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

by blueturando Tue Jan 17, 2012 5:10 pm

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."

by oftenwrong Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:42 pm

In the notional stand-off between Strivers and Skivers, it is earnestly to be hoped that the categories don't simply decide to change sides, as the Coalition would be thrown into total confusion at having to find two new descriptions.

by blueturando Wed Jan 09, 2013 1:05 pm

IVAN......Once again you chicken out of the truth and delete a message that YOU dont like, saying its a personal message. Well I suggest you read a few more messages here then as 80% are personal...that's what happens in discussions.

Redflags message to Boatlady 2 posts before the one you deleted is very personal, so why discriminate against me....isnt that 'Racist?' because I am a different colour (Blue)

No doubt this one will be deleted too as you dont want other poster to realise you discriminate on here

For the last time, if you have any complaints about the administration of this forum, put them in personal messages, not on the threads. Is that so difficult to understand?

The message which I deleted - but kept - was addressed to tlttf and went into details about what you keep in your computer. It had no place here. Ivan.

by Redflag Wed Jan 09, 2013 1:15 pm

blueturando wrote:IVAN......Once again you chicken out of the truth and delete a message that YOU dont like, saying its a personal message. Well I suggest you read a few more messages here then as 80% are personal...that's what happens in discussions.

Redflags message to Boatlady 2 posts before the one you deleted is very personal, so why discriminate against me....isnt that 'Racist?' because I am a different colour (Blue)

No doubt this one will be deleted too as you dont want other poster to realise you discriminate on here

The reason for boatladies post was obvious blue, and she ask all on this forum for advice and suppose your upset because you knew there was not a hope in HELL of her joining the Nasty party is that what got up your BLUENOSE .

As to where Labour should position itself EXACTLY WHERE IT IS but now put on the BOXING GLOVES THE FIGHT HAS STARTED

by Ivanhoe Wed Jan 09, 2013 1:27 pm

What I want is a Labour government that looks after the vulnerable without means testing people.

We pay in, we get out. End of bloody story.

by blueturando Wed Jan 09, 2013 1:57 pm

Redflag.....You're a Labour person and like to harp on about fairness, so I would expect you to agree that Fairness is all we need when comes to posting on cutting edge. I do not complain about personal (discussing) messages with other posters. In the main these messages are responses to a previous post...The forum is littered with them.

As to where Labour should position itself, well it doesn't have a position at the moment....unless you would care to enlighten us all.

by skwalker1964 Wed Jan 09, 2013 2:44 pm

blueturando wrote:Redflag.....You're a Labour person and like to harp on about fairness, so I would expect you to agree that Fairness is all we need when comes to posting on cutting edge. I do not complain about personal (discussing) messages with other posters. In the main these messages are responses to a previous post...The forum is littered with them.

As to where Labour should position itself, well it doesn't have a position at the moment....unless you would care to enlighten us all.

I think the decision (a correct one in my opinion) to vote against the uprating bill represents Labour drawing a line in the sand, especially because it was done against the opposition of the 'Progress' closet-tory faction. My hope is that it will be the first step of many in Labour embracing the left rather than trying to beat the Tories in the centre ground (which is what has led to the accusation that both parties are the same - not enough differentiation. We'll see.

Of course there's still a long way to go, but the centre ground has moved left and Labour should be leading by example not still fighting over dead ground.

by boatlady Wed Jan 09, 2013 4:54 pm

That Owen Jones writes a good piece, doesn't he?
Wish I had his eloquence.
I agree, Labour needs to move left - if only to put some distance between themselves and the Tories - maybe then the people this government is shafting will begin to feel there's some hope of change

by oftenwrong Wed Jan 09, 2013 5:40 pm

If Cameron thinks his Coalition inherited a mess in 2010, how's he likely to leave things in 2015? The Labour Party is going to need lots of cleaning-material when it takes over.

Hercules diverted a river when tasked with cleaning out the Augean Stables, so Thames Water may need to be put on standby!

On the topic question, today's window-dressing of the Coalition Record would appear to suggest that Labour prepare a mea culpa for the unavoidable events of 2008, in time for the next Election. There's no point in trying to pretend that the Credit Crunch never happened.

by Redflag Wed Jan 09, 2013 6:29 pm

blueturando wrote:Redflag.....You're a Labour person and like to harp on about fairness, so I would expect you to agree that Fairness is all we need when comes to posting on cutting edge. I do not complain about personal (discussing) messages with other posters. In the main these messages are responses to a previous post...The forum is littered with them.

As to where Labour should position itself, well it doesn't have a position at the moment....unless you would care to enlighten us all.

But you have blue you referred to boatlady's post because it was not on topic, we all go off topic very rarely.

As for the position of Labour EXACTLY where it is without the bloody BOXING GLOVES OFF its game on for 2015.

by tlttf Sat Jan 12, 2013 11:44 am

At last Miliband has removed 2 more New Labour mp's from cabinet and has replaced them with a more left leaning duo, perhaps a separation of "sameness" politics will return to parliament now. Who knows if he bins Balls and Cooper and then resigns himself there might be a genuine alternative to the "middle/meddling governments that have plagued parliament for the last 20 years. Very Happy

by Ivanhoe Sat Jan 12, 2013 12:22 pm

Who are these MP's, and who have they been replaced by ?. I can find nothing online.

by **Ivan** Sat Jan 12, 2013 12:30 pm

Ivanhoe. I'm afraid that certain posters are not renowned for the reliability of what they post. I think Ed made a couple of minor adjustments to his shadow team last May, but I don't think he's PM yet so he can't make changes to the cabinet.

by Ivanhoe Sat Jan 12, 2013 12:53 pm

Ivan wrote:Ivanhoe. I'm afraid that certain posters are not renowned for the reliability of what they post. I think Ed made a couple of minor adjustments to his shadow team last May, but I don't think he's PM yet so he can't make changes to the cabinet.

Ivan, are you saying this posting is basically, rubbish. ?

""At last Miliband has removed 2 more New Labour mp's from cabinet and has replaced them with a more left leaning duo, perhaps a separation of "sameness" politics will return to parliament now. Who knows if he bins Balls and Cooper and then resigns himself there might be a genuine alternative to the "middle/meddling governments that have plagued parliament for the last 20 years.

tlttf

Posts: 607
Join date: 2011-10-08

by Redflag Sat Jan 12, 2013 2:12 pm

tlttf wrote:At last Miliband has removed 2 more New Labour mp's from cabinet and has replaced them with a more left leaning duo, perhaps a separation of "sameness" politics will return to parliament now. Who knows if he bins Balls and Cooper and then resigns himself there might be a genuine alternative to the "middle/meddling governments that have plagued parliament for the last 20 years.

Thank you tittf it is true the Tory party are shit scared of Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper, is that because they have got the tories down to a tee ?

by **Ivan** Sat Jan 12, 2013 2:38 pm

tlttf wrote:-
Wales gets as much money per capita as England does

Then tlttf wrote:-
If Wales can't survive on the subsidy they're given, though it is more than the English receive

by oftenwrong Sat Jan 12, 2013 5:12 pm

.... and STILL all Tory supporters can do is nit-pick over activity within the Opposition. (We might be bad, but your lot are worse. Yah-boo!)

by Ivanhoe Sat Jan 12, 2013 5:15 pm

oftenwrong wrote:.... and STILL all Tory supporters can do is nit-pick over activity within the Opposition. (We might be bad, but your lot are worse. Yah-boo!)

This is because over 13 years New Labour continued Thatcherism.

by Redflag Sat Jan 12, 2013 6:44 pm

Ivanhoe wrote:
oftenwrong wrote:.... and STILL all Tory supporters can do is nit-pick over activity within the Opposition. (We might be bad, but your lot are worse. Yah-boo!)

This is because over 13 years New Labour continued Thatcherism.

Not thatcherism per say just that Tony Blair just followed what she had left in place, and we do not know if she had tied his hands just like Labour will find when they get into power 2015 the 49% of the NHS that Landsley has handed over to the private health care sector, that could cost us tax payers millions .

by Ivanhoe Sat Jan 12, 2013 6:57 pm

Yes Redflag, Thatcher's free market policies were continued by Blair and Brown from 1997.

by Redflag Sat Jan 12, 2013 7:44 pm

Ivanhoe wrote:Yes Redflag, Thatcher's free market policies were continued by Blair and Brown from 1997.

I agree Ivanhoe and I know they should have put more regulation on the banks and the City hedge fund managers, it is then up to us as Labour party members/voters to let them know what we want them to do about certain things. As for where should Labour position itself to the left right beside Ed Miliband and his shadow cabinet.

by **Ivan** Sat Jan 12, 2013 8:00 pm

Ivanhoe wrote:-
Ivan, are you saying this posting is basically, rubbish?

"At last Miliband has removed 2 more New Labour mp's from cabinet and has replaced them with a more left leaning duo"

You might very well think that; I couldn't possibly comment. What a Face

by skwalker1964 Sat Jan 12, 2013 8:45 pm

Ivan wrote:
Ivanhoe wrote:-
Ivan, are you saying this posting is basically, rubbish?

"At last Miliband has removed 2 more New Labour mp's from cabinet and has replaced them with a more left leaning duo"
You might very well think that; I couldn't possibly comment.

There is a press story running (I believe it originated with Kevin Maguire in the New Statesman) that Ed Balls has threatened to quit the Labour front bench if Ed M replaces him with David Miliband.

Personally, I'm no massive fan of Ed Balls since his 'zero-based spending review' nonsense to placate the markets and try to out-Tory the Tories. But DM's blairite credentials worry me, too. However, his speech in the 1% debate might indicate a more genuinely left-wing stance.

Of course, the fact that it's in the press doesn't mean any of it's true, or that Ed M has even floated the idea. We'll see what happens, I guess.

by Redflag Sat Jan 12, 2013 10:35 pm

skwalker1964 wrote:
Ivan wrote:
Ivanhoe wrote:-
Ivan, are you saying this posting is basically, rubbish?

"At last Miliband has removed 2 more New Labour mp's from cabinet and has replaced them with a more left leaning duo"
You might very well think that; I couldn't possibly comment.

There is a press story running (I believe it originated with Kevin Maguire in the New Statesman) that Ed Balls has threatened to quit the Labour front bench if Ed M replaces him with David Miliband.

Personally, I'm no massive fan of Ed Balls since his 'zero-based spending review' nonsense to placate the markets and try to out-Tory the Tories. But DM's blairite credentials worry me, too. However, his speech in the 1% debate might indicate a more genuinely left-wing stance.

Of course, the fact that it's in the press doesn't mean any of it's true, or that Ed M has even floated the idea. We'll see what happens, I guess.

I heard his speech in the debate on the 1% cap on benefits he did say the bill was RANCID he could have also said the same of the Tories and L/Ds because they supported the Bill getting through so that it gets a third reading. I do not think that Ed M would dump Ed B because he knows that Ed B gets up Osbourns nose.

by bobby Sat Jan 12, 2013 11:26 pm

Dont go getting your nickers in a twist, if there are to be changes within the shadow cabinet let us wait to hear what Ed Miliband has to say on the matter.

As for Dave Miliband automatically getting the second job, just because he is Eds Brother, certainly wouldnt send me the right sort of message, Dave as far as I am concerned would make an exelent Prime minister but unfortunitely Ed is destined for that job, my second choice for Dave would probably be something in the foreign office as he is an experienced and very capable diplomat.

by tlttf Sun Jan 13, 2013 8:41 am

Probably a wise move on your behalf Ivan!

Follow the link to the source? Am I allowed to do that?

Latest news

Ed Miliband makes changes to Labour’s Frontbench

http://www.labourmatters.com/the-labour-party/ed-miliband-makes-changes-to-labours-frontbench/

by Redflag Sun Jan 13, 2013 8:44 am

bobby wrote:Dont go getting your nickers in a twist, if there are to be changes within the shadow cabinet let us wait to hear what Ed Miliband has to say on the matter.

As for Dave Miliband automatically getting the second job, just because he is Eds Brother, certainly wouldnt send me the right sort of message, Dave as far as I am concerned would make an exelent Prime minister but unfortunitely Ed is destined for that job, my second choice for Dave would probably be something in the foreign office as he is an experienced and very capable diplomat.

You have produced good ideas bobby, and I think your right it would not look good to the voters if Ed M replaced Ed B with his brother it would not look like Nepotism within the Labour party.

by oftenwrong Sun Jan 13, 2013 1:07 pm

My personal feeling is that shuffling the deckchairs is neither desirable or necessary. I recall the old military advice, "Order followed by a Counter-order results in Disorder."

Even Labour voters are conservative with a small "c" about personnel changes in a shadow cabinet nearing an Election. (Better the Devil you know?)

Again on a personal level only, I feel that a small amount of humility would go down well with electors who can still remember the arrogance of Gordon Brown's failure to take the advice of his colleagues. Ever. It might give the Tories an impression of weakness, but confession is good for the Soul and a little sincerity goes a long way in the current climate of opinion.

by bobby Sun Jan 13, 2013 1:54 pm

Regarding David Miliband. My personal feelings are that he is a far to able a Politician not to be included in the Shadow Cabinet, If he is not destined to be leader, who better to have behind his Brother giving the occasional shove, not only that, I think he will also bring in a fair number of supporters to assist in the stuffing of the Tory Led Coalition.

Regarding his so called Blairite credentials, I personally do not have a problem with that because I do not see taking millions out of poverty, the introduction of the minimum wage, the introduction of the Social Chapter, 10 years of unprecedented growth in our economy, speedily taking us out of recession after the Banking Crisis, Creating a stable economy where company’s could plan and grow without the fear of Toryesk recessions, reducing massively unemployment, banning Fox hunting and the many other things they did that where beneficial to Britain. And before Ivanhoe comes on telling us that Blair and Brown where Thatcherite, to save me having to make another posting, I will say my customary “Bollocks” Now.

by Redflag Sun Jan 13, 2013 2:17 pm

bobby wrote:Regarding David Miliband. My personal feelings are that he is a far to able a Politician not to be included in the Shadow Cabinet, If he is not destined to be leader, who better to have behind his Brother giving the occasional shove, not only that, I think he will also bring in a fair number of supporters to assist in the stuffing of the Tory Led Coalition.

Regarding his so called Blairite credentials, I personally do not have a problem with that because I do not see taking millions out of poverty, the introduction of the minimum wage, the introduction of the Social Chapter, 10 years of unprecedented growth in our economy, speedily taking us out of recession after the Banking Crisis, Creating a stable economy where company’s could plan and grow without the fear of Toryesk recessions, reducing massively unemployment, banning Fox hunting and the many other things they did that where beneficial to Britain. And before Ivanhoe comes on telling us that Blair and Brown where Thatcherite, to save me having to make another posting, I will say my customary “Bollocks” Now.

Your quite right to point out the good things the Labour party did in there 13 years in power bobby, if you hold it up against the last two half years of the Tory led coalition Labour win hands down. It seems to be people are only too ready to point out what the Labour party got wrong, I would say to them do the same for this gov't and I'm sure they would out number the things that Labour got wrong but just in two half years.

by Ivanhoe Sun Jan 13, 2013 2:37 pm

We never had the Social Charter under New Labour. We never had Labours fair distribution of wealth. We never had State pensions link to earning, we never had industry or manufacturing bases returned, we still had Thatcher's free market.

As a former Labour activist, it is on record that our rich and poor divide widened under Blair and Brown.

Tony Blair wasted 13 years in office and a massive mandate from the British people, sticking to Thatcher's free market.

by **Ivan** Sun Jan 13, 2013 3:12 pm

it is on record that our rich and poor divide widened under Blair and Brown

Ivanhoe. That’s true, but the UK economy grew continuously from 1995 until 2008, the longest period of sustained growth for at least 200 years. Inequality in Britain is the fourth highest in the developed world, but in those good years most people were slightly better off than previously, and public services, which the poor use more than the rich, were receiving vast injections of cash. There is more discussion of that issue here:-
https://cuttingedge2.forumotion.co.uk/t709-does-inequality-matter

Where should the Labour Party position itself? To win a clear majority, a party needs about 12 million votes. Labour has to get some votes from the centre (the Tories veered off to the right as soon as they came to power and reverted to type), but also to give enough incentive to its natural supporters to turn out and vote. So Labour needs to be left of where it was under Blair and well to the left of the current nightmare of a government. A government like the post-war one of Clement Attlee would be ideal.

by Scarecrow Sun Jan 13, 2013 3:34 pm

bobby , you state ,
regarding David Milibands Blairite credentials , you dont have a problem with it .

However put yourself in the shoes of the Labour PR gurus who advise Ed , having brother David in the shadow cabinet , with all the baggage from the Blair years would be an absolute god send for the front bench tories and that nefarious party in general , as you have eloquently stated he did much good , however he presided over the rendition flights entering UK airspace and was very keen to block an in depth investigation into it all.
Running a credible Labour party in 2013 requires giving the least amount of political ammunition to the tories , having David in the cabinet would be a backward move in PR terms , no matter how much good he did on his watch during his Blair years . The theatre and spectacle of PMQs for example would afford great venom to the tories , using David as the perpetual whipping boy .
The visual narrative along with the sound bite culture would not be kind to David upon a return to shadow front bench politics , however if he does return I am big enough to see how it all pans out , but having a grasp of PR in the media , I will not sleep easy knowing the ammunition factor could drag Ed' s forward thing Labour model down .

by bobby Sun Jan 13, 2013 3:54 pm

Ivanhoe said: As a former Labour activist, it is on record that our rich and poor divide widened under Blair and Brown.

Here you are allmost on queue. Of course the divide widened, and as I see it there is no problem with that, so long as those at the bottom end get a fair deal. Before I became my own boss and worked for some nameless govenor, I didn't give a tinkers cuss what he/she earn't so long as the cash I recieved was fair to the work I was doing. I am an employer and have 6 full time people in the UK, and 8 full Time with 4 holiday time workers in Italy, and out of the businesses I own and run I earn very well, but so long as the wages I pay are fair which they are, who's business is it as to what I earn. It was me that took the gamble and risked all to start my business, it was me who at the beginning was working for nothing, yet paying my staff their wages in order to get the business working, it was me who was putting in 16 + hours a day, something no employee would ever be expected to do unless paid for through the nose.

by Ivanhoe Sun Jan 13, 2013 4:00 pm

bobby, I dont regard means testing workers and pensioners for handouts paid for by the very same workers taxation as moving forward.

I see a widening rich and poor divide as a disgrace under a government which is tagged to Labour.

by Redflag Sun Jan 13, 2013 4:48 pm

Ivanhoe wrote:bobby, I dont regard means testing workers and pensioners for handouts paid for by the very same workers taxation as moving forward.

I see a widening rich and poor divide as a disgrace under a government which is tagged to Labour.

You have got to admit Ivanhoe the gap at the moment between the have and the have nots with this shower of nasties is as broad as a fortnight, and Labour have admitted they got things wrong can you not forgive and put your energies into getting a decent gov't into power Labour where people really are treated FAIRLY.

by Ivanhoe Sun Jan 13, 2013 4:55 pm

Redflag, Actually my efforts are going nationwide on the internet with other people.

And we arent talking about the coalition, we are talking about New bloody Labour who were a shower.

by oftenwrong Sun Jan 13, 2013 5:25 pm

Well why didn't you say so? You'd be very welcome at that Conservative Club which Phil reports on from time-to-time.

by **Ivan** Sun Jan 13, 2013 7:26 pm

New bloody Labour who were a shower..

Ivanhoe. Like you, I wish that the last Labour government had done more to reverse the insane Friedmanite policies which have infested our politics since 1979. However, let's keep things in perspective and consider what Labour did do and then compare it to the evil policies now being pursued by Tory headbangers trying to take us back to the Victorian era:-

- Uninterrupted economic growth from 1997 to 2008
- Longest period of sustained low inflation since the 1960s
- Made Bank of England independent
- Home ownership up by more than a million
- Minimum wage introduced and increased
- Minimum Income Guarantee for working families
- Nearly 3 million more people in work since 1997
- ‘New Deal’ for young unemployed
- Entitlement to 28 days paid leave annually
- Trebled spending on NHS
- 85,000 more nurses and 32,000 more doctors
- Brought back matrons to hospital wards
- Free breast cancer screening for all women aged between 50-70
- Set up NHS Direct offering free convenient patient advice
- More than doubled spending on education
- Over 36,000 more teachers in England and 274,000 more support staff and teaching assistants.
- Nursery school entitlement for all three and four year olds
- Free fruit for most four to six year-olds at school
- Child benefit increased by 26% in real terms since 1997
- Set up Child Trust Funds
- Brought over 1 million social homes up to standard
- Minimum Income Guarantee for pensioners
- Winter fuel payments to OAPs
- Free prescriptions and eye tests for everyone over the age of 60
- Free TV licences for over 75s
- Free bus passes for pensioners
- Reduced VAT on gas and electricity from 8% to 5%
- Cut standard rate of income tax from 23p in 1997 to 20p (lowest since the 1930s)
- Free admission to museums and galleries
- 14,000 more police
- Brokered peace in Northern Ireland
- Banned smoking in public places
- Cleanest rivers, beaches, drinking water and air since before the industrial revolution
- Banned driving when using a mobile phone
- Abolished foxhunting
- Banned fur farming and the testing of cosmetics on animals
- Introduced civil partnerships
- Restored city-wide government to London
- Cleared most hereditary peers out of House of Lords

by bobby Sun Jan 13, 2013 7:40 pm

Yes but what about Blair Brown embracing Thatchers Free Market policy. Just pretending to be Ivanhoe as it seems no matter what good Blair and Brown did he will come back and bang on the same old drum again and again and again and again. Sorry I had to stop as I was going giddy.

by bobby Sun Jan 13, 2013 7:49 pm

Ivanhoe, please read my earlier post again, in fact read it several times just to make certain you have got it right. I said sweet fanny Adams about any Social Charter, what I mentioned was the Social Chapter, which was a Part of the Maastricht Treaty signed by John (fancy a Currey) Major. Major negotiated an opt out for the SOCIAL CHAPTER, then opted out. The SOCIAL CHAPTER was adopted in 1997. Maybe you may want to do a bit of research, something you seem to do very little of and let us all know who it was that came to power in 1997.

by bobby Sun Jan 13, 2013 7:52 pm

Ivan, all of those New Labour achievements you very kindly listed must have been Tory, as our Ancient Saxon Knight knows for a fact and keeps telling us that Blair and Brown where closet Tories.

by Sponsored content