Labour leadership: Result will be announced on 4 April [Post #1698]

[s28]

Refreshing change I think. Over time it will illustrate just how out of touch and wrong headed Cameron/Tory policies are.

Cameron kept coming back to the need for a strong economy which of course doesn't answer or deal with the micro issues people are facing in their real lives. On the macro level one of the strongest economies in Europe and our best comparitor is Germany. So the follow up questions or responses to Cameron should really be why don't we take a leaf out of the German book if we want to make our economy stronger. It is poignant that whilst we celebrated the 'Battle of Britain 'few' yesterday in the long term Britain may have won the war but it lost the peace as Germany is a far stronger economy now. They don't seem to feel the need to go around bombing other countries and they start from a more co-operative basis to their version of capitalism than the UK exhibits.

Ultimately the key assets of the economy are the people so surely the Managers of the economy should treat those assets like assets and wish to invest in them rather than treat them like commodities/slave labour ?

 

[shaz619]

Refreshing change I think. Over time it will illustrate just how out of touch and wrong headed Cameron/Tory policies are.

Cameron kept coming back to the need for a strong economy which of course doesn't answer or deal with the micro issues people are facing in their real lives. On the macro level one of the strongest economies in Europe and our best comparitor is Germany. So the follow up questions or responses to Cameron should really be why don't we take a leaf out of the German book if we want to make our economy stronger. It is poignant that whilst we celebrated the 'Battle of Britain 'few' yesterday in the long term Britain may have won the war but it lost the peace as Germany is a far stronger economy now. They don't seem to feel the need to go around bombing other countries and they start from a more co-operative basis to their version of capitalism than the UK exhibits.

Ultimately the key assets of the economy are the people so surely the Managers of the economy should treat those assets like assets and wish to invest in them rather than treat them like commodities/slave labour ?

Came across as a douchebag tbh, he was basically saying he is cool with the people of Britain suffering for the greater good which is a "strong economy" it's very strong indeed, unemployment has fallen in record numbers and there is barely any debt. Glad that the PMQs were civil and although it was fantastic that Corbyn was able to use the voice of the people to get his point across he wasn't able to follow up on them a bit more. Overall I'd give this round to Corbyn, Cameron never really answered his questions emphatically and would often make excuses with the whole strong economy nonsense

 

[Robert]

Refreshing change I think. Over time it will illustrate just how out of touch and wrong headed Cameron/Tory policies are.

In touch with somebody - he just won an election outright.

Cameron kept coming back to the need for a strong economy which of course doesn't answer or deal with the micro issues people are facing in their real lives.

Obviously. His job is to control the macro issues, our jobs to control the micro.

 

[Strike Rate]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Yes, its <a href="https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn">@JeremyCorbyn</a>
now <a href="https://twitter.com/UKLabour">@UKLabour</a> Leader
&possible next <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ukPM?src=hash">#ukPM</a>
in <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Karachi?src=hash">#Karachi</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Rickshaw?src=hash">#Rickshaw</a>
during 2006 <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/WorldSocialForum?src=hash">#WorldSocialForum</a> <a href="http://t.co/MwtJIVOI0K">pic.twitter.com/MwtJIVOI0K</a></p>— Adil Najam (@AdilNajam) <a href="https://twitter.com/AdilNajam/status/643107061983805440">September 13, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Strike Rate]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Guess who's enjoying <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Rickshaw?src=hash">#Rickshaw</a> ride in <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Karachi?src=hash">#Karachi</a>?
Yes, <a href="https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn">@JeremyCorbyn</a>!
<a href="https://twitter.com/UKLabour">@UKLabour</a> leader/possibly next <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/UKPrimeMinister?src=hash">#UKPrimeMinister</a>! <a href="http://t.co/eWdhAosZjJ">pic.twitter.com/eWdhAosZjJ</a></p>— Adil Najam (@AdilNajam) <a href="https://twitter.com/AdilNajam/status/643018642842632192">September 13, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[s28]

Over 40,000 full new members since Corbyn election now. That translates into annual membership fee increase of c.£2m p.a.

 

[Gabbar Singh]

Oh dear.

Labour's 'Mayor' savages Corbyn: Party star Khan damns leader over anti-Semitism

Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell have been sensationally accused of risking inciting terrorist and anti-Semitic attacks in capital by Sadiq Khan
Khan, who is Muslim, suggested that Corbyn's refusal to sing the National Anthem at St Paul's Cathedral showed he was unfit to be Prime Minister
And he denounced the Labour leadership duo's links to terror groups
Khan was recently revealed as the Labour candidate for London Mayor

Published: 02:01, 20 September 2015 | Updated: 08:51, 20 September 2015

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rty-star-Khan-damns-leader-anti-Semitism.html

 

[Adil_94]

Oh dear.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rty-star-Khan-damns-leader-anti-Semitism.html

What an uncle Tom mentality. Being anti israel means hitler loving nazi to the MSM. Like not singing an anthem that basically just praises the Queen and monarchy makes you non patriotic. Actually wanting to help the most disadvantaged in society and making the country a better place isnt patriotic enough.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

 

[Gabbar Singh]

So Labour's policy on trident remains unchanged.

Labour leadership to press for a vote on the renewal of the Trident nuclear programme was overwhelmingly rejected at the party’s conference.

Hours after the opening of the event in Brighton, Britain’s largest trade unions and the party membership spurned a call for the conference to hold a debate and a vote on Wednesday about whether Britain should renew Trident.

In a severe embarrassment to Corbyn, who won the support of the main trade unions in the leadership contest, the call for a debate on Trident was supported by just 0.16% of the trade union vote. The support among constituency Labour parties was little higher at 7.1%.

Shadow cabinet members, who had earlier welcomed a signal by Corbyn that he would allow a free vote on Trident, were scathing about the new leader’s conference debut. “Chaos and confusion rule the day,” said one frontbencher.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/27/corbyn-trident-vote-rejected-labour-party-conference

 

[Gabbar Singh]

The infighting begins.

If Labour cannot even agree amongst themselves about the economy then I'm not sure how they expect the electorate to agree with them and lend them their vote come election time.

John McDonnell's fiscal responsibility U-turn sends wrong message – Labour MP

The shadow chancellor, John McDonnell, needs to explain fully his U-turn on voting against the government’s charter of fiscal responsibility, his predecessor, Chris Leslie, has said, arguing it sends the wrong economic message to the public.

McDonnell told the Guardian in an interview during the weekend of the Labour conference that the party would change its position under the new leadership and back the fiscal rules despite Jeremy Corbyn having been elected as leader on an anti-austerity ticket.

But, in a letter to Labour MPs on Monday evening, McDonnell said “matters have moved on” since his initial reaction, citing reports in the past fortnight “highlighting the economic challenges facing the global economy as a result of the slowdown in emerging markets”.

The charter, which was unveiled in the budget in July, requires the government to run a budget surplus within three years during “normal times”, when there is no economic crisis.

John McDonnell says Labour will now vote against charter requiring government to run budget surplus within three years during ‘normal times’

The U-turn sparked an angry reaction at a meeting of the parliamentary Labour party at Westminster on Monday. Former cabinet minister Ben Bradshaw declared, within earshot of waiting reporters, that the meeting had been a “total ****ing shambles”.

The Labour MP John Mann told the BBC that the u-turn had left McDonnell looking “ a bit of a fool” and that he had fallen into a political trap set by George Osborne.

In a comment piece written for the website Politics Home, Mann said the u-turn came after a group of MPs informed the Labour whips on Sunday that they would be continuing with the party’s old position and voting against Osborne’s charter.

“Just one hour before the Parliamentary Labour Party was due to meet, without McDonnell choosing to speak, he announced his u-turn,” writes Mann. “Yet in all of this time there has been no debate, nor any consultation within the Labour Party. So two contradictory policy announcements, without a single collective discussion.”

Mann continues: “The reality is that to have voted with Osborne would have led to political meltdown in Scotland and McDonnell’s political judgement faces some big questions. New Corbyn supporters would have been bemused and demoralised. It would have been a political disaster with huge consequences.”

In more evidence of the discontent among backbenchers, Mike Gapes, Labour MP for Ilford South since 1992, took to Twitter on Tuesday morning to condemn his party’s state. “There is now no collective Shadow cabinet responsibility in our Party, no clarity on economic policy and no credible leadership,” he wrote. Challenged by another user of the social media site to show loyalty to Corbyn, Gapes responded: “I will show loyalty in the same way as he was loyal to Kinnock, Smith, Blair, Brown, Beckett, Miliband and Harman. Ok?”

Speaking to the BBC’s Today programme on Tuesday, Leslie – who was shadow chancellor before Corbyn’s election as Labour leader and ruled out serving in a Corbyn-led shadow cabinet – said “to go from one extreme to the other is wrong in economic terms, but also it sends the wrong message”.

He said: “To be fair to John McDonnell, this is a very difficult balancing act, and a very difficult topic. But it’s incredibly important that he’s clear and consistent and explains fully, not just what Labour’s position is, but why he backed George Osborne’s surplus a couple of weeks ago and is now against it apparently.”

Setting out his initial position at the Labour party conference last month, McDonnell said he would be advocating voting for Osborne’s plans because he was committed to balancing the books even though he did not agree with many of the charter’s specific objectives.

Some Labour MPs were openly planning to rebel and vote against the charter, including the Treasury select committee member Helen Goodman. There had also been opposition to McDonnell’s stance from the Scottish National party and members of his newly appointed economic advisory council, who were baffled as to how he could square his anti-austerity economics with support for the chancellor’s revised charter.

In the letter sent to all Labour MPs on Monday, McDonnell explained his changed position. He said: “As the nature and scale of the cuts Osborne is planning are emerging, there is a growing reaction not just in our communities but even within the Conservative party.

“The divisions over the cuts in tax credits to working families are just the first example of what we can expect as the cuts in other departments are exposed and the failure to find additional resources to bridge the growing expenditure gap in service areas like the NHS is revealed. So I believe that we need to underline our position as an anti-austerity party by voting against the charter on Wednesday.”

At the parliamentary Labour party meeting on Monday evening, Labour MPs criticised McDonnell’s approach and complained that there had not been any attempt to consult them about the change. The BBC reported that John Mann MP could be heard shouting at the leadership from outside the committee room.

Corbyn’s spokesman confirmed that the economic policy change had been agreed without a collective meeting of the shadow cabinet – instead, McDonnell rang individual shadow cabinet members.

Leslie said: “I think it’s important to be clear and consistent about these things. John is the person who needs to explain his change of heart on this particular issue.

“I personally think it would be very regrettable if Wednesday’s debate turned into a discussion about why John McDonnell changed his mind rather than focusing on the shortcomings of George Osborne’s strategy.

“[Wednesday will be] John’s first test against George Osborne and I think it is very important therefore that the Labour frontbench is extremely clear about where we stand … I can’t explain why John went in favour of supporting and voting for George Osborne’s strategy.”

Newly appointed shadow chancellor played a vital role in the new Labour leader’s winning campaign but his straight-talking manner may prove fractious

Leslie said Osborne’s charter of fiscal responsibility was about playing politics and urged McDonnell to adopt the position taken by the previous Labour leadership and abstain on the vote. “I think it would be a better thing not to engage in the game-playing with George Osborne but to put down our own motion.”

The shadow international development secretary, Diane Abbott, said the party was now in the right place to oppose Osborne’s mismanagement of the economy and that McDonnell would be explaining his decision to parliament on Wednesday.

“We are in the right position now,” she said. “It is a position that most of the [parliamentary Labour party] is comfortable with and, I think, all of the party members.”

Abbott, a key ally of Corbyn and McDonnell, said Osborne’s charter was purely political and designed to “put [Labour ] in the corner”.
She said: “At any given time there will be a group of MPs in parliament in whatever party who will be unhappy. I suspect my colleagues on reflection will calm down and devote their energies to attacking Osborne and his dismantlement of the economy.”
She added: “Some people are only slowly coming to terms with the fact that Jeremy won. Once they’ve come to terms with that they will be happy.” Abbott said she hoped it would take them weeks rather than months to accept Corbyn’s leadership.

In his letter to MPs, McDonnell said he had initially regarded Osborne’s charter, and the votes in the Commons approving its wording, as “little more than political game-playing” by the government.

He added: “In my initial public comments and in my speech to Labour party conference, I made it clear that we had no time for these political games and would move on to a serious discussion about the future of our economy, including a review of our economic institutions. At that stage, my approach was to show the inherent weaknesses of the chancellor’s approach, the charter and its various get-out clauses.

“I suggested we vote for it nevertheless in support of the principle of tackling the deficit, but to demonstrate that our approach would not involve austerity measures and we would seek to exclude capital investment from its severe and arbitrary constraints.”

Osborne said on Monday night: “Labour’s economic policy has lurched from chaos to incredibility. Two weeks ago, ‎they said they were going to vote for a surplus – now we know they want to keep on borrowing forever. That would be a grave threat to the economic security of working people‎.‎”

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...sibility-u-turn-sends-wrong-message-labour-mp

 

[Robert]

The infighting begins.

If Labour cannot even agree amongst themselves about the economy then I'm not sure how they expect the electorate to agree with them and lend them their vote come election time.

What you have here is growing internecine war between the Labourites with actual experience of running the country, and the ideologues who have been on the fringes for decades with no experience of setting policy, gaining cross-party support, dealing with the media, anything except student-style protesting.

Corbyn won't make it to the next election as Leader. There will be a no confidence motion by the PLP sooner or later.

 

[s28]

New kind of politics. They won't be having a no confidence motion if they are deselected.

 

[Robert]

New kind of politics. They won't be having a no confidence motion if they are deselected.

Actually it is an old kind of politics - a return to the Militant tendency ways of 1984. This is why older Labour voters with memory and understanding are recoiling from Corbyn. You don't gain cross-party support by throwing out people who disagree and replace them with yes-people: you form alliances and hold things together. Surely you don't want the people with actual experience of government gone?

 

[Robert]

There is no mechanism in the Labour constitution for the PLP to remove Corbyn so all they can do is trigger another leadership vote, which Corbyn will win because of all the £3 members. This will result in paralysis. Corbyn will have to:

1. stand down to allow a leader who can unite Labour to emerge

2. withdraw the whip on the rebels en masse. This will gut the PLP of Members, including many of the talented ones with Cabinet or and/or Ministry experience. They can either create a new party, join the Lib Dems or continue as independents.

 

[Robert]

.

 

[Markhor]

Labour's U-turn on whether to vote for Osborne's fiscal charter is a shambles. First Labour committed to it but now saying they'll oppose it and that its a "change in tactics".

Apparently Corbyn didn't even know McDonnell was going to backtrack on it.

Now Corbyn is saying he'd consider air strikes in Syria without a UN resolution to create "safe zones" for civilians, despite saying throughout the leadership campaign more bombing wouldn't help the situation.

 

[Robert]

Labour's U-turn on whether to vote for Osborne's fiscal charter is a shambles. First Labour committed to it but now saying they'll oppose it and that its a "change in tactics".

Apparently Corbyn didn't even know McDonnell was going to backtrack on it.

Now Corbyn is saying he'd consider air strikes in Syria without a UN resolution to create "safe zones" for civilians, despite saying throughout the leadership campaign more bombing wouldn't help the situation.

This is the problem with spending 30 years on the fringes of your own party! He doesn't know how to organise, to stay on-message and is not in charge of his Shadow Chancellor. He badly needs an Alistair Campbell figure.

If PM, how will he keep the RAF from bumping heads with the Russian air force over Syria? What will he say if there is an exchange of fire? He's a nice man, but out of his depth.

 

[Markhor]

This is the problem with spending 30 years on the fringes of your own party! He doesn't know how to organise, to stay on-message and is not in charge of his Shadow Chancellor. He badly needs an Alistair Campbell figure.

If PM, how will he keep the RAF from bumping heads with the Russian air force over Syria? What will he say if there is an exchange of fire? He's a nice man, but out of his depth.

Its all a big mess right now, Diane Abbott went on R4 trying to justify the U-turn but it was laughable. If you weren't going to commit to the fiscal charter, don't make a statement at Conference saying you were going to back it ! Labour have fallen right into Osborne's trap, and Cameron went on about it at PMQs.

Corbyn obviously wants to compromise in order to appease the centrists in the party but then he'll be accused of betraying his principles by the membership, not to mention the continual threat of party rebellions on key issues like Syria so there's a total lack of unity. How long he'll remain depends on whether there are any viable leadership alternatives in Labour, there's no obvious candidates right now and who will dare challenge him considering the huge mandate he got ? Those who wield the knife won't wear the crown as we saw with Heseltine all those years ago.

 

[Robert]

Diane Abbott, another all at sea. I have voted Labour solidly since 1987 but this lot are, to use an Iannucci-ism, an omnishambles. I like my MP (now a junior shadow Cabinet minister) but wonder how long such a smart woman will continue to serve.

 

[s28]

George Osborne attacks George Osborne for U-turn

Brilliant

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...e-for-fiscal-u-turn_n_8310654.html?1444990989

 

[Robert]

Ex-Labour Minister Lord Warner has resigned the whip in protest at Corbyn's leadership.

 

[James]

Surely even the hardcore Corbynites can't believe that Jeremy could win a General Election. British history has proven that (unless your name is Margaret or Tony) an election is hard enough to win outright when your party is more or less united - so how can a totally disparate and omnishambolic collection of pub politicians hope to even get 200 seats?

2020 is going to be a Tory landslide at this rate.

 

[Robert]

Surely even the hardcore Corbynites can't believe that Jeremy could win a General Election.

But they do. They are living in student politics land, where nothing has to be paid for and aggressive national leaders such as Putin don't have to be fronted up to.

 

[Geordie Ahmed]

Surely even the hardcore Corbynites can't believe that Jeremy could win a General Election. British history has proven that (unless your name is Margaret or Tony) an election is hard enough to win outright when your party is more or less united - so how can a totally disparate and omnishambolic collection of pub politicians hope to even get 200 seats?

2020 is going to be a Tory landslide at this rate.

Not like they had a chance under the other candidates

At least with Corbyn they are starting to become a genuine opposition party with policies of their own. It's got many people that were previously disinterested in politics taking an interest again

 

[Robert]

Not like they had a chance under the other candidates

At least with Corbyn they are starting to become a genuine opposition party with policies of their own. It's got many people that were previously disinterested in politics taking an interest again

That's the problem. They have little depth of understanding, just a kind of juvenile idealism.

 

[James]

I agree with Robert on this one.

Even some traditionally 'safe' Labour seats will be under threat now IMO, whether that's to the Tories or UKIP.

 

[Gabbar Singh]

Syria/ISIS/terrorism continue to cause divisions within the Labour patry.

Labour shadow minister tells journalists Jeremy Corbyn is a 'f***ing disgrace' after angry
meeting
Some MPs were reportedly unhappy about Mr Corbyn questioning the Government's 'shoot to kill' policy and action on Syria

One of Jeremy Corbyn’s shadow ministers has branded their leader a “f***ing disgrace” after he attended an acrimonious meeting with Labour MPs.

Some politicians at the private Monday evening meeting were reportedly angry that Mr Corbyn had questioned police having a “shoot to kill” policy for terror suspects on British soil.

There was also said to be dissent over the Labour leader’s statement earlier in the day effective ruling out support for military action in Syria.

“He doesn’t answer anything. He got roasted, he’s a f****** disgrace,” the MP said, according to both the Daily Mirror and The Sun newspapers.

The BBC reports another anonymous MP as saying the Labour leader was “aggressively heckled” during the meeting.

A spokesperson for Mr Corbyn said that those who express critical views “volubly” were in the minority and that the shadow cabinet was united on blocking military action in Syria.

Mr Corbyn said he was “not happy” with a police policy of shoot-to-kill of the kind that had killed Brazilian electrician Jean Charles de Menzes in 2005.

“I'm not happy with the shoot-to-kill policy in general. I think that is quite dangerous and I think can often be counter-productive,” he said.

“I think you have to have security that prevents people firing off weapons where you can,” he had said earlier in the day.”

Mr Corbyn also warned on Monday that bombing Syria might simply cause “yet more conflict, more mayhem and more loss”.

Some Labour MPs are pro bombing the country and want to be able to vote differently to their leader on the issue.

The Labour leader was speaking after a string of bomb and gun attacks in Ankara, Beirut and Paris over the last month that left hundreds dead

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ng-disgrace-after-angry-meeting-a6737306.html

 

[JaDed]

Syria/ISIS/terrorism continue to cause divisions within the Labour patry.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ng-disgrace-after-angry-meeting-a6737306.html

He got heckled for that?

 

[Robert]

Syria/ISIS/terrorism continue to cause divisions within the Labour patry.

My problem with Mr Corbyn is that he is in effect a 65-year-old student union president. He has a rather child-like naive view of the world, or how it should be, and if he becomes PM then the other national leaders will eat him alive.

He was a backbencher under Kinnock, Smith, Blair, Brown and Milliband for a reason - he is simply not very capable.

His appeal is that he is genuine and kind, and says a lot of truisms that nobody can disagree with. But scratch that surface, and he doesn't know how to make things work in the real world because he has no experience of setting policy.

 

[shaz619]

My problem with Mr Corbyn is that he is in effect a 65-year-old student union president. He has a rather child-like naive view of the world, or how it should be, and if he becomes PM then the other national leaders will eat him alive.

He was a backbencher under Kinnock, Smith, Blair, Brown and Milliband for a reason - he is simply not very capable.

His appeal is that he is genuine and kind, and says a lot of truisms that nobody can disagree with. But scratch that surface, and he doesn't know how to make things work in the real world because he has no experience of setting policy.

You rather have someone with a good heart like that who will do a half-asssed job trying to help people then someone who will 100% screw us despite their prowess of setting policy which ultimately will hurt us. Give him some time and show faith. Having said that, what are the alternatives?

 

[Robert]

You rather have someone with a good heart like that who will do a half-asssed job trying to help people then someone who will 100% screw us despite their prowess of setting policy which ultimately will hurt us. Give him some time and show faith. Having said that, what are the alternatives?

I remember the 1970s - 25% inflation, power cuts, everyone on strike, phones not working, trains not running, rubbish not being collected, and I'm not willing to go back to that. Two bad choices at present - the Bullingdon crew who are competent but evil, or the nice but incompetent current Labour leadership.

I'm not being 100% screwed, mind. Truth to tell I'm doing as well under Cameron as I did under Blair and Brown. I know some people aren't. I would choose a Blairite if I could - someone who manages capitalism with a strong commitment to public services (but without the invasion of Iraq). Labour missed a trick by not electing the elder Milliband - he would have been PM by now.

 

[shaz619]

I remember the 1970s - 25% inflation, power cuts, everyone on strike, phones not working, trains not running, rubbish not being collected, and I'm not willing to go back to that. Two bad choices at present - the Bullingdon crew who are competent but evil, or the nice but incompetent current Labour leadership.

I'm not being 100% screwed, mind. Truth to tell I'm doing as well under Cameron as I did under Blair and Brown. I know some people aren't. I would choose a Blairite if I could - someone who manages capitalism with a strong commitment to public services (but without the invasion of Iraq). Labour missed a trick by not electing the elder Milliband - he would have been PM by now.

I agree with you to an extent and the thinking behind why certain folk who are better off can afford to route for the evil but competent crew but I have to stick with my people in the inner city who have suffered so much under Tory and now someone after a long time has come along that is actually listening to our woes and social problems; will he tackle them? time will tell but someone is talking about things which others are not willing to.

 

[Gabbar Singh]

At a time when it should be the Tories who are in civil war because of Europe it is the Labour party who seem to be in disarray.

Labour MPs back David Cameron and hit out at Jeremy Corbyn over response to Paris attacks

A string of Labour MPs have praised David Cameron’s efforts to win parliamentary approval to bomb Isis targets in Syria and criticised their own leader’s response to the Paris attacks.

In a statement in the House of Commons on Tuesday the Prime Minister signalled he will ask MPs to approve Britain launching air strikes on Isis targets in Syria by Christmas, but Jeremy Corbyn said Labour would only support military intervention if it received the legal backing of the United Nations.

However, Labour MP Mike Gapes said the Prime Minister’s “content and tone spoke not just for the Government but for the country”.

Fellow Labour MP Ian Austin also backed Mr Cameron’s remarks, saying: "I agree with everything the Prime Minister said about Syria and about terrorism.

Other Labour MPs turned on Mr Corbyn in their response to Mr Cameron’s statement in the Commons, attacking his refusal to distance himself from Stop the War Coalition after it published a blog post saying Paris had “reaped the whirlwind of western support for extremist violence in the Middle East”.

Former front bencher Emma Reynolds even lined up Mr Cameron to attack Mr Corbyn for his links to the Stop the War Coalition.

She asked: "Does the Prime Minister agree full responsibility for the attacks in Paris lies solely with the terrorists and any attempt by any organisation to somehow blame the West or France's military intervention in Syria is not only wrong, disgraceful, but also should be condemned?"

And current shadow Europe minister Pat McFadden said: "Can I ask the Prime Minister to reject the view that sees terrorist acts as always being a response or a reaction to what we in the West do? Does he agree with me that such an approach risks infantilising the terrorists and treating them as children when the truth is they are adults entirely responsible for what they do?”

Labour MPs also attacked Mr Corbyn for saying on Monday that he was “unhappy” with the shoot-to-kill policy.

Chris Leslie, the former shadow chancellor, said: "The Prime Minister is right, the police and security services need our full support at this time.

"Shouldn't it be immediately obvious to everyone that the police need the full and necessary powers, including the proportionate use of lethal force if needs be, to keep our communities safe?"

Chuka Umunna also hit out at Mr Corbyn: "I agree with all the comments about the number one priority of this Government being the safeguarding of the national security of those we represent,” he said. "That extends to every single member of this House."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-over-response-to-paris-attacks-a6738256.html

 

[Robert]

Ken Livingstone has been forced by Mr Corbyn to apologise for comments about Shadow Defence Secretary Kevan Jones's mental health.

 

[Gabbar Singh]

Ken Livingstone has been forced by Mr Corbyn to apologise for comments about Shadow Defence Secretary Kevan Jones's mental health.

His comments were pretty distasteful. His appointment as co-convenor of the party’s defence review was handled really badly too because no one from Labour told the shadow defence secretary.

However I feel a bit sorry for Corbyn - he clearly has a strong mandate (from party members) to lead the party however some of his colleagues are acting like treacherous ****s. This exchange below on the Daily Politics yesterday was extremely funny looking in from the outside however it doesn't say a lot about the loyalty of the MP is question.

 

[Markhor]

Corbyn may as well stand down as this is going nowhere. There's seems to be furious PLP meetings every week, forget off-the-record briefings - Labour MPs are openly attacking their leader and astonishingly at PMQs, Labour MPs were setting up attacks on Corbyn for the Prime Minister ! The MPs seem to be totally at odds with the leadership be it on Trident or air strikes in Syria with Benn saying he would be willing to proceed with strikes without a UN resolution but Corbyn says he wants to go through the UN.

Now this Livingstone controversy adds to the wounds - I genuinely believe that Ken didn't know about Kevan Jones' history of mental illness and wouldn't attack his mental health personally given he's campaigned on mental health and equality for years. But even if you take those comments in isolation its a nasty attack on your own party colleague despite Jones criticising him co-chairing a defence review.

So how long can this last ? The problem the centrists in the party have is who wields the knife won't wear the crown - given the massive grassroots support for Corbyn it will be difficult for anyone to mount a challenge against him. It might take a disasterous election result next May in the local and Assembly polls.

 

[Robert]

However I feel a bit sorry for Corbyn - he clearly has a strong mandate (from party members) to lead the party however some of his colleagues are acting like treacherous

Serves him right after not supporting Kinnock, Smith, Blair, Brown and Milliband. You reap what you sow.

 

[Robert]

Corbyn may as well stand down as this is going nowhere. There's seems to be furious PLP meetings every week, forget off-the-record briefings - Labour MPs are openly attacking their leader and astonishingly at PMQs, Labour MPs were setting up attacks on Corbyn for the Prime Minister ! The MPs seem to be totally at odds with the leadership be it on Trident or air strikes in Syria with Benn saying he would be willing to proceed with strikes without a UN resolution but Corbyn says he wants to go through the UN.

So how long can this last ? The problem the centrists in the party have is who wields the knife won't wear the crown - given the massive grassroots support for Corbyn it will be difficult for anyone to mount a challenge against him. It might take a disasterous election result next May in the local and Assembly polls.

I think Corbyn's only hope of survival in the medium term is entryism by the £3 on-line members into the constituency Labour groups, and hoping he can deselect the rebel MPs in short order. Of course, they could stand as independents and defeat his loyalist candidates.....

 

[Robert]

I must say that Chancellor played a blinder yesterday, somehow finding £24B down the back of the sofa, cancelling the tax credit cuts and relieving the pressure on the NHS generally and mental health services particularly. He looked relaxed and funny and a PM-in-waiting.

That stunt with the Little Red Book backfired on Shadow Chancellor McDonnell. These NewOldLabourites seem to be lacking a bit between the ears.

Though it was nice to see my MP sitting next to the Shadow Chancellor. Never had a frontbencher for an MP before!

 

[Markhor]

Corbyn opposes Syria air strikes. Question is will it be a free vote for Labour MPs or will they be whipped ? Major divisions in the party.

 

[James]

Corbyn has been a washout so far. His days are already numbered as leader IMO.

 

[Gabbar Singh]

I must say that Chancellor played a blinder yesterday, somehow finding £24B down the back of the sofa, cancelling the tax credit cuts and relieving the pressure on the NHS generally and mental health services particularly. He looked relaxed and funny and a PM-in-waiting.

That stunt with the Little Red Book backfired on Shadow Chancellor McDonnell. These NewOldLabourites seem to be lacking a bit between the ears.

Though it was nice to see my MP sitting next to the Shadow Chancellor. Never had a frontbencher for an MP before!

The look on Tom Watson's face when McDonnell pulled out Mao's book was priceless. Sure it was obviously a joke but it allowed the Tories to deflect away from the actual issues and laugh at Labour for a few minutes.

 

[Gabbar Singh]

Corbyn opposes Syria air strikes. Question is will it be a free vote for Labour MPs or
will they be whipped ? Major divisions in the party.

Cameron will probably win that vote not because of his arguments but because enough Labour MPs will want to give Corbyn a bloody nose and will vote with the PM. If intervention in Syria is approved by the votes of Labour rebels when enough Tories vote to block it then Corbyn will be in a tough situation.

 

[Robert]

Corbyn opposes Syria air strikes.

The funny thing is - I find it hard to disagree with him on this point. How will airstrikes by a few obsolescent Tornados on ISIL in Syria make us safer? The PM had not explained this. The move to bomb them seems to be motivated by solidarity with France rather than a military objective.

 

[Alizai]

Jeremy Corbyn lad, he's such a lad that I would support labour just because of him

 

[Gabbar Singh]

Jeremy Corbyn faces humiliation as more than 100 Labour MPs plan to defy leader over Syria air strikes

Half of Labour MPs will defy Jeremy Corbyn next week over military action in Syria, it has emerged as senior figures in the party openly questioned his leadership.
Senior party sources told The Telegraph on Friday night that as many as 115 Labour MPs are preparing to back a government motion allowing British fighter jets to bomb targets in Syria.
On Friday Mr Corbyn was in open conflict with Tom Watson, the deputy leader, and Hilary Benn, the shadow foreign secretary, who are both calling for air strikes.
It can also be disclosed that around 20 Conservative rebels have now backed down and agreed to support Mr Cameron’s plans - meaning he now has a substantial Parliamentary majority in favour of air strikes.
It came as Francois Hollande, the French President, appealed to Labour MPs to back Mr Cameron’s plans in the wake of the Paris terror attacks.

Downing Street will this weekend begin approaching Labour MPs to give them briefings to shore up support.
Mr Corbyn could next week face calls to resign from within his own shadow cabinet following the “debacle” over the Syria vote as well as a by-election in Oldham, which Labour figures say will be a “disaster”.
Senior members of the party called for Mr Corbyn’s resignation on Friday, in a growing signs of a plot to oust the Labour leader.
John Spellar, a former defence minister, suggested Mr Corbyn should resign and Fiona Mactaggart, another ex-minister, said Mr Corbyn's leadership was "weak" and "unsustainable".

Tom Watson, the Labour deputy leader, publicly spoke out in favour of the “compelling case” for bombing, putting him directly at odds with Mr Corbyn.
Yvette Cooper on Friday wrote to the Prime Minister asking for Labour members of the Privy Council to be given security briefings about Syria despite the fact Mr Corbyn has already been given the intelligence.
The Labour leader infuriated MPs by sending them all a letter on Thursday making clear his opposition to air strikes – despite telling ministers the party will reach a “collective decision” over the issue on Monday.
And late on Friday, Jeremy Corbyn took the unprecedented step of emailing Labour supporters to seek their views on whether Parliament should vote to authorise airstrikes in Syria.

"I am writing to consult you on what you think Britain should do. Should Parliament vote to authorise the bombing of Syria?" Mr Corbyn wrote in the 224 word missive to members.

Mr Corbyn’s office was also accused of “aiding and abetting” the “intimidation” of moderate MPs who are undecided about whether to support air strikes.
Labour whips have been calling MPs to determine who many are preparing to back Mr Cameron. However, sources have said that Mr Corbyn’s office has leaked the names of undecided MPs to hard-left campaign group Momentum, which has been accused of threatening moderates with de-selection.
Meanwhile, the Unite and Unison unions have called for Labour MPs to oppose military action.
The Parliamentary vote on Syria is scheduled for Thursday and will coincide with the Oldham West and Royton by-election.

Insiders are warning that anger over Mr Corbyn’s behaviour in recent weeks could lead to Ukip winning the seat, a defeat which would lead to an attempt to force the Labour leader to resign.
Mr Corbyn has been kept away from the seat – which Labour won at the election with a majority of nearly 15,000 – amid fears that he is “toxic” on the doorstep.
"I do not believe the Prime Minister’s current proposal for air strikes in Syria will protect our security and therefore cannot support it."
Jeremy Corbyn
Jim McMahon, the Labour candidate in the seat, has distanced himself from Mr Corbyn and indicated that he backs military action in Syria.
Other Labour insiders predict that Labour win but with the majority reduced to around 1,000.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...an-to-defy-leader-over-Syria-air-strikes.html

 

[Gabbar Singh]

 

[shaz619]

Why are they so hell bent on bombing Syria [MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] both Labour and Tory

 

[s28]

It's in the interests of the Establishment i.e. the 1% who want to keep the people afraid so they will accept cuts to Education/Health etc whilst money goes on Killing people/Trident. There is no real case for war which is why the genocide cheerleaders are reduced to 'we need to show support for France'. France which has admitted most of the bombers in Paris were home grown terrorists and had nothing to do with Syria.

 

[Gabbar Singh]

Corbyn backs down.

Syria airstrikes: Jeremy Corbyn gives Labour MPs free vote

Labour leader says party policy is to oppose airstrikes and calls for vote to be delayed but tells his MPs they can vote with their consciences


Jeremy Corbyn is to offer a free vote to MPs on David Cameron’s proposals for UK to bomb Isis in Syria but will make it clear that Labour party policy is to oppose airstrikes.

The Labour leader will also press Cameron to delay the vote until Labour’s concerns about the justification for the bombing are addressed, as part of a deal he has thrashed out with the deputy leader, Tom Watson, and other senior members of the shadow cabinet over the weekend.

His decision averts the threat of a mass shadow cabinet walkout, while making it clear that his own firmly held opposition to airstrikes is official Labour party policy, backed by the membership.

It will also create a dilemma for Downing Street about whether to press ahead with the vote this week, because undecided Labour MPs are likely to be tempted to back Corbyn’s call for a longer timetable.

Cameron has been expected to try for a vote on Wednesday but he has said he will not do so unless he is sure there is a clear majority in favour of strikes.

It is understood there has been no discussion with No 10 about Labour’s proposals to put off the vote.

Corbyn has written to the prime minister asking for further details of the Cameron plan and a commitment to stage a two-day debate.

Corbyn wrote to Cameron: “As of this morning, we have not had a clear proposal from the government on when you plan to bring forward a motion to the house on airstrikes in Syria or on arrangements for the debate.

“In the view of the opposition on a matter of such critical importance there must be full and adequate time for any debate in the house and only a full two-day debate would ensure time for all members who wish to participate to be able to do so.

“As has happened previously, a one-day debate would inevitably lead to important contributions being curtailed. It is incumbent on us all to ensure the country feels there has been the fullest parliamentary discussion of what you have rightly described as a highly complex situation.

“In addition, the debate would be much better informed by views from the foreign affairs and defence select committees following your recent statements.”

The Labour deal was brokered over the weekend and on Monday morning between the leader’s office and the deputy leader, Tom Watson.

Cameron is due to visit Bulgaria this Thursday for critical talks on his plan to renegotiate the terms of UK membership of the European Union.

Tory MPs said they were still expecting the vote to be called on Wednesday, despite Corbyn’s efforts to get it delayed.

However, one senior Labour source, who is not in Corbyn’s camp, said Labour MPs seemed to have become more wary of backing military action over the weekend for fear of “marking their card” and getting singled out as targets for possible deselection by activists.

Even though Corbyn is allowing a free vote, Labour MPs will still be defying their party’s official position if they back Cameron’s motion.

The Labour leader’s decision will be communicated to the whole party at a meeting of MPs and peers at 6pm on Monday.
Airstrikes in Syria are lawful, but I’ll be voting against them
Keir Starmer
Read more

Corbyn will stress with the agreement of Watson that the preconditions for current party policy to support airstrikes have not been met.

Those preconditions include unambiguous support for airstrikes from the United Nations, clear support of regional partners, a comprehensive humanitarian plan and a commitment that airstrikes only target Isis and that any strikes are subordinate to any diplomatic efforts to stop the war.

Corbyn went into the shadow cabinet meeting armed with polling of a sample of members who responded to an email asking for their views, which showed 75% of 1,900 people were against Cameron’s proposals.

He has also canvassed the views of Labour’s national executive committee, while members of the grassroots Momentum group of Corbyn supporters have urged people to lobby their MPs against airstrikes.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...ikes-jeremy-corbyn-gives-labour-mps-free-vote

 

[Robert]

Why are they so hell bent on bombing Syria [MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] both Labour and Tory

Don't know. I'd like to hear from Hilary Benn and Maria Eagle. IMO it will only work with a coherent strategy to defeat ISIL on the ground, then set up a new state. And look how well that worked in Iraq...

I guess the strategy is to keeping knocking out the command posts, keep killing the key players, while beefing up MI5 and GCHQ resources to interdict plots on our soil.

There seems to end in sight.

 

[Robert]

Corbyn backs down.

The man is a jellyfish. He never says anything concrete, and that he will hold discussions. He has no control over his Shadow Cabinet, but he won't do the honourable thing and quit. For shame!

 

[Gabbar Singh]

I wonder what the late Tony Benn would think about the current situation within Labour. It's ironic that his son is leading the drive, on the Labour side, into war.

 

[Alizai]

Corbyn LAD

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

[Gabbar Singh]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en-gb"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">About 60 Labour MPs voted for bombing. Don't know about abstentions.</p>— Andrew Neil (@afneil) <a href="https://twitter.com/afneil/status/672181619810242560">December 2, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Gabbar Singh]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en-gb"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">67 Labour MPs voted with the government. When Hilary Benn stood up it was 50.</p>— Dan Hodges (@DPJHodges) <a href="https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/672183032686764035">December 2, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Eagle_Eye]

Labour wins Oldham west by-election by a big margin........ Blairites in mourning lol

 

[s28]

Massive win for Corbyn. The media are shellshocked. Labour right in mourning.

Big win for British people showing they are not ruled by the Establishment be it Media or Politicians. They will vote their own way.

 

[s28]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en-gb"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">67 Labour MPs voted with the government. When Hilary Benn stood up it was 50.</p>— Dan Hodges (@DPJHodges) <a href="https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/672183032686764035">December 2, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

This guy is White English in his 40's or 50's and he lives at home with his mother !

His only claim to fame is that is mother was a famous actress and less famous politician.

He is basically a Pakistani Bilawal Bhutto but in a Society where we do not bow down to inherited privilege.

 

[Robert]

Labour wins Oldham west by-election by a big margin........ Blairites in mourning lol

Better than losing the seat to UKIP.

Remember that the Blairites delivered the only three Labour victories in the last nine general elections. That's significant don't you think? Without them, there would have been unbroken Tory government for forty years. Think about that for a moment.

 

[Robert]

This guy is White English in his 40's or 50's and he lives at home with his mother !

His only claim to fame is that is mother was a famous actress and less famous politician.

He is basically a Pakistani Bilawal Bhutto but in a Society where we do not bow down to inherited privilege.

See, this is where some Corbynistas would do well to grow up a bit. Comments about opponents living with their mum are at the level of the playground. Likewise, don't tweet about violent reprisal and make threats about deselection - it makes you look like nasty people.

Challenge the different ideologies within the Labour Party with rational debate instead!

 

[s28]

I think it's fair game for those who have the 'bully pulpit' of MSM afforded them by privilege / nepotism they are public figures and open to criticism. It's funny how people try to close down 'free speech' of those they disagree with.

 

[Robert]

I think it's fair game for those who have the 'bully pulpit' of MSM afforded them by privilege / nepotism they are public figures and open to criticism.

What privilege? Hilary Benn is a duly elected MP. Do you think Labour voters voted for him because his grand-dad was a Viscount? Hardly.

Talking about family living arrangements isn't constructive criticism, it's puerile name-calling.

People making threats of violence on Twitter is not lawful exercise of free speech - it's crime. I'm glad that Mr Corbyn has told his followers to behave decently, but some have already ignored the instruction.

 

[Gabbar Singh]

The Oldham result is a much needed boost for Corbyn. Now lets see if he can control and unite the parliamentary Labour party

 

[Eagle_Eye]

[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION]

I voted for labour in 97, not sure what the connection is now to then. What we have realised is that blairites are basically Tory-lite. Labour is not meant to be Tory-lite. There is a huge disconnect between vast majority of labour supporters and the blairite wing.

The only solution I can think of is that blairite wing should leave labour and form a party of its own.

Corbyn has not been allowed any good will or favour by the plp. At every oppurtunity the knives are out for him.

With so much negativity swirling around every day, labour still managed to win by huge margin, when some pundits were predicting a close run and even a shock win by ukip.

Every time Corbyn goes to the polls, he finds connection with the people and that's not digestible to the blairites. They want to impose their way on the rest even when there is little support for their ways in the membership. Like a spoilt child, they can't stomach not having it their way and engage in unending dark art of media spin, hoping enough negative publicity and image will be created to tire out the public.

 

[s28]

spot on

Establishment throwing its toys out of the pram and having collective hissy fit

They don't care about bullying it's just a tool they prefer to keep to themselves rather than let the proles use it against them.

 

[Robert]

[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION]

I voted for labour in 97, not sure what the connection is now to then. What we have realised is that blairites are basically Tory-lite. Labour is not meant to be Tory-lite. There is a huge disconnect between vast majority of labour supporters and the blairite wing.

You have to be a realist. Without the Blairites, we would have seen a solid forty years of Tory government: 1979-2020. Imagine what the nation would be like without the thirteen Blair-Brown years. Go on, do it now.

Seventies-style socialism was reject by the people in 1979, then Thatcher won two thumping majorities in 1983 and 1987 as Labour lurched left, just as it is doing so today. Now we have a generation come up who cannot recall the seventies, and they want to go back to those failed policies. They have no idea what is in store - everybody on strike, 25% inflation, power cuts, dreadful railway service, innovation stymied, all the brightest people leaving for the USA or the Far East.

It's sad for me to see the Labour Party taking this retrograde route, because the younger members simply don't know any better.

Corbyn has not been allowed any good will or favour by the plp. At every oppurtunity the knives are out for him.

That is because they are old enough to know that Corbyn is a naive ideologue with no experience of running anything, and they are old enough to remember the seventies, from which Corbyn has not learned.

Every time Corbyn goes to the polls, he finds connection with the people and that's not digestible to the blairites.

That is because the man speaks in highly generalised truisms - statements that no reasonable person will disagree with. Like Boris did the first time he was elected London Mayor.

But scratch the surface, ask a question about the values beneath the truism and Corbyn replies that he will have to have a debate on that - or in other words, go and ask the much more intelligent and learned Seumas Milne what to think and say. Not heard of Seumas Milne yet? Google him.

To resolve this conflict between membership and PLP, a centrist candidate must step forward. Neither a hard leftist like Corbyn nor a Blairite. Someone like dear old John Smith..... I suggest Tom Watson or Hilary Benn.

 

[Gabbar Singh]

Corbyn is going to reshuffle the shadow cabinet. Revenge reshuffle? Wonder if Benn survives.

Jeremy Corbyn is starting talks with shadow cabinet members as part of a reshuffle, a Labour source has said.

The intention is for the new line-up to be announced on Tuesday, although the process could take several days.

Mr Corbyn is reportedly considering replacing some shadow ministers who disagree with his policies.

BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg said she did not expect a "very dramatic purge" of Mr Corbyn's top team in the next 24 hours.

It would be "more a shuffle than lots of moderates being shoved out", she said, although new shadow foreign and defence secretaries are expected to be appointed.

The current shadow cabinet is divided on issues including Trident renewal and military intervention in Syria.

Shadow foreign secretary Hilary Benn backed air strikes in last month's Commons vote, but Mr Corbyn opposed them.
'Petty and divisive'

Speaking on BBC Radio 4's The World at One, former London mayor Ken Livingstone, who is co-chairing the party's defence review, said it "might very well be the case" that Mr Benn could be moved to a portfolio where he agrees with Mr Corbyn - although he said he had no knowledge of the leader's intentions.

He said it was a problem if, as happened in the Syria debate, Labour's frontbench spokesman stood up and made a speech opposing the stance of the party leader.
Analysis by Laura Kuenssberg

Don't forget, Jeremy Corbyn built his own career by being a serial rebel, voting against his party leader again and again and again.

For him to call for message discipline from the outset might have seemed ludicrous. And given the lack of support he had among Labour MPs, he was determined to try to build a team from all parts of the party to give him credibility in Westminster.

So now, just four months on, if he embarks on dramatic changes, sacks those who have publicly disagreed with him, like the shadow foreign secretary Hilary Benn, there's a danger it looks like when his own authority is challenged he just can't take it.

Read more from Laura

Shadow Europe minister Pat McFadden told BBC Radio 4's Westminster Hour Mr Corbyn's "whole career" was based on disagreeing with party leaders, and warned him against carrying out a reshuffle "as a punishment for shadow minister who disagree with him".

"He has talked of an open, pluralist kind of politics but a reshuffle for that reason could end looking more petty and divisive than open and pluralist politics," he added.

But speaking on the BBC's Victoria Derbyshire programme, Labour MP and Corbyn ally Clive Lewis said reshuffles were a "perk" of being leader.

He added: "It's his prerogative as leader to be able to manage and shape the shadow cabinet - it's one of the benefits and perks of being a leader to be able to shape the shadow cabinet without it being seen as revenge."
'Piffle'

Mr Lewis said it was "speculation" to say he could replace Maria Eagle - who does not share Mr Corbyn's opposition to renewing the UK's nuclear weapons - as shadow defence secretary.

He said he would only do the job if Mr Corbyn said it was "essential" he take it, but said he thought this unlikely.

Another of Mr Corbyn's allies at Westminster, shadow international development secretary Diane Abbott, told BBC Radio London's Vanessa Feltz rumours she could replace Mr Benn as shadow foreign secretary were "poppycock and piffle".

Ms Abbott said she did not know whether there would be a reshuffle, but added that if Mr Corbyn were to change his top team it would continue to be inclusive and "would reflect his considered thoughts about the importance of having a team at the top which reflects the views of the party".

Another shadow minister, housing spokesman John Healey, said it was important to have a range of views at the top of the party, adding: "I would be very surprised if we see the sort of scale of reshuffle that some have speculated on so far."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35220413

 

[Gabbar Singh]

The car crash that is Corbyn's Labour party continues to surprise us....

Three Labour MPs have quit the party's front bench in protest at sackings made by Jeremy Corbyn in his reshuffle.

Jonathan Reynolds and Stephen Doughty quit over the sacking of the shadow Europe minister Pat McFadden.

Mr Corbyn fired Mr McFadden over "disloyalty" after he appeared to criticise his stance on terrorism.

Kevan Jones has quit his defence role over Trident after Mr Corbyn replaced pro-nuclear weapons MP Maria Eagle with unilateralist Emily Thornberry.

Shadow foreign secretary Hilary Benn - who also disagrees with Mr Corbyn on key issues - escaped the axe in the shake-up.

He denied he had been "muzzled" by Mr Corbyn, after reportedly agreeing not to publicly criticise the leader's policy positions, saying he would be carrying on with his job "exactly as before".

The only changes in the shadow cabinet see anti-Trident MP Emily Thornberry replacing shadow defence secretary Maria Eagle, who moves to culture to replace sacked Michael Dugher.
Media captionCameron: Corbyn plans 'laughable'

In his resignation letter, Mr Reynolds backed comments by Mr McFadden in the aftermath of the Paris terror attacks, which he has blamed for his sacking.

Mr McFadden attacked the response of the Stop the War Coalition, which Mr Corbyn used to chair, to the attacks.
'Distorted' views

He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme Mr Corbyn had told him he thought his comments were "an attack on him and that he had come to the conclusion because of that and one or two other things that I shouldn't continue".

"He clearly feels that me saying terrorists are entirely responsible for their action, that no-one forces anyone to kill innocent people in Paris, to blow up the London Underground, to behead innocent aid workers, that when I say they are entirely responsible for that, he clearly interpreted that as an attack on him," he added.

Mr McDonnell told the BBC there had been "issues about loyalty", saying it was not just about his one statement in the House of Commons.

He told the Today programme Mr McFadden's comments had "played into an agenda which distorted Jeremy's views on how we tackle terrorism".

This had contributed to an "undermining of Jeremy's status", he said.

There had been widespread speculation over the future position of Mr Benn - who backed air strikes in Syria in last month's Commons vote as Mr Corbyn opposed them.
Analysis by Laura Kuenssberg, BBC political editor

Reshuffles are a test of leaders' authority. So where did Jeremy Corbyn get his way, and where did he not?

He wanted a new face at defence, and he got one by moving Maria Eagle. That will go some way to neutralising brewing rows over renewing nuclear weapons...

Where did Mr Corbyn fail to get his way?

He wasn't able to move his big target, Hilary Benn the shadow foreign secretary. Benn has had to agree he will be less public on issues where the two men disagree. Mr Corbyn has caused more concern and more bad feeling in parts of the parliamentary party over how this whole thing has been handled.

Read more from Laura

Mr McDonnell said Mr Benn "has recognised the mandate that Jeremy Corbyn has from our members... and he will recognise his leadership on this issue".

The shadow foreign secretary will be entitled to disagree with the leader on matters of conscience like bombing Syria, he said, but would have to do so from the backbenches, rather than as the party spokesman.
Media captionHilary Benn: I haven't been muzzled

Mr Benn is yet to comment on his own situation, but did tweet a message of support to Pat McFadden after his sacking emerged.

Mr McFadden is being replaced by former junior shadow education minister, Pat Glass.
Clockwise from top left: Hilary Benn, Maria Eagle, Emily Thornberry, Michael Dugher, Pat Glass and Pat McFadden Image copyright PA/Getty/Labour
Image caption Clockwise from top left: Hilary Benn, Maria Eagle, Emily Thornberry, Michael Dugher, Pat Glass and Pat McFadden

There are now 17 women and 14 men in the full shadow cabinet.

Ms Thornberry, the Islington South MP and shadow employment minister, had been tipped to take over from Ms Eagle - who has also been at odds with Mr Corbyn over the future of the UK's Trident nuclear weapons system.

Ms Eagle backs Trident renewal while Mr Corbyn and Ms Thornberry do not.
MPs' anger

Elsewhere, Emma Lewell-Buck was promoted to shadow minister for devolution and local government.

MPs Wes Streeting, John Woodcock and Jamie Reed were among those to criticise Mr McFadden's sacking on Twitter.

Labour MP Stephen Kinnock said the party was "going into uncharted territory primarily because we have a leader who over his 30 odd years on the backbenchers voted against the whip 550 times".

Responding to comments by Labour leadership sources he was sacked for "incompetence and disloyalty", Mr Dugher tweeted that he was "not sure it's sensible for the leader and his office to get into a debate about 'loyalty' or 'competence'".

Confirming his own dismissal earlier on Tuesday, Mr Dugher - a former aide to Gordon Brown - said he had "paid the price" for speaking out in defence of colleagues whose reputations he claimed had been "trashed" by aides to Mr Corbyn.

He said the biggest casualty in the reshuffle had been the "new politics", and despite promises from the leader that there would be room for a little dissent, "the truth is that's just not transpired".

The Conservatives dubbed the reshuffle "the longest in history", but allies of Mr Corbyn defended his right to make changes, saying the shadow cabinet had been out of line with the party as a whole on issues such as Syria.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35239232

 

[Gabbar Singh]

Corbyn sacks a shadow minister for daring to criticise terrorism.

 

[James]

The Labour Party is not even a functioning entity at the moment. They are going to end up ultra-leftist and Lib Dem-sized in 10 years unless Corbyn steps down this year and Burnham takes the reigns to rebuild relationships.

 

[Robert]

The Labour Party is not even a functioning entity at the moment. They are going to end up ultra-leftist and Lib Dem-sized in 10 years unless Corbyn steps down this year and Burnham takes the reigns to rebuild relationships.

Momentum don't want to form a Government.

They would have no idea what to do. The only things they understand is protesting against the power structure. Better to stay in Opposition for ever than win three General Elections like Tony Blair and actually do some good for poor people.

 

[s28]

Pat McFadden was plain wrong and it was a veiled attack on his own Leader because he was criticising the Stop The War position.

It's part of a rather bigoted attempt by the neocon right to hijack the debate even though it is accepted by most Intelligence Agencies and experts that terrorism is a direct result and blowback from Western foreign policy

 

[Robert]

Three Shadow Junior Ministers have quit Corbyn's cabinet today.

 

[s28]

Three people who are Labour Friends of Israel and nobody had ever heard of.

 

[Robert]

Three people who are Labour Friends of Israel and nobody had ever heard of.

Maybe the average Labour voter has not heard of them. The statement that they are Labour Friends of Israel reveals your personal prejudices. So much for the broad church!

The concern to the Labour leadership here should be the loss of ability and experience in senior positions. Of course Corbyn can replace competent Oxford-educated right-wingers with fellow ideologues. That will please his supporters but not necessarily impress the centre ground of floating voters which he needs to attract to form a Government.

It's interesting that the Bullingdon Bruiser is now using high-handed ridicule and questioning of competence as a PMQ tactic. Corbyn can expect years of variation on "You don't know what you're doing".

 

[Eagle_Eye]

Right wingers going off in a hissy fit.

I have said before, its clear the people have no support amongst the labour masses, they are better off going to LibDems or Tories for that matter, where they really belong and not hold the labour party to a ransom it seems.

Labour voters, grass roots want to go left. Just accept it and move on. If the country doesn't vote for it then so be it atleast we will have an alternative. Why are they so afraid of British people deciding its fate?

The day in and day out discrediting campaign is typical blairism, its frankly nauseating. One idiot resigning live on BBC? This is just beyond the pale stuff. I am surprised Corbyn hasn't got the knives out and frankly got them all deselected. Only when their jobs are on the line, will they start to behave.

 

[s28]

Corbyn is too nice for his own good. But I'm sure his team are taking down names and they will suffocate the Blairite wing with a velvet glove rather than smash them with an iron fist.

 

[Robert]

Right wingers going off in a hissy fit.

I have said before, its clear the people have no support amongst the labour masses, they are better off going to LibDems or Tories for that matter, where they really belong and not hold the labour party to a ransom it seems.

Labour voters, grass roots want to go left. Just accept it and move on. If the country doesn't vote for it then so be it atleast we will have an alternative. Why are they so afraid of British people deciding its fate?

The day in and day out discrediting campaign is typical blairism, its frankly nauseating. One idiot resigning live on BBC? This is just beyond the pale stuff. I am surprised Corbyn hasn't got the knives out and frankly got them all deselected. Only when their jobs are on the line, will they start to behave.

This scenario is the death of the Labour Party as a serious force in Westminster, leaving us with a Tory government in perpetuity.

Thanks, commies.

 

[Junaids]

This scenario is the death of the Labour Party as a serious force in Westminster, leaving us with a Tory government in perpetuity.

Thanks, commies.

We already have that!

Thatcher changed English - not British - politics forever, with the result that even the Blair and Brown governments had Conservative policies.

The Corbyn debacle shows that Labour cannot win power with the policies that elect Labour / Labor / SNP / Trudeau governments in NZ / Australia / Scotland / Canada.

It's good news for those of you in the southeast, who get to benefit from the conservative policies you prefer no matter who wins.

But I've just left after a month in Cheshire, while my Lancastrian neighbours were flooded due to cuts to the flood defences budget. The north has to consider whether it gains from perpetual Conservative governments, or whether it needs to secede with Scotland. Not that the current price of oil makes that very attractive.