Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

First topic message reminder :

Do Labour go hunting for the electorate who voted Blair into power 3 times and risk the wrath of the Unions, or side with the core Labour party supporters and the Unions at a risk of being unable to get back the voters who deserted them in the last election?
 

The scale of the rift between Labour and the unions over Ed Miliband's decision to embrace austerity measures has been made clear as a senior leader warned of long-term implications over the "most serious mistake" the party could have made.
Unions affiliated to Labour have been fuming since shadow chancellor Ed Balls told a conference at the weekend that he would not reverse the Government's planned 1% public sector pay cap, which affects millions of workers.
Unite leader Len McCluskey warned that Mr Miliband was setting Labour on course for electoral "disaster" and undermining his own leadership by accepting Government cuts and the cap on public sector pay.
Mr Miliband hit back against his union critics, insisting that Mr McCluskey was "wrong" to attack his decision to embrace austerity measures.
It has emerged that the leader of the GMB has written to the union's senior officials saying that the speech by Ed Balls may have a "profound impact" on its relationship with the Labour Party.
General secretary Paul Kenny said in the message: "I have spoken to Ed Milliband and Ed Balls to ensure they were aware of how wrong I think the policy they are now following is. It is now time for careful consideration and thought before the wider discussions begin on the long-term implications this new stance by the party has on GMB affiliation.
"It will be a fundamental requirement that the CEC (executive) and Congress determine our way forward after proper debate. I will update everyone as events unfold but I have to say this is the most serious mistake they could have made and the Tories must be rubbing their hands with glee." The GMB declined to comment on the message but confirmed it had been sent.
Mr McCluskey said in an article in The Guardian: "Ed Balls' sudden weekend embrace of austerity and the Government's public sector pay squeeze represents a victory for discredited Blairism at the expense of the party's core supporters. It also challenges the whole course Ed Miliband has set for the party, and perhaps his leadership itself."
Mr Miliband responded in a statement: "Len McCluskey is entitled to his views but he is wrong. I am changing the Labour Party so we can deliver fairness even when there is less money around and that requires tough decisions."

Heavens, this takes me back to a saying of my Grandmother's ....

Only strike a child with a killing blow, and only swear if you can't win the argument.

If you cant win the argument "stripe their boats

Appologies to those that dont understand Rhyming"

why has my word been edited to "eff"?.

betty.noire. That happens automatically when someone's command of English is so limited that they have to resort to the 'f' word. The site owners don't want their good name besmirched by gutter language.

Caroline Flint writes:-

“An often raised issue is why we have let the government get away with blaming Labour for the deficit. There is frustration in Labour ranks on this issue. A long leadership contest (at the time I argued it was too long), and ironclad message discipline in coalition ranks has allowed an unfair accusation to take hold in the public’s mind. Even in his resignation letter Liam Fox managed to get in the accusation that the Labour government was at the root of the financial crisis and deficit. It isn’t easy on the doorstep, especially in the South East, and it’s unfair because all the parties agreed with levels of public spending up until 2008.

But we must win the argument of the future not the past. We have to move the debate forward on to what is happening now because of this government’s choices and what the future would be like under Labour.”

http://labourlist.org/2012/04/southern-comfort-crawley-and-reigate/

The problem is Ivan is that it happened on Labours watch and thats what people will remember. They won't remember all partys agreeing to the spending budget because the others were in opposition.

The crash was unavoidable because of successive governments handling of the Financial Services industry, de-regulation and the global credit crunch. All opposition partys blame the government of the day if things go wrong, just as Labour do now with the coalition

Blue. The very fact is that Thatcher de-regulated the FSI because she had to to make up for the loss of revenue derived from the manufacturing industries that closed because of her destructive policies.

On the other hand regulation is a much more difficult task because all banking sectors here and overseas have to agree with their various governments as a whole. Brown tried to negotiate the regulation for
many years and was unable to succeed unfortunately. It was an impossible
task as the world banking system if far far stronger than any government attempting to regulate it.

Brown brought in the FSA to protect the public from unscrupulous lenders etc, it was not ever in a position to regulate global bank to bank lending, nor volume poor underwriting.

Is there a list of swear words that aren't allowed? Will all the bad ones gets edited out? You see, for me, when I'm talking tory, only "certain" words will suffice!!! lol

blueturando wrote:The problem is Ivan is that it happened on Labours watch and thats what people will remember. They won't remember all partys agreeing to the spending budget because the others were in opposition.

The crash was unavoidable because of successive governments handling of the Financial Services industry, de-regulation and the global credit crunch. All opposition partys blame the government of the day if things go wrong, just as Labour do now with the coalition

Truisms, but the significant difference is that in the run-up to the May 2010 General Election, the Tories did not just "blame the government of the day", they repeatedly told the Public that they could make a better job of it than Labour. They couldn't, they haven't, and were never going to do better than the plan which Chancellor Darling had already begun.

Sometimes described as, "Throwing the baby out with the bathwater."

Is there a list of swear words that aren't allowed? Will all the bad ones gets edited out?

Yes, Adele, the 'f' and 'c' words are edited; the first one becomes 'eff' and the second is removed altogether. (By the way, the 'c' word isn't 'conservative'.)
:affraid:

As a Kid, my Priest told me that, the only swear word is "Damn" and everything else is merely a vulgar expression.

Ivan wrote:

Is there a list of swear words that aren't allowed? Will all the bad ones gets edited out?

Yes, Adele, the 'f' and 'c' words are edited; the first one becomes 'eff' and the second is removed altogether. (By the way, the 'c' word isn't 'conservative'.)
:affraid:

Bloody Norah! I can't believe that coconut is banned!!!!

Adele Carlyon wrote:Is there a list of swear words that aren't allowed? Will all the bad ones gets edited out? You see, for me, when I'm talking tory, only "certain" words will suffice!!! lol

Just goes to show, the word Tories warps the purest hearts and minds. Really, there is only one, well two words that can describe a Tory, wait for it, they are (Greedy Bastards).

Agreed Jackthelad!!! Two other words that spring to mind are "morally bankrupt"

Adele Carlyon wrote:Is there a list of swear words that aren't allowed? Will all the bad ones gets edited out? Y5ou see, for me, when I'm talking tory, only "certain" words will suffice!!! lol

You and me both. i could not agree more with you. They are 100% Anti Woman, Who is losing there job? Woman, Who is facing the greatest loss of income? Woman. Who are most likely to be found working in low paid Job? Woman. Who is helping to cut the tax to 45p but facing most of the Tory cut. Yes Woman.

maybe that is why just 13% of woman say they would now vote Tory?

Hello and welcome Red Cat Woman. I'm new here too, people have been very welcoming on here! Enjoy!
Oh they despise women, we really should know our place and get back to baking those fairy cakes! But I have a feeling that it is us women that will help with the downfall of these buffoons in the end!

Are those buns ready yet...?

I'm going to go and check on them as soon as I've finished ironing the napkins!

Red Cat Woman wrote:

Adele Carlyon wrote:Is there a list of swear words that aren't allowed? Will all the bad ones gets edited out? Y5ou see, for me, when I'm talking tory, only "certain" words will suffice!!! lol

You and me both. i could not agree more with you. They are 100% Anti Woman, Who is losing there job? Woman, Who is facing the greatest loss of income? Woman. Who are most likely to be found working in low paid Job? Woman. Who is helping to cut the tax to 45p but facing most of the Tory cut. Yes Woman.

maybe that is why just 13% of woman say they would now vote Tory?

Red Cat Woman. We had a woman running the country once, she has gone but her free market legacy contuned through the former New Labour Government, and through this coalition.

Britain is finished, and not because of politicians, but due to the British people, millions of who are simply politically ignorant. No offence to you intended.

QUOTE: ".... the British people, millions of who are simply politically ignorant. "

Oh, well, back to darning socks and let Hubby worry about the voting then.

I'm feeling the love.....

Nurse! The sedative!

And I love the feeling Kicking Tory ass that is.

oftenwrong wrote:QUOTE: ".... the British people, millions of who are simply politically ignorant. "

Oh, well, back to darning socks and let Hubby worry about the voting then.

There is many a true word....................

(Latest blog from skwalker.wordpress.com)

I love ‘The West Wing’. It’s a glimpse of how politics could and should be, and a fascinating education in how political systems can negate even the best intentions. As it was written by people who’d actually lived the life, it’s also a source of good information on how politics works, what to do and what not to do.

One of the recurring elements has been in my mind lately. On numerous occasions, one of the political ‘old hands’ will tell an up and comer not to let his/her opponent frame the debate, and not to grant the premise of a misleading question.

I think that lesson applies very strongly to the current Parliamentary situation, because I think I see a pattern in the way David Cameron tries to neutralise, or if possible belittle, Ed Miliband. I’m not talking about the out and out bad-mouthing – though there’s plenty of that and it makes Cameron look immature and infantile (which I think he’s proving himself to be). I’m talking about a slightly more subtle tack (Cameron may be childish and arrogant, but he’s cunning) that has become a constant theme in his pronouncements and accusations.

David Cameron is trying to cast Ed Miliband as ‘Cameron Lite’ – in effect, saying ‘He’d do just the same as I would, except in a weaker and more wishy-washy way, and what’s more he’s in the pocket of the unions. He wants to do what I’m doing, but he daren’t because he’s scared of the unions’.

In Cameron’s recent lash-out at the Labour leader, he asked rhetorically whether Miliband was weak or left wing, then concluded ‘he’s both!’. Miliband refused to engage with the point, which superficially looked like a good decision, but in fact by not giving a categorical answer, he was allowing Cameron to frame the debate. Similarly, when Cameron regularly challenges Miliband to condemn whatever latest industrial action the Tories’ ‘smash & grab’ policies have caused, Miliband carefully avoids allowing Cameron to corner him on the issue.

I believe this is a mistake – and now more than ever.

Another regular motif in TWW is ‘You have to know what you stand for – and voters have to know’. In using ‘left-wing’ as an insult, Cameron is in fact displaying just how true Nadine Dorries’ accusation of being arrogant and out of touch is. People are beginning to realise that the ‘cut to grow’ ploy is a Big Lie; that the pain is just beginning and the benefits aren’t going to come; that the Tories’ main passion is the interests of the already-rich; in short, that the Tories are the Tories, and their true colours will always show.

What people need now is a clear statement that there is an alternative. Not a slightly less draconian, slightly less ‘blue’ version of the ‘leaders’ we have now – but a genuine, unashamed, ethical socialism that has the best interests of the ordinary British people at heart, including the weak, vulnerable and disadvantaged. One that states – unequivocally – that there is a different and better way, and the ways things are now is not set in stone, not the only way. And certainly by no means the best one.

The growing anti-austerity trend around Europe demonstrates that people are waking up to the wool that the neoliberals have pulled over their eyes for too long. François Hollande understood the lesson, saw the opportunity, and humiliated the right-wing Presidential incumbent. We Brits are different – but we’re not stupid. People are starting to understand – and since the facts are against the Tory deception (see my ‘Inherited Mess’ posts and others on this blog), presenting them in the right way, clearly and with conviction, is going to carry a lot of weight, and persuade a lot of people.

The next time David Cameron accuses or taunts Ed Miliband, singing his old tune of ‘you wish you were me, but you’re weaker’, Ed Miliband should call his bluff. David Cameron is using the tactic because he’s terrified that the British electorate is going to see a candidate with strong and better convictions, and in that light will see Cameron for the shallow, vacuous lightweight that he is.

The next time Cameron calls Miliband a socialist as if it were an insult, Miliband should claim the title, own it – and wear it with pride. And then rip Cameron’s legs off as he taunts him with his fears.

The next time Cameron taunts Miliband about the industrial action being taken by people who are being systematically robbed and have no other way to resist, Miliband should answer that yes, he is absolutely on the side of the people against greed and injustice – and use that as a platform for a ringing declaration that there is a better way.

I like Ed Miliband, and I’ve become convinced that he’s a man with heart, with convictions, with a vision – and with nerve. I believe that it’s time to show Cameron for what he is – and that a frontal assault is the best way. Demolish his postures and his fatuous arguments, and do so mercilessly. The facts are with us, and against him.

People will warm to conviction, clearly expressed. They’re heartsick of mealy-mouthedness and ready to be inspired by the force of someone who believes – and states unequivocally – the rightness of his convictions. One who knows you can’t please everyone, but that the rich have enough to be happy about and taking care of the vulnerable and the majority is more important. We’re ready for someone who’s socialist, left-wing and the antithesis of everything odious about the Conservatives – and proud of it.

I started with ‘The West Wing’ and I’ll finish with it. In the first episode of the second series, Leo McGarry talks to Josiah Bartlett (in a flashback to a discussion when Bartlett was still campaigning for the Presidency about why JB should continue his campaign) and says:

‘Because I’m tired of it: year after year after year after year of having to choose between the lesser of “who cares” – of trying to get myself excited about a candidate who can speak in complete sentences. Of setting the bar so low, I can hardly look at it. They say a good man can’t get elected President. I don’t believe that – do you?’

We’ve had years of low bars, of party leaders fighting over the middle ground, over who can be the most lukewarm and the least offensive. People are tired of it, and it shows in low turnouts, cynicism and weariness with politics. We need a candidate who’ll dare to take a strong position – one who’s socialist and proud of it, and who dares to convey that conviction to people who are bowed under the weight of predator-capitalism and the cynical politicians who protect and promote it.

Ed – it’s time…

I agree with much of what you have said SK. In very simple terms I believe that Ed has been biding his time by allowing Cameron enough rope to strangle himself. The problem with that is the rope is still two years long, enough time for the arrogant tyrant to implement something worse than actual Tory ideology (if that is possible).

The public in general seem to favour the underdog in many respects and I reckon Ed is playing this game. The public of course subconciously want a strong leader and Cameron tries to emulate one and fails miserably by being arrogant and seemingly uncaring.

We hear that the "cuts" have not reached their full capacity yet with more to come (god help us) therefore perhaps Ed is waiting to push the knife in with more vigour and thrust which hopefully could go a long way to creating a Vote Of No Confidence in this so called Coalition.

Keep up the good work. Thank you,
Mel

Brutus to Cassius

There is a tide in the affairs of men.
Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;
Omitted, all the voyage of their life
Is bound in shallows and in miseries.
On such a full sea are we now afloat,
And we must take the current when it serves,
Or lose our ventures.

power is a force that ebbs and flows in time, and one must "go with the flow." Waiting around only allows your power to pass its crest and begin to ebb; if the opportunity is "omitted" (missed), you'll find yourself stranded in miserable shallows.

http://www.enotes.com/shakespeare-quotes/there-tide-affairs-men

Ed just has to find the right 'flood-tide'.


And I never liked Shakespeare's plays at school.

Personally, I simply feel grateful that Ed Miliband has so far resisted the temptation of lowering the tone of debate to the sad old, bad old YAH-BOO politics.

Cameron SAID he wanted to get away from that, but embraces it every time his face turns pink, which is often.

I suggest that he knows he is losing the argument, and therefore Ed Miliband does not need to do much more than he is doing anyway.

Mel wrote:I agree with much of what you have said SK. In very simple terms I believe that Ed has been biding his time by allowing Cameron enough rope to strangle himself. The problem with that is the rope is still two years long, enough time for the arrogant tyrant to implement something worse than actual Tory ideology (if that is possible).

The public in general seem to favour the underdog in many respects and I reckon Ed is playing this game. The public of course subconciously want a strong leader and Cameron tries to emulate one and fails miserably by being arrogant and seemingly uncaring.

We hear that the "cuts" have not reached their full capacity yet with more to come (god help us) therefore perhaps Ed is waiting to push the knife in with more vigour and thrust which hopefully could go a long way to creating a Vote Of No Confidence in this so called Coalition.

Keep up the good work. Thank you,
Mel

Your right again Mel great post from SK, I think that is what Ed Miliband has been doing all along giving Scam..er..on enough rope to HANG HIMSELF and all we could do was slag Ed off for not doing it, I love it when Scam..er..on turns red than I because then I know that Ed has done his job and done it really well.

I love to watch PMQs if Ed Miliband does not make Cameron take a hissy fit and turn red do not worry Dennis Skinner MP will always manage to make him red.

I alluded to this question on the Blair thread (history channel). My opinion is that Ed should move the party away from Blairite policy and philosophy. However a think-tank - Progress, is very much pro-blairite...centrist, pro-free market, etc and would like the Labour party to continue to represent what New Labour represented. The unions, and specifically Unite, are seeking to negate the influence of Progress (a group championed by the likes of Mandelson, Andrew Adonis, and financed by Lord Sainsbury), and are backing a return to more traditional Labour thinking.

More reading on this here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/17/settling-scores-last-thing-labour-needs


What do Labour supporters, and others here, think?

It seems to me Ed is steering the party in roughly the right direction, but has a difficult course to chart, and without many firm policies in place (understandable given the turbulent nature of our economy at present) it's quite difficult to gauge exactly which form the party will eventually take once in government.

likes Mandelson, Andrew Adonis, and financed by Lord Sainsbury

If the Labor party is going to put itself in the place thes 3 want it, then for me, I think the Labour Party should position itself on top of the Bass Rock!


We have had over 40 years of current thinking and look where we are!

My guess is there is a lot to play out between now and the next GE and Milliband and his advisors will be taking a very close look at the policies of Mr.Hollande across the pond to see how they work with the electorate and in the current economical climate.

I can't see that Labour currently has any concrete policies to speak of, but then they don't really need to at this time. Cameron and co are making and complete hash of it and very easy for Miliband.

I also think Miliband is in 2 minds on which direction the party should go. His natural instincts are to take the party back towards the left, but he is also aware that this could make it harder for the Party to become elected again and Labour enjoyed 13 years in power under the New Labour banner

Normal practice in 21st Century Parliament is for one party to announce their manifesto and the other party to steal all the best ideas for their own Policy statements.

What can you recall of David Cameron's proposals prior to the Election of 2010? It doesn't matter, because he never mentioned any of them again.

Not sure if they should follow the Blairites or "Potty Brown" as he has been so aptly described. For a novel idea why not support the working man/woman indigenous to these Isles rather than ship in ready made followers from abroad.

I think we were invited to read something rather similar in the last manifesto of the British National Party.

Whatever happened to Mr Griffin?

tlttf wrote:Not sure if they should follow the Blairites or "Potty Brown" as he has been so aptly described. For a novel idea why not support the working man/woman indigenous to these Isles rather than ship in ready made followers from abroad.

You utter racist!

If really stuck for a worthy argument , the Race Card is the usual favoured approach for those of a certain disposition...

I don't recall mentioning race once. However the fact that you see my post as racist says more about your thought forming than mine. Perhaps if I'd mentioned anybody born here you wouldn't jump onto the populist idea of racism. You should really get a life folks.

None so blind as those who will not see.

"I don't recall mentioning race once."

Your memory is as bad as your temperament Land.

You referred to People from Pakistan in a racist description in a post not long ago and was pulled up on the subject.

You seem to enjoy treading upon thin ice here on this forum. Obnoxious people are so boring.

in a post not long ago and was pulled up on the subject.

Maybe Maybe, but that was not in THIS thread.


Careful, or we are leading up to the blood letting that Bobby and I had elsewhere also!

Edit.

This IS a democracy is it not? Still? and topics should be able to be discussed without someone throwing in the race card.

It would be like me decrying the Royal Enfield Motorcycle that is in the shops NOW. If I said the build quality was not up to scratch and the thing shakes itself to bits, then someone could say I'm racist because the motorbike is made in India!


Nothing in here by the people who disagree like the statement -

"I disagree with what you say, but I defend to death your right to say it!