DeeTillEhDeh Posted August 12, 2016 Share Posted August 12, 2016 4 hours ago, strichener said: The public are more than welcome to attend the court proceedings. I have no doubt that the judgement will be published in due course should you wish to critique the process and reasons. The basis of the success of the appeal would appear to be that the High Court judge determined that the NEC are ultimately responsible for setting the rules around the leadership process and therefore the process was legitimate. Which was always going to be the result - the original judge was interpreting membership of the Labour Party to being akin to membership of a club with access to services when clearly it isn't. Even with that viewpoint the original judgement is flawed as any member of a club will tell you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunning1874 Posted August 13, 2016 Share Posted August 13, 2016 Surely it goes hand in hand with the ruling that Labour should be returning membership fees to all who joined and are unable to vote? Considering they explicitly told people they'd be able to vote if they joined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stemjsim Posted August 13, 2016 Share Posted August 13, 2016 On 11/08/2016 at 22:19, marty_j said: " Smith only coming out with "left wing policies" due to Corbyn getting massive support. No way Labour would be anywhere near this far left if not for Corbyn factor. That in itself is a victory for me. Smith seems to just nail his colours to anything he thinks might be popular than stuff he actually believes in. Austerity/Iraq/NHS for examples. 17 hours ago, strichener said: This is the kind of situation that Labour find themselves in all the time. Even your post is ambiguous, to the extend that you cannot deduce if you think the court was correct. It appears to be the Labour way - don't commit to anything and we can't be blamed for anything: Austerity - Abstain Welfare - Abstain Trade Unions - Abstain This is a party that thinks they only need a change of leader to become electable? Labour are Unelectable because they seem to want to Win but don't seem to know why they should be in other than SNP/Tories Bad. They fumble the ball constantly and have done since Blair left. The split and infighting has killed them up here and in England and there seems to be no one who is capable of sorting the mess out. They need to be fighting for what the believe in (if they can figure that out) and running into brick walls full speed to get the point across, not just gifting the Tories easy victory after easy victory. As for changing the rules retroactively, Dick move for sure and a scared move. Sadly not surprising though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerwickMad Posted August 13, 2016 Share Posted August 13, 2016 I agree with most of that tbh. They've let the Tories call the shots and just let them get away with it. Two prime examples for me were letting the the Tories attach the blame on the credit crunch to Labour alone and not managing to deal with the Labour/SNP shit before the election. They were basically following the Tories around reacting to everything they did despite them being hugely unpopular themselves. They had no confidence in what they could do and it summed up Ed's weak leadership.However, what they've done since is a completely different kind of awfulness. A 'leader' who has absolutely nothing about him other than his principles. People can put their head in the sand all they want and cry about the media and "but but but, you don't understand", but now more than ever, Labour need a strong leader and a firm plan to stick to so the general public know what they stand for and what they're going to do. Not the shambles they have now, perfectly shown up by the EU referendum where Corbyn's tactics provided confusion and mixed messages to anyone not already converted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cream Cheese Posted August 13, 2016 Share Posted August 13, 2016 Corbyn didn't lose the EU referendum. It wasn't his referendum to lose. He gave his own honest opinion about the EU. Far better than politicians who pretend to feel a particular way about a specific policy, just because it's the official party line. Your idea of a strong leader is a liar. Somebody who says what they're not really thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerwickMad Posted August 13, 2016 Share Posted August 13, 2016 Corbyn didn't lose the EU referendum. It wasn't his referendum to lose. He gave his own honest opinion about the EU. Far better than politicians who pretend to feel a particular way about a specific policy, just because it's the official party line. Your idea of a strong leader is a liar. Somebody who says what they're not really thinking. I didn't say he lost the referendum. I gave an example of why I think he's a poor leader and how I believe he undermined the Labour Party campaign. He's not on the back benches anymore. He's the leader of a political party and he strayed from the message to deliver a confused message. That, along with other incompetent things like announcing a reshuffle in a day when the party were launching an opposition to rail price hikes, show to me that he doesn't have the skills to lead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cream Cheese Posted August 13, 2016 Share Posted August 13, 2016 2 minutes ago, BerwickMad said: I didn't say he lost the referendum. I gave an example of why I think he's a poor leader and how I believe he undermined the Labour Party campaign. He's not on the back benches anymore. He's the leader of a political party and he strayed from the message to deliver a confused message. That, along with other incompetent things like announcing a reshuffle in a day when the party were launching an opposition to rail price hikes, show to me that he doesn't have the skills to lead. The party were launching an opposition to rail price hikes, not because they actually care how much you and I pay for our rail fares, but to stall a reshuffle within the party. If there hadn't been a call for a reshuffle, Labour would have just sat on their hands. Yes, he's the leader. Is the leader not allowed to be honest and say what they think? Party policy should fit around the leader of a political party, not the other way around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerwickMad Posted August 13, 2016 Share Posted August 13, 2016 The party were launching an opposition to rail price hikes, not because they actually care how much you and I pay for our rail fares, but to stall a reshuffle within the party. If there hadn't been a call for a reshuffle, Labour would have just sat on their hands. Yes, he's the leader. Is the leader not allowed to be honest and say what they think? Party policy should fit around the leader of a political party, not the other way around. What a load of shit! The rail price hike opposition was on the day of the hikes and had been planned for over a month. The reshuffle blew it out of the news. And I totally disagree with the last point. No party should be devoid of critical opinion of their leader. The leader has a part to play obviously in setting an overall direction, but expecting everyone to fall behind a confused message when the leader is making no attempt to reach out to anyone is unrealistic. Some members of the shadow cabinet had barely had a meeting with Corbyn in 10 months. His leadership skills are severely lacking, whatever you think of his principles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerwickMad Posted August 13, 2016 Share Posted August 13, 2016 Also, to be dismissive of anyone disagreeing with Corbyn like you are is a bit pathetic. "The don't care about rail fares", "careerists" etc. It has no basis in reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted August 13, 2016 Share Posted August 13, 2016 40 minutes ago, BerwickMad said: I didn't say he lost the referendum. I gave an example of why I think he's a poor leader and how I believe he undermined the Labour Party campaign. He's not on the back benches anymore. He's the leader of a political party and he strayed from the message to deliver a confused message. That, along with other incompetent things like announcing a reshuffle in a day when the party were launching an opposition to rail price hikes, show to me that he doesn't have the skills to lead. Totally agree with you, Labour have always stood against increasing the cost of rail travel. In fact when they were in government, they reduced the costs significantly by ensuring that regulated rail fares were increased at a rate higher than inflation. Labour hypocrisy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerwickMad Posted August 13, 2016 Share Posted August 13, 2016 Totally agree with you, Labour have always stood against increasing the cost of rail travel. In fact when they were in government, they reduced the costs significantly by ensuring that regulated rail fares were increased at a rate higher than inflation. Labour hypocrisy. I'm certainly not going to defend the last Labour government on that, especially as I was travelling back and forward 5 days a week to Newcastle between 2005 and 2008. I'm also not absolving the last Labour government of any blame for the mess the party are in now. Though the MP who cited this example has only been in the commons since 2010. It's not really the point though when it comes to analysing leadership qualities and where the party should be heading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted August 13, 2016 Share Posted August 13, 2016 11 hours ago, DeeTillEhDeh said: What is "representative of the wider membership" though? I would have thought an intelligent chap like you could work that out on his own, or are you being deliberately obtuse? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted August 13, 2016 Share Posted August 13, 2016 9 minutes ago, BerwickMad said: I'm certainly not going to defend the last Labour government on that, especially as I was travelling back and forward 5 days a week to Newcastle between 2005 and 2008. I'm also not absolving the last Labour government of any blame for the mess the party are in now. Though the MP who cited this example has only been in the commons since 2010. It's not really the point though when it comes to analysing leadership qualities and where the party should be heading. It is absolutely amazing how any positives are referred to as being carried out by the Labour Party but the negatives are the last labour government. The labour party were the ones that introduced the RPI+ measure into regulated fares and now complain that this is increasing the cost of rail fares. It was no wonder that Corbyn announced a reshuffle on the very day that your party was about to embark on another clusterfuck of a protest against a measure introduced by Labour. You should probably be thanking the guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFC90 Posted August 13, 2016 Share Posted August 13, 2016 All this chat about Corbyn being incompetent is all well and good but the replacement they have lined up is Owen Smith, Owen fucking Smith [emoji23] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerwickMad Posted August 13, 2016 Share Posted August 13, 2016 It is absolutely amazing how any positives are referred to as being carried out by the Labour Party but the negatives are the last labour government. The labour party were the ones that introduced the RPI+ measure into regulated fares and now complain that this is increasing the cost of rail fares. It was no wonder that Corbyn announced a reshuffle on the very day that your party was about to embark on another clusterfuck of a protest against a measure introduced by Labour. You should probably be thanking the guy. That's all well and good, but he appointed her and he let her get on with it. Maybe if he was so against the plan, rather than letting it happen and then undermining it, he should have, you know, lead, worked with her and delivered a proper message from the party rather than a shambles. My guess is he didn't know what was going on as he's not as interested as what a leader should be on what's happening in departments. He's happy to constantly talk about his overall vision without paying attention to the actual detail that underpins it. It's poor leadership whatever way you look at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted August 13, 2016 Share Posted August 13, 2016 35 minutes ago, BerwickMad said: That's all well and good, but he appointed her and he let her get on with it. Maybe if he was so against the plan, rather than letting it happen and then undermining it, he should have, you know, lead, worked with her and delivered a proper message from the party rather than a shambles. My guess is he didn't know what was going on as he's not as interested as what a leader should be on what's happening in departments. He's happy to constantly talk about his overall vision without paying attention to the actual detail that underpins it. It's poor leadership whatever way you look at it. I really couldn't give two hoots if Corbyn is leading the party or not but he was elected against the wishes of the MPs who have done there best to undermine him at every opportunity. It isn't poor leadership, it shows that the Labour Party has lost sight of their objectives. The Labour party exists to reflect the views of the members, not the views of MPs. If you want an example of the achievements of the Labour party, use this link: http://www.labour.org.uk/pages/what-is-the-labour-party, click on the "Our History" Link and it tells you everything you need to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DublinMagyar Posted August 13, 2016 Share Posted August 13, 2016 I really couldn't give two hoots if Corbyn is leading the party or not but he was elected against the wishes of the MPs who have done there best to undermine him at every opportunity. It isn't poor leadership, it shows that the Labour Party has lost sight of their objectives. The Labour party exists to reflect the views of the members, not the views of MPs. If you want an example of the achievements of the Labour party, use this link: http://www.labour.org.uk/pages/what-is-the-labour-party, click on the "Our History" Link and it tells you everything you need to know. [emoji6] Lol, just tried the link.[emoji28] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cream Cheese Posted August 13, 2016 Share Posted August 13, 2016 6 hours ago, BerwickMad said: Also, to be dismissive of anyone disagreeing with Corbyn like you are is a bit pathetic. "The don't care about rail fares", "careerists" etc. It has no basis in reality. Actually it does. You just aren't aware of it. You think Labour were absolutely wonderful under Blair and Brown, completely oblivious to their agenda, which included steep rises in rail fare costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerwickMad Posted August 13, 2016 Share Posted August 13, 2016 Actually it does. You just aren't aware of it. You think Labour were absolutely wonderful under Blair and Brown, completely oblivious to their agenda, which included steep rises in rail fare costs. Poor trolling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cream Cheese Posted August 13, 2016 Share Posted August 13, 2016 Just now, BerwickMad said: Poor trolling. Nice dodge. Once again swerving around the facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.