That's a promo picture of Streeting. It's not like he's been papped in his local Asda with sweaty pits after coming from the gym. That's the image he wants to present to the world.
Are we doing Rayner calling Tories scum again on this thread?
As much as I agree with her and happily refer to Tories as scum myself, it does feel like it's soon going to bite her on the arse.
Also there's no way that Keith is going to let it slide if the Daily Heil disapprove.
If they had any bollocks, they would ride out the usual performative outrage. No, actually, if they had any bollocks they'd call it (the performative outrage) out for what it was.
If they had any bollocks, they would ride out the usual performative outrage. No, actually, if they had any bollocks they'd call it (the performative outrage) out for what it was.
As it is, they will do this.
They are just dreadful.
Apparently Reeves is on C4 News later and Newman says she gets worse, saying "Reeves...says someone born male who identifies as a woman would not get access to a women’s refuge under Labour policy". So it seems they must be planning to repeal or significantly amend the Equality Act, to ban some women from refuges.
Dodds was classic shite soft left Labour, and invisible, but Reeves is pure evil. Prob as well she will never ever hold any power. Pity is thats cos Labour will never be in power at Westminster for years, if ever again.
Dodds was classic shite soft left Labour, and invisible, but Reeves is pure evil. Prob as well she will never ever hold any power. Pity is thats cos Labour will never be in power at Westminster for years, if ever again.
No, I don't think they will be. There's no way back and while there will always be a rump left who are far too wedded to the party to ever leave, one does wonder for how long some of the excellent and bright young people in Young Labour (eg Lara McNeil and Jess Barnard) will bother sticking around given they will never be allowed to gain any influence beyond their present roles.
What I'm saying is, there has to a schism. Surely.
You'd hope. But you'd have hoped lots of times before and have been disappointed.
Well yes. There'll be lots of people advocating to stay put, play the long game, may get another tilt at it in a few years... but honestly, if they're not getting the hint after the 20% nominations rule change and the fact that Corbyn obviously isn't getting the whip back, ever, then I don't know what else to say
I don't know for certain if £15 an hour is an exactly appropriate demand for the minimum wage. Maybe it should be £15.60, I dunno. And I appreciate that it might be considered a big political ask. But if you yourself are earning more than £15 an hour, for jobs that however well-rewarded are perhaps less essential to the running of society than care work, nursing, or other frontline jobs in which people have literally put their lives on the line during the pandemic, then ask yourself if you're entitled to decry this demand as "unrealistic".
Question is, who gets to determine this realism? Why should we put up with our expectations being continually corroded, lowered since 1979 in the name of pragmatism? And why do some in Labour submit to these lowered expectations with such apparent relish?
Surely the whole point of Labour, as implied in the name, as it is a party set up to defend the interests of Labour as opposed to Capital. At the very least, £15 per hour is a good starting bargaining position. Why would people supposedly of the Labour persuasion undermine that position from the outset by describing it as "unrealistic"? Starmer didn't, at least while he was pitching for the leadership. Now he is.
Fifteen fills me with fear just based on the US experience. Ask for 15, continue to ask for 15, a decade later when it looks like you are going to get 15 everyone shouts "how can you think 15 is enough?"
Special conference of the BFAWU is today, debating whether to disaffiliate from Labour. Not certain but I hear noises that suggest the FBU may disaffiliate (again) also
Threatening us with "police hubs in every neighbourhood" based on Ring doorbells and WhatsApp, apparently.
That's alongside declaring they would continue to the deportation charter flights and be tough on crime and tough blah blah blah blah fuck off.
Don't get me wrong, Labour has always been an authoritarian racist party. But these bastards...
Yeah, as a libertarian socialist (OK, anarchist from certain perspectives but I can be flexible), it was the socialism of the 15-19 era that attracted me and allowed me to partially overlook the still existing authoritarianism and racism. Now they've killed the good bits and ramped up the awful bits to new heights. I still expect to be slated by lots of acquaintances when I refuse to prop up my awful MP's slender majority next time
My (Labour) MP is rotten and unassailable. Which is why I'm thinking that if I'm up to do anything next time out, it would be good to go help try to get rid of a scumbag like Duffield.
My (Labour) MP is rotten and unassailable. Which is why I'm thinking that if I'm up to do anything next time out, it would be good to go help try to get rid of a scumbag like Duffield.
That would be doing the Lord's work imo
Mine has built his 5k majority on an alliance of liberal middle class Remainers/anti-Tories (even the impregnable wealthy blue wards in the constituency have a majority of Lab/LD/G voters who are mostly clued up enough to vote Labour in a GE) and the more Left/'Corbynite' precarious graduate millennials in HMOs. Given that he's lost the latter part of that and a huge number of the volunteers who flooded in from safer seats - esp now that neighbouring West is ripe for a Green gain rather than being a safe seat - I don't think I'll have to do much other than sit on my hands to make Jones worried.
Comment