Corbyn suspended

Status
Not open for further replies.
We seem to be very proud of our PR system, especially when compared with our historic superiors in these things, from whom we inherited our very democracy.
I have even seen self congratulation of our PR system of electing a President. But of course the election of the President is the antithesis of PR as there is only one winner. What they are really crowing about is the Single Transferable Vote. The STV elects the least unpopular of the candidates. Still better than FPTP which is effectively the US system, albeit somewhat gerrymandered.
 
Sister Sara said:
Reform UK are against the First Past the Post system.
Click to expand...

It's not in their manifesto and according to a recent article in the Spectator:

"[Reform] party chairman Zia Yusuf was quizzed by an audience member about whether Reform still supports changing the electoral system to proportional representation. ‘To turn [Britain] around, it will take us winning under a first past the post system,’ he responded matter-of-factly. Going on, he added:

I firmly believe – and I’m speaking personally here – I think if PR was ever instituted in this country, we will end up in a state of gridlock. We will not be able to do the frankly quite ambitious, and in some cases radical, things by the time we get to 2029 that we’re going to need to do to unshackle the British economy from the crazy overregulation to unleash the potential of British ingenuity. So no, look, we are firmly in favour of first past the post. I don’t think [PR has] served Germany particularly well. I don’t think it’s serving France particularly well. So no is the answer. I personally think that we need first past the post and that’s what reforming tends to win under."
 
This is turning more into the Starmer Shambles rather than anything to with Corbyn.

I haven't delved into the Epstein affair too much but now its almost impossible not too. The extent of Epstein's 'associates' at high-level politics, business and royalty is staggering.

Starmer was a shambles at PM questions today. Its simply not credible that he 'didn't know', if not the true extent of Mandelson's relationship with Epstein, then the on-going communications between the two. Where is MI5 when you need them?
Starmer has promised to release the notes on the process to appoint Mandelson UK Ambassador to US...but with the exception that matters in the "national interest" or matters that may effect "international relations" will be withheld!!

I wonder what national interest or international relations could be effected during a screening of Mandelson and his relationship with Epstein?
 
Sister Sara said:
Its simply not credible that he 'didn't know', if not the true extent of Mandelson's relationship with Epstein, then the on-going communications between the two. Where is MI5 when you need them?
Click to expand...
It seems he did know, that MI5 or whoever told him.

From todays FT: “official security vetting he received mentioned Mandelson’s ongoing relationship with the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein”, to which Starmer replied: “Yes, it did.”
 
cremeegg said:
It seems he did know, that MI5 or whoever told him.
Click to expand...
That is correct. That is what Badenoch stated today, that she forced him in Leaders Questions to admit he was aware. He then pivoted to not being aware of the extent of that relationship and now his line is "if I had known then what I know now".

Basically he ignored the security assessment on Mandelson and decided on the word of the twice-sacked Minister and apparently went against several Labour colleagues advising against his appointment.

Badenoch tore his apology to pieces today. As she said, "they are in office, they are not in power". Only a matter of time before he falls, or takes the Labour Party with him into irrelevance.

On a wider note, Badenoch stated she was not in Epstein files but it was asked of her by a reporter how she felt that David Cameron was mentioned. Apparently, associates of Cameron were engaged with Epstein to arrange a meeting between Cameron, Epstein and Woody Allen!! :oops:

The meeting never occurred so no wrong-doing, but what on earth would David Cameron, Epstein and Woody Allen be meeting about??
 
Purple said:
If it was a movie it would have to be a comedy.
Click to expand...

Indeed.

I know this topic has veered but I do see a link between the toppling of Corbyn on the over-stated anti-semitism and now the likely toppling a British PM, if not, the govt.

Mandelson was no fan "I work every single day to bring forward the end of [Corbyn's] tenure in office", but after 2017 election did eat some humble pie - Mandelson conceded that Corbyn's election campaign was "very sure-footed" and the result, in which Labour gained seats and denied the Conservatives a majority, unexpected. "I was wrong" about Corbyn, he told BBC News of Corbyn.

He still worked every day to have him removed though.

Mandelson is reported to have been instrumental in pushing Starmer forward for leadership, and from the outside looking in, it would appear to me that Mandelson's appointment as US Ambassador looks increasingly likely a return payback

It really has turned around for the worse on Starmer. He was a lame-duck PM anyway but now he is in free-fall.
I'm quite chuffed to be honest :)
 
Last edited:
Morgan McSweeney has resigned.
Starmer showed a significant lack of judgement in appointing him in the first place. Up there with "Don't fight a land war in Asia Minor" is "Don't appoint Cork people as Special Advisors".
 
Sister Sara said:
Anas Sawar, Leader of the Scottish Labour Party expected to call on Starmer to resign this afternoon.
Click to expand...
What unelectable loony will the Unions support this time? Labour have a remarkable ability to self destruct. They kept Boris in office, no mean feat, and now they'll get the National Front, sorry they are called UKIP now, no, sorry, it's Reform, elected.
This is all a response to the post 2008 bail out and the resulting concentration of wealth in capital (stock markets, property etc) and the reduction in the real value of labour (work). When the Centre fails the extremists on both sides elbow their way to the table. They are, in my opinion, equally dangerous. Reform and the Corbynite wing of Labour are two sides of the same coin.
 
Purple said:
Morgan McSweeney has resigned.
Starmer showed a significant lack of judgement in appointing him in the first place.
Click to expand...
Oh come on. His advice enabled Starmer to deliver Labour 33.7% of the vote and 411 constituencies in the last election; got Labour back in power after 20 years and four election defeats , and (hopefully) a reset to centralist policies.
 
Purple said:
This is all a response to the post 2008 bail out and the resulting concentration of wealth in capital (stock markets, property etc) and the reduction in the real value of labour (work).
Click to expand...

I would agree with this part, not the rest of your post.

Labour needs to get back to its roots. Time to get back to what their raison d'etre is....rasing and protecting the real value of labour (work).

Corbyn is out, but a move back to the Left is on the horizon.
 
Last edited:
Sister Sara said:
I would agree with this part, not the rest of your post.
Click to expand...
The taxation policies of the so-called left wing parties in Ireland is to hit high earners rather than the wealthy. There's no move to tax Capital income and gains in the same way that income from work is taxed even though that's the only way of addressing the issue.
Sister Sara said:
Labour needs to get back to its roots. Time to get back to what their raison d'etre is....rasing and protecting the real value of labour (work).
Corbyn is out, but a move back to the Left is on the horizon.
Click to expand...
What does that actually mean?
Social Welfare and high tax on work have never addressed that problem and never will. Those are the solutions of those who consider themselves on "the left", those who are more interested in ideology than solutions. The electorate will continue to reject those policies as they are stupid, self defeating and unjust. Then in order to get elected the left morphs into the kind of populism that was imbodied by Fianna Fail for decades and is now embodied by Sinn Fein. Starmer doesn't seem to be competent but he's a Centralist, not an ideologue. The world needs less dogma and more rationality.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top