deselected. But there could be a hard-working MP or councillor, who devotes his or her self to sorting out the problems of their constituents, who does get deselected because he doesn't follow a particular doctrine or dares to vote against an unpopular leader.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
I don't think many would have an issue with an MP like that being deselected. But there could be a hard-working MP or councillor, who devotes his or her self to sorting out the problems of their constituents, who does get deselected because he doesn't follow a particular doctrine or dares to vote against an unpopular leader.
Click to expand...
That's the life in Politics though, tough sometimes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top