Options

NEC suspend B & H Labour Party

24567

Comments

  • Options
    smudges dadsmudges dad Posts: 36,989
    Forum Member
    Heavenly wrote: »
    Statement from the B & H Labour Party as to why they have been suspended

    https://twitter.com/bhdlabourparty/status/753732015053238272

    Looks like support of Corbyn is being discouraged by the NEC.
  • Options
    clinchclinch Posts: 11,574
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Looks like support of Corbyn is being discouraged by the NEC.

    Looks like another attempt to tie the leadership vote. If you can't keep him off the ballot, change the rules about voting. If that's not enough, just suspend those who might vote for him. No threats and violence around here, and all the people I have come across are blaming the PLP for the mess rather than Corbyn.
  • Options
    QofShebaQofSheba Posts: 43,330
    Forum Member
    Looks like support of Corbyn is being discouraged by the NEC.

    My local party had our AGM last Sunday. The motions on the email were 'No confidence and Confidence'. At the meeting someone put forward another motion which was a motion not to vote on the other two motions. To remain neutral.

    After discussing etc, it was finally agreed that the new motion would have to be voted on first, because obviously if it had been carried there would be no need to vote on the other two motions.

    After voting with a small majority against the 'new' motion we voted on the other two. The result was the motion 'we do have confidence in Corbyn' won by 32 to 16, with 2 abstentions.

    So yes, I got the feeling that they preferred to report the result as neutral rather than support show that local members do have confidence in Corbyn.
  • Options
    QofShebaQofSheba Posts: 43,330
    Forum Member
    clinch wrote: »
    Looks like another attempt to tie the leadership vote. If you can't keep him off the ballot, change the rules about voting. If that's not enough, just suspend those who might vote for him. No threats and violence around here, and all the people I have come across are blaming the PLP for the mess rather than Corbyn.

    It is the PLP who are to blame. Why could they not support the leader and just vote against him on issues they really disagreed on such as trident.

    They are the ones looking like fools now that the PM has talked about taking care of the disadvantaged. If May does keep to her word and does things like scraping the bedroom tax, there will not be any need for a Labour party, and even less need for a right wing Blairite Labour party.
  • Options
    JavedJaved Posts: 6,832
    Forum Member
    QofSheba wrote: »
    It is the PLP who are to blame. Why could they not support the leader and just vote against him on issues they really disagreed on such as trident.

    They are the ones looking like fools now that the PM has talked about taking care of the disadvantaged. If May does keep to her word and does things like scraping the bedroom tax, there will not be any need for a Labour party, and even less need for a right wing Blairite Labour party.

    How can you say Blair was right-wing when Cirbyn voted FOR the vast majority if Blair's policies??? Corbyn, himself, by your reasoning, is "a right-wing Blairite". See how these labels are nonesense!
  • Options
    JavedJaved Posts: 6,832
    Forum Member
    Looks like support of Corbyn is being discouraged by the NEC.

    If the support is from AWL infiltrators who threaten the attendees, then yes it does look like that. Surely we don't want other, more extreme, parties to take over our party? And behave like thugs?
  • Options
    QofShebaQofSheba Posts: 43,330
    Forum Member
    Javed wrote: »
    How can you say Blair was right-wing when Cirbyn voted FOR the vast majority if Blair's policies??? Corbyn, himself, by your reasoning, is "a right-wing Blairite". See how these labels are nonesense!

    Okay, let me rephrase that then. War warmongering Brairites.
  • Options
    JavedJaved Posts: 6,832
    Forum Member
    clinch wrote: »
    Looks like another attempt to tie the leadership vote. If you can't keep him off the ballot, change the rules about voting. If that's not enough, just suspend those who might vote for him. No threats and violence around here, and all the people I have come across are blaming the PLP for the mess rather than Corbyn.

    But the NEC just voted by the decisive majority to support Corbyn being in the ballot, which suggests that the majority of the NEC support Corbyn, who himself has a vote. Why would the same NEC bring in rules saying no meetings, and bringing in suspensions, just to minimise support for Cirbyn??? They are either pro-Corbyn or against him and we have just had it proved that the NEC are pro-Corbyn. :confused:
  • Options
    JavedJaved Posts: 6,832
    Forum Member
    QofSheba wrote: »
    Okay, let me rephrase that then. War warmongering Brairites.

    Oh so now they are no longer " right-wing Blairites"? Your mind is like a weather-vane! :D
  • Options
    AristaeusAristaeus Posts: 9,974
    Forum Member
    mimik1uk wrote: »
    i think there is a bit more to the story than just a decision to back corbyn

    end of the day this is just another sign of the shambles and divisions within the labour party between momentum and traditional labour

    Momentum are not within the Labour party. They are an external organisation with no official links.
  • Options
    AristaeusAristaeus Posts: 9,974
    Forum Member
    Javed wrote: »
    But the NEC just voted by the decisive majority to support Corbyn being in the ballot, which suggests that the majority of the NEC support Corbyn, who himself has a vote. Why would the same NEC bring in rules saying no meetings, and bringing in suspensions, just to minimise support for Cirbyn??? They are either pro-Corbyn or against him and we have just had it proved that the NEC are pro-Corbyn. :confused:

    Not really. They voted that the rules allowed Corbyn on the ballot, not that they supported Corbyn.
  • Options
    JavedJaved Posts: 6,832
    Forum Member
    Aristaeus wrote: »
    Momentum are not within the Labour party. They are an external organisation with no official links.

    They were registered as Jeremy Coryn for Leader Campaign before changing their name to Momentum. The proof was posted on Twitter. It's true they have no links to the Labour Party but they have very strong links to Cirbyn.
  • Options
    QofShebaQofSheba Posts: 43,330
    Forum Member
    Javed wrote: »
    Oh so now they are no longer " right-wing Blairites"? Your mind is like a weather-vane! :D

    I know how rabidly you oppose Corbyn, (or Cirbyn) so I cut my post short. But here goes.

    They were more right wing than the Tories. And even now, when not in power, who were the Labour MPs who voted with the Tories for austerity? Even when Thatcher was asked about her legacy, she said 'Tony Blair'. Maybe you are too young to remember these things, but the information is out there if you really wanted to learn about it.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/06/12/tony-blair-right-wing-says-john-major_n_1589295.html
  • Options
    JavedJaved Posts: 6,832
    Forum Member
    Aristaeus wrote: »
    Not really. They voted that the rules allowed Corbyn on the ballot, not that they supported Corbyn.

    That was supporting Corbyn. If you look at the NEC membership, you will see it is mostly pro-Corbyn and fast becoming more so.
  • Options
    JavedJaved Posts: 6,832
    Forum Member
    QofSheba wrote: »
    I know how rabidly you oppose Corbyn, so I cut my post short. But here goes.

    They were more right wing than the Tories. And even now, when not in power, who were the Labour MPs who voted with the Tories for austerity? Even when Thatcher was asked about her legacy, she said 'Tony Blair'. Maybe you are too young to remember these things, but they are out there if you really wanted to learn about it.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/06/12/tony-blair-right-wing-says-john-major_n_1589295.html

    I am not " rabidly" anti-Corbyn at all. I was actually one of the people saying give him a chance. However, like many people who supported him, I have become disillusioned and I abhor the type of people whom he seems to have brought with him, who are intimidating and bullying. As for being too young, I am older than Cirbyn! So I'm practically ancient and I remember very well waiting two years for a hip op under Thatcher/Major and then getting it in a matter of weeks under New Labour. If you think To y Blair was more right wing than the Tories then you are closing your mind to the fact that in order to be elected, a po,itical party has to appeal to all sides of the electorate. Thatcher knew this because she got the votes of working class people and Tony Blair understood this too. You win from the centre ground or you don't win. Tiny Blair did a lot if good things for the working class -that's why CIRBYN himself supported the vast majority if his policies. He also did things to appeal to other voters. Cirbyn will have to win over soft Tories in the key marginals if he is win - how do you think he is going to do that? If he doesn't win them over, he won't be able to help the poor because he won't be in power. That's the dilemma under FPTP.
  • Options
    mossy2103mossy2103 Posts: 84,308
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Javed wrote: »
    Yes I would agree with that. But Corbyn's response seems to be to wallow in the adulation whilst saying " please play nicely everyone" whilst all around him there is chaos. He hadn't really tackled it head-on like Kinnock did because they are on his side.

    And if he actually got into power? I dread to think!
    yes, platelet does have a point, but I would agree with you entirely there.

    And regardless as to which side they were on, a proper leader worth his salt would have been very forthright in their response - the thing is Corbyn can do effective speeches when at a rally, so why is he unable (or unwilling) to "do a Kinnock" here?
  • Options
    trevgotrevgo Posts: 28,241
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Labour is in the process of being taken over by the hard left thugs who ran it in the 70s and have been merely hibernating ever since.

    Fully in the knowledge that a truly red socialist party could never get elected in the UK (they've never held a deposit when they've tried) they are waging a guerilla war on the party. The Labour Party proper has only two options - to fight for its survival or split.

    All necessary measures should be taken to try for the former. If unsuccessful, then a split will have to happen. The only language the left understands is dirty tricks and fire must be fought by fire.
  • Options
    mossy2103mossy2103 Posts: 84,308
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Aristaeus wrote: »
    Momentum are not within the Labour party. They are an external organisation with no official links.

    However, this does raise some suspicions:
    The founder and head of Momentum, the hard-Left activist group accused of bullying and intimidation by moderate Labour MPs, has been working out of Jeremy Corbyn’s office.

    Jon Lansman was seen four times last month using a desk in the Labour leader’s set of rooms in Parliament according to multiple sources.

    The news undermines previous claims that Momentum is run independently from Mr Corbyn’s office after a series of fierce rows about the group’s behaviour towards MPs.


    Momentum has been accused of bullying Labour MPs to vote against bombing Isil in Syria and attempting to force moderates out of the party by triggering re-selection races.

    MPs said the revelation proved the group is “working hand-in-hand” with Mr Corbyn and demanded the Labour leader “come clean” about his control over the group.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/05/momentum-leader-working-out-of-jeremy-corbyns-office/
  • Options
    JavedJaved Posts: 6,832
    Forum Member
    mossy2103 wrote: »

    The two guys at the head of Momentum aren't even working class. They are also pretty affluent.
  • Options
    JavedJaved Posts: 6,832
    Forum Member
    mossy2103 wrote: »
    yes, platelet does have a point, but I would agree with you entirely there.

    And regardless as to which side they were on, a proper leader worth his salt would have been very forthright in their response - the thing is Corbyn can do effective speeches when at a rally, so why is he unable (or unwilling) to "do a Kinnock" here?

    He is either unwilling or unable to " do a Kinnock" and kick the thugs out.

    Perhaps both?
  • Options
    mooxmoox Posts: 18,880
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    So how long before the party finally splits?

    I don't think suspending local parties is going to make much of a difference - they'll still meet up and pass motions if they like, even if the NEC won't recognise it

    "comradely conduct" - LOL. I know that's probably a term that has been used by the party for decades, but it still sounds ridiculous
  • Options
    JavedJaved Posts: 6,832
    Forum Member
    trevgo wrote: »
    Labour is in the process of being taken over by the hard left thugs who ran it in the 70s and have been merely hibernating ever since.

    Fully in the knowledge that a truly red socialist party could never get elected in the UK (they've never held a deposit when they've tried) they are waging a guerilla war on the party. The Labour Party proper has only two options - to fight for its survival or split.

    All necessary measures should be taken to try for the former. If unsuccessful, then a split will have to happen. The only language the left understands is dirty tricks and fire must be fought by fire.

    They are making the Party look unfit for office, whilst Theresa May looks like the kinder face of politics. Who'd have thunk it? At this rate, Corbyn has no chance holding on to the marginals. But then, perhaps all the Corbynistas want is to destroy the " right-wing, war-mongering, Blairites" and then wave some placards around for the next decade or two. >:(.
  • Options
    mimik1ukmimik1uk Posts: 46,701
    Forum Member
    Aristaeus wrote: »
    Momentum are not within the Labour party. They are an external organisation with no official links.

    are you saying that alot of the trouble we are seeing at CLPs across the country has nothing to do with momentum?
  • Options
    JavedJaved Posts: 6,832
    Forum Member
    moox wrote: »
    So how long before the party finally splits?

    I don't think suspending local parties is going to make much of a difference - they'll still meet up and pass motions if they like, even if the NEC won't recognise it

    "comradely conduct" - LOL. I know that's probably a term that has been used by the party for decades, but it still sounds ridiculous

    It sends a shiver down my spine when I hear people call each other " Comrade". I imagine them standing at La Guillotine while Emma Thornberry and Diane Abbott sit there knitting away.
  • Options
    James_B1James_B1 Posts: 176
    Forum Member
    Javed wrote: »
    How can you say Blair was right-wing when Cirbyn voted FOR the vast majority if Blair's policies??? Corbyn, himself, by your reasoning, is "a right-wing Blairite". See how these labels are nonesense!

    Javed, we've agreed on a lot of things but c'mon, Blair was/is a centre right wing politician. He was the figurehead for a movement that entered the Labour Party and co-opted. This can't be argued.

    Blair was in an enviable position in 1997 to throw the left a few bones whilst carrying out major policies that favoured big business (further deregulation of the City of London and financial markets, further PFI, Iraq War etc).

    You only have to look at who he works for now and has worked for since leaving Politics...definitely a man of the Centre Right.
Sign In or Register to comment.