Article 50 Discussion

[honeybee13]

Thank you, I understand now.

[London1971]

11 hours ago, tobyjugg2 said:

 

 

 

 

- As defined by Labours historic trouncing under Corbyn, and his clinging on like a dried up bogey that desperately needs wiping from everyones face.

 

 

 

 

 

Yup,

 

3 weeks after their worst General Election drubbing since 1983 , comrade Corbyn is still strutting around like nothing has happened, and he still actually has a mandate to lead HM Opposition. 

 

Even more laughably, many people in the party think that more of the same is going to help them win the next election. 

 

Lifelong Labour voter here in absolute despair.

[tobyjugg2]

14 hours ago, fletch70 said:

Say what you will about Corbyn - he seemed honest if a little dithery.

 

Dishonest and dithery

Like you avoiding straight answers to the open door policy here in this thread.

 

What was it Corbyn Incontinence Candidate said

“We didn’t lose because of our commitment to scrap universal credit, invest in public services or abolish tuition fees.”

 

No Labour certainly didn't - it was all the other crap they tried to force in with it.

 

and what else has Corbyn done?

Made sure the unelected 'advisor's'  who screwed up everything and for whom corbyn reneged on an agreement with his elected politicians on the Brexit issue position - get permanent positions while the hard working teams lose their jobs

... and sits there himself trying to ensure his sycophants replace him along with those unelected advisers

 

A decent politician with a smidgen of honour and decency would have resigned the next day and taken his sycophants with him.

Bloody ridiculous and utterly disgraceful.

 

[honeybee13]

I think this article has some interesting points on how Labour might change its strategy. I hadn't heard of the Preston model, it sounds interesting.

 

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/oureconomy/labour-should-focus-building-co-operative-new-economy-ground/

[unclebulgaria67]

Labour seem to be following the "Beachy Head" model.  Looking over a cliff edge, not quite sure what they really want.  

 

Fact is that if the Labour heartlands of the North of England and parts of Wales, think that Corbyns Labour was too left wing, they cannot elect a new leader with a similar political agenda.

 

Labour have got to remove momentum from the party and go back to more moderate politics, actively working with Trade Unions to seek better rights for people. 

[honeybee13]

I agree about seeking better rights and lives for people. Someone needs to because I don't see Bojo's people trying very hard.

 

Here's another article about how the writer thinks Labour should change. Amongst other things he mentions having policies other then wanting a Labour government or defeating the Tories. He also thinks, as I do, that central control by the far left hasn't helped.

 

 https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/31/only-way-labour-win-ditch-labourism-corbyn

[tobyjugg2]

1 hour ago, unclebulgaria67 said:

Fact is that if the Labour heartlands of the North of England and parts of Wales, think that Corbyns Labour was too left wing, they cannot elect a new leader with a similar political agenda.

 

and against Boris Johnson at that !!!!!!!!!!!!!

I wonder how much of the Lib dems flat performance (she showed Corbyn how it should be done when you simply don't excel - let alone fail abysmally) was due to the expectation of them supporting Corbyns policies as they did (had to) some Tory policies when in coalition before?

 

and Rebecca Long-past-time-Corbynism-was-gone-Bailey still doing the 'we got it right but people didn't understand and thought we cant deliver, we must push these policies harder' utter garbage.

 

Nope. People did understand and were sure you would do your utmost to deliver ... the things they wanted least of all

- whatever the cost to or the will of the British people.

 

all against a background of Corbynite

If you vote for something I dont like, YOU are wrong - so shut up

if you aren't cheering, YOU simply don't understand - so shut up

 

What it does say is that the majority of Labour MP's who quickly shut up when they thought they might be deselected, and those who were and are busy selling Corbinite propaganda rather than addressing constituents real world issues - are unfit for office and unworthy of peoples votes.

 

HB's first couple of links defines the real issues.

 

"In the north-east, where Acorn’s young activists are using the organisation to circumvent councillors and MPs, Labour lost eight stronghold constituencies to the Conservatives, causing one outgoing veteran socialist MP to attack his own party’s “bloody lazy” representatives.

“The Tories have come out in Blyth and done exactly what we used to do,” Ronnie Campbell, the MP for Blyth Valley since 1987 until his retirement before the election, told the Guardian. “Their councillors work and work. Our lot [were saying] ‘When do we get our money?’”

“Labour’s campaigning has been based on policy ideas rather than doing stuff.”

 

 

[tobyjugg2]

2 hours ago, honeybee13 said:

I think this article has some interesting points on how Labour might change its strategy. I hadn't heard of the Preston model, it sounds interesting.

 

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/oureconomy/labour-should-focus-building-co-operative-new-economy-ground/

 

 

+ 1

 

less Corbynite, middle class professional politicians with personal ideologies which workers are expected to follow

... and more back to working with and for those who work.

 

 

[fletch70]

11 hours ago, tobyjugg2 said:

 

Dishonest and dithery

Like you avoiding straight answers to the open door policy here in this thread.

 

What was it Corbyn Incontinence Candidate said

“We didn’t lose because of our commitment to scrap universal credit, invest in public services or abolish tuition fees.”

 

No Labour certainly didn't - it was all the other crap they tried to force in with it.

 

and what else has Corbyn done?

Made sure the unelected 'advisor's'  who screwed up everything and for whom corbyn reneged on an agreement with his elected politicians on the Brexit issue position - get permanent positions while the hard working teams lose their jobs

... and sits there himself trying to ensure his sycophants replace him along with those unelected advisers

 

A decent politician with a smidgen of honour and decency would have resigned the next day and taken his sycophants with him.

Bloody ridiculous and utterly disgraceful.

 

I do find your rants quite insulting as often so far off the mark as to be laughable.

 

I asked you for an example of labour offering an open door policy and you failed to deliver. All I can find is Abbott saying immigration would be based on labour values and the manifesto where they essentially say they will not be constrained by artificial quota such as in the past the Tories have said they want to do. To me that means having a policy that allows immediate family to join legal migrants and refugees as well as allowing people in to fill the labour market gaps. 
 

I admit I am not entirely comfortable with momentum but as I’ve said before do not think that MPs from other parties do not face deselection. 
 

You talk about unelected advisors but what about other parties , they have them-who masterminded the Tory and Brexit victories. 
 

I do not even think you are a socialist, more a neo liberal Blairite if I’m being charitable. Yes there is a lot wrong with Labour but we lost because of Brexit and a better Tory promise of getting Brexit done. 
 

Sadly the UK is becoming centre right or Right wing just like the USA. We are sleep walking into Totalitarianism and the persecution of minorities . Muslims, Jews, people of colour, LGBT . Try plowing through Arendt’s books or many others about the 1920s and 30s 

 

History repeating itself . Why is History marginalised in primary education, why do so many people not know of Auschwitz or the murder of several million Soviet citizens by ‘Uncle Joe’ . 

 

 

 

 

 

[tobyjugg2]

1 hour ago, fletch70 said:

 

but we lost because of Brexit and a better Tory promise of getting Brexit done.

 

 

 

LOL

Head in sand? or own backside?

 

 

 

1 hour ago, fletch70 said:

I do find your rants quite insulting as often so far off the mark as to be laughable.

 

I asked you for an example of labour offering an open door policy and you failed to deliver.

 

 

LOL

Not true and you simple quoting some of Corbyns hide the peanut antics (as you both did) fools no-one but just demonstrates that Corbynites are at least as dishonest as Johnson.

 

Tell it to mcClucksy and labourlist as previously linked

... and as you two tried to avoid while supporting immediate benefits and free movement and opposition to immigration based on worth to the nation.

Head in sand? or in own backside?

 

https://socialistworker.co.uk/art/49239/McCluskeys+opposition+to+Labours+free+movement+policy+gives+into+racist+myths

 

https://labourlist.org/2019/09/labour-conference-approves-motion-to-extend-free-movement/

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/13/mccluskey-tells-corbyn-defy-calls-extend-freedom-of-movement

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-50426023/len-mccluskey-labour-is-not-a-remain-party

 

 

Read them as see what they support, not just the headline.

 

 

 

The EX Labour voters weren't listening to right wing rhetoric, they were listening to you lot.

 

[fletch70]

TJ 

You links make no sense whatsoever

 

Many of the were before the manifesto 

 

Yes Len McCluskey was wrong to insist the election wasn't about Brexit - it was but you will note he argued against total freedom of movement - his stance was echoed by the Labour Party manifesto as I explained earlier 

 

Your rants make no sense and you seem to think I am joined at the him with Jase. 

You still have not shown any evidence that Labour's manifesto had an open door policy- not one ounce . You are just making it up because you like a fight. Do you think if you say it loud enough people will believe you?

 

Tell me , why do you think labour voters voted Tory when their only message was getting Brexit done? No either you are saying they are psychic and knew something we didn't or they were just tired of the whole thing. I can see why they were tired.

 

A recent article in the Guardian asked why did the the opposition parties allow a GE- well of course the SNP can see an opportunity to break up the union. The election should never have happened or not at this point.

 

You are I am afraid just insulting and ignorant . I am not Jase and Jase is not me, we are different people with different views but a similar socialist ideal. I think we will review this in 12 months time, at which point we will know if we are screwed or if Johnson is an even bigger liar than at the moment- when he has to go to parliament and ask for an extension to the negotiating period. The man has come back with a deal that s worse than May's. I think the dissolution honours will be interesting when we see who gets awards 

[tobyjugg2]

43 minutes ago, fletch70 said:

Tell me , why do you think labour voters voted Tory when their only message was getting Brexit done? No either you are saying they are psychic and knew something we didn't or they were just tired of the whole thing. I can see why they were tired.

 

 

How condescending and offensive to millions of Labour voters

You appear to be claiming that life long Labour voters, who voted Labour whatever its many forms,

were listening to Johnson and voted for him through 'misunderstanding' the Labour message

 

How ridiculous!

 

 

They were listening to you lot and decided Johnson was the lesser of the two evils

- just like I have now (see below). I dont listen to the right wing rags.

Quite straight forward.

 

 

 

I only voted Corbyn Labour (probably like 100's of thousands of others) in the half forlorn hope that the party would force him to deliver something of the confirmatory referendum pledge, although I had no doubt he would try to weasel it. Even at that I was certain any sort of vote would be presented as support for Corbyn - it was NOT.

But - Thats gone and so is any chance of me EVER voting for Corbynite Labour again.

 

 

 

and Johnson has announced an increase in minimum wage

.. worth more than any amount of empty undeliverable promises.

Wonder how many first time Tory voters that will convince, even if they aren't as shallow and ignorant as you seem to be claiming?

 

I think its you Corbynistas that are demonstrating (selective) blindness

 

 

 

 

So what do you are Jase think is the lesser evil?

 

Johnson in Power with and increasingly disenfranchised, shrinking and powerless labour in entirely ineffective opposition

or

a Labour centrist in power

 

 

 

Edited December 31, 2019 by tobyjugg2

[Jase1982]

40 minutes ago, tobyjugg2 said:

Tell it to mcClucksy and labourlist as previously linked

... and as you two tried to avoid while supporting immediate benefits and free movement and opposition to immigration based on worth to the nation.

Head in sand? or in own backside?

 

There's that phrase again... "worth to the nation" .... you might want to look at this in greater detail and decide what you mean by "worth" and who that would include.

 

I dont understand why people have an issue with other people living and working alongside them if they're foreign born.. we have rights in foreign countries too.  Our citizens can live and work in foreign countries, so why isn't it fair that people who are like us shouldn't be able to access the welfare state if needed.  What does anyone think all the people who have retired to foreign countries do when they need medication or require state aid?  I think you've been led by daily mail stories that tell everyone that foreign people just take our benefits and are all criminals looking to steal our stuff.

 

1 hour ago, tobyjugg2 said:

 

How condescending and offensive to millions of Labour voters

You appear to be claiming that life long Labour voters, who voted Labour whatever its many forms,

were listening to Johnson and voted for him through 'misunderstanding' the Labour message

 

How ridiculous!

 

 

They were listening to you lot and decided Johnson was the lesser of the two evils

- just like I have now (see below). I dont listen to the right wing rags.

Quite straight forward.

 

It's not ridiculous.  Many people misunderstand socialism because it's been branded a dirty word.  They support socialist healthcare and education policies, but wouldn't call themselves socialist because it's been misunderstood, or packaged by people selling us a product as something disgusting.  We live in an over commodified world and socialism, capitalism etc are just more things to be bought and sold.

 

Again, I debate whether people dismissed Corbyn and the policies when ten million people voted for them.  You keep ignoring the fact that Brexit being done was the biggest selling point in any election.  Also, again, you can't rule out the role of the media in completely demonising Jeremy Corbyn for little reason.  I can't stomach this debate because there's been so much BS floating about.

[fletch70]

2 hours ago, tobyjugg2 said:

 

 

and Johnson has announced an increase in minimum wage

.. worth more than any amount of empty undeliverable promises.

Wonder how many first time Tory voters that will convince, even if they aren't as shallow and ignorant as you seem to be claiming?

 

I think its you Corbynistas that are demonstrating (selective) blindness

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Good god, how easily you are conned. Labour promised a much higher Living wage. Th term living wage was hijacked by the coalition government to try and look good. have a look at what the Living Wage Foundation state is the minimum wage needed, what they say is a real Living Wage. On top of that, earning the living wage is only any good if you get enough hours and security of those hours. Again the LWF have said everyone should be guaranteed at least 16 hours a week, personally I think it should be more like 30 but there you go. 

 

So yes I do think many labour voters voted Conservative or Brexit or didn't vote at all because they wanted Brexit getting done - they were tired of it.  I will agree with Jase , almost all the mainstream media vilified Corbyn and the Labour Party , many used playground style attacks based on appearance like they did with Foot in the 80's. 

 

You still can not answer questions and you were almost right but I wasn't being condescending to other labour Voters, just to those that do not have the arguments to support what they did.

 

For the record, I did not think JC was the right man for the job- I have said that on many occasions but I do think his policies were right and while I dislike Blair he would have been preferable to a man voted  into power by 92000 people, not even a majority of his own party. 

[tobyjugg2]

3 minutes ago, Jase1982 said:

 

I can't stomach this debate because there's been so much BS floating about.

 

To someone who continually avoids giving a straight answer and claiming 'that isn't what they mean'  - the only response is stop shovelling it then.

 

Lets see if I've got this straight

 

Corbyn who sold himself on more power to the party and the people, at least when it was promoting him,

is going to ignore or 'reinterpret' (depending on the moment) his parties stated wishes to

 

• Oppose the current Tory immigration legislation and any curbing of rights.
• Campaign for free movement, equality and rights for migrants.
• Reject any immigration system based on incomes, migrants’ utility to business, and number caps/targets.
• Ensure unconditional right to family reunion. (Come back to your family Mr Hamsa - and bring all your 'relatives')
• Maintain and extend free movement rights.
• End “no recourse to public funds” policies.
• Scrap all restrictions on migrants’ NHS access (through translator paid for by NHS - Hi - I arrived this morning, I want a nose job and a bunion sorted)
• Extend equal rights to vote to all UK residents (rent a flat for a week - get a vote and housing preference for the 12 family members you are now bringing in under the unconditional right to family reunion)

 

 

.. AH - I get it - like he didn't implement the parties policy of pro-remain

Trouble is - everyone believes he WOULD do the above.

 

 

So how will you/fletch/he interpret as the mechanism which:

 

Rejects any immigration system based on, as stated:

* incomes,

* migrants’ utility to business, 

* number caps/targets.

 

even before we get to the instant benefits part.

- particularly as the word of the motion implies anyone from anywhere - not just EU members.

 

 

 

 

 

1 minute ago, fletch70 said:

Good god, how easily you are conned. Labour promised a much higher Living wage.

 

Selective reading again. Read line 2 of what YOU quoted.

Corbyn is delivering NOTHING,

 

" and Johnson has announced an increase in minimum wage

.. worth more than any amount of empty undeliverable promises"

 

[fletch70]

Not selective reading- you were making the point that Johnson was providing an increase to the NLW which was in some way different and better than anything Labour would have delivered. 

 

As for the rest of it - you write so much rubbish and do not critique the alternative. If we adopt the Tories plans for immigration (income for example) where will we get our nurses, care home workers, chambermaids, agricultural workers from?

 

 

 

[honeybee13]

Guys, can we avoid using value judgements please? Everyone is entitled to their own opinions but let's not judge someone who disgrees with us.

[tobyjugg2]

7 minutes ago, fletch70 said:

Not selective reading- you were making the point that Johnson was providing an increase to the NLW which was in some way different and better than anything Labour would have delivered.

 

No I wasn't

 

I was making the point that Johnson IS delivering a wage increase that could be a big convincer to those ex Labour voters

and that a minority opposition Corbyn government can't deliver on any promises - even if it could be trusted to want to.

 

A bird in the hand ...

 

 

Hence the point following the bit you selected, which you chose to ignore:

 

"So what do you are Jase think is the lesser evil?

 

Johnson in Power with and increasingly disenfranchised, shrinking and powerless labour in entirely ineffective opposition

or

a Labour centrist in power"

 

Edited December 31, 2019 by tobyjugg2

[tobyjugg2]

25 minutes ago, fletch70 said:

 

As for the rest of it - you write so much rubbish and do not critique the alternative. If we adopt the Tories plans for immigration (income for example) where will we get our nurses, care home workers, chambermaids, agricultural workers from?

 

 

That is exactly my point.

How do you prioritise nurses, care home workers, chambermaids, agricultural workers

 

When labour policy is to

Reject any immigration system based on:

* migrants’ utility to business, 

* number caps/targets.

[fletch70]

I think you need to be more concise when making points because when challenged you say, are but that’s not what I said . It seems very clear to me it was what you said. Some of them even sound like sound bites from the Daily Mail. 
 

You need to read more about what the manifesto said-it was different to conference.

 

Migration is by no means open door. I’m on my phone and can’t find the link but will add it when I can. 
 

A stat I saw today was that 1 in 163 people in Birmingham are homeless and therefore are excluded from society and voting. Surely a shocking statistic but wait it’s only 1 in 163, it could be worse- a bird in the hand and all that.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[hightail]

On 27/12/2019 at 20:38, unclebulgaria67 said:

Labour need to find a new leader who has a chance of becoming  popular with the British public

And yet it's what they seem hell bent against doing.  I understand the lure of Corbyn to the faithful.  He is great in person - like it or not he is difficult to dislike in the flesh.  He's like a band who put out rubbish records but are great live and have a cult following who have some secret knowledge.  Labour seem determined to continue their private party, somehow revelling in the rest of us not being party to their inner world.

[tobyjugg2]

3 minutes ago, fletch70 said:

I think you need to be more concise when making points because when challenged you say, are but that’s not what I said .

 

 

ROFL

You are thinking of yourself

 

Open door policy, thats not open door policy but you wont say what it is

We all see it here again and again

 

So Jase, are you in favour of entirely open door on immigration as you still haven't answered despite multiple asks? Just YOUR continual poor attempts to sidestep the question

... just like Corbyn.

 

 

[tobyjugg2]

On 13/11/2019 at 12:19, Jase1982 said:

I thought Labour's official policy on immigration was open borders?  Or at least that's what they said at their party conference.

 

[Jase1982]

18 minutes ago, tobyjugg2 said:

So Jase, are you in favour of entirely open door on immigration as you still haven't answered despite multiple asks? Just YOUR continual poor attempts to sidestep the question

... just like Corbyn.

 

are you aware I'm not fletch, or have you been on the vino early celebrating new years... you seem to get fletch and myself conflated with eachother quite a bit...

 

Well, I'm against borders, and I think immigration just puts a divide up between human beings, so open door seems ok to me.  You're forgetting that there are many nasty people living within this country and, shock horror, we have our own laws to protect law abiding citizens.

 

Borders are literally partly to blame for every war that's ever happened... why would people support something that has created so much turmoil and strife in the world?  This is the longest period in history without any major war because of our membership with the EU, and relaxed immigration policies.  It's like people that want to end freedom of movement as though it only applies to other people..  ask anyone you like whether they're against freedom, I bet you'd get a different answer.

 

Your posts are starting to read like a channel five documentary.

Edited December 31, 2019 by Jase1982

[fletch70]

In simple English the Labour Party Manifesto 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/21/whats-in-the-labour-party-manifesto

 

Of course we all know manifestos are what they want to achieve not what they do achieve. 

 

@Jase1982  I think you may have a point there, he does seem to think we are one and the same and I have tried to explain we are not. I am sure HB or any of the mods could confirm we are not using the same or similar devices and probably not from the same areas.