The Chairman Mao resembling, Monarchy hating, threat to Britain, Labour Party thread

[chrisp65]

I’m the stunt double for Typhoid Mary.

[Demitri_C]

2 hours ago, chrisp65 said:

 

 

Here’s a couple of maps of places I’ve been recently

 

Guess where the best public transport was.

 

 

Leeds?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[HanoiVillan]

Now look, on the one hand it's obviously nice to see Keir Starmer actually working with unions for a change, rather than undermining them. But come on, there's a pandemic on; why are we having a meeting, unmasked and in a room with no obvious ventilation, when it could clearly be held on Zoom?

He's been hammering the government about borders all week, now he's hanging out at an airport holding meetings

[Jareth]

One can righteously argue this seems a legitimate reason to delay the Forde report, but the upshot is that it will be delayed for a long time and this will benefit a few. I'd be more gutted were I still in the party - IMHO it's being buried to insulate the future chances of Labour by avoiding more civil war - but then I'm an old bitter cynic.

 

[HanoiVillan]

How long until the report is itself leaked?

[bickster]

23 minutes ago, Jareth said:

IMHO it's being buried to insulate the future chances of Labour by avoiding more civil war - but then I'm an old bitter cynic.

You realise nobody in the Labour Party has any influence over the Information Commissioners Office don't you?

 It has been delayed because it could prejudice the ICO's own investigation into the same leaks

You appear to be saying that a report is being buried because the subject of the report is now being investigated by the correct legally empowered body to investigate the issue in the first place? Your conclusion is beyond bizarre

[Jareth]

1 minute ago, bickster said:

You realise nobody in the Labour Party has any influence over the Information Commissioners Office don't you?

 It has been delayed because it could prejudice the ICO's own investigation into the same leaks

You appear to be saying that a report is being buried because the subject of the report is now being investigated by the correct legally empowered body to investigate the issue in the first place? Your conclusion is beyond bizarre

No dude - I'm saying your POV holds entirely, but I'm way too tired of every attempt in the playbook to bury this thing that I don't think this is the whole story - in fact I think I saw another tweet earlier that pointed to a grey area as to who had actually initiated the pause - but again way too tired to care these days so good luck Keir, he will need it with all the snakes he's got to deal with. 

[bickster]

16 minutes ago, Jareth said:

No dude - I'm saying your POV holds entirely, but I'm way too tired of every attempt in the playbook to bury this thing that I don't think this is the whole story - in fact I think I saw another tweet earlier that pointed to a grey area as to who had actually initiated the pause - but again way too tired to care these days so good luck Keir, he will need it with all the snakes he's got to deal with. 

It was Jenny Formby that reported this to the ICO originally. The reporting to the ICO pre-dates Starmer being elected leader and therefore pre-dates the Forde Enquiry. Any crackpot theories you’ve read on Twitter are just that. The ICO is grossly understaffed and works at a glacial pace. The ICO are the statutory body that investigate any such breaches of data and as they are involved, the Forde Enquiry is and always was, utterly pointless and should be thrown in the bin. It is now irrelevant. It should always have been left to the ICO and never started in the first place. It was only done to appease the Corbynites

[Jareth]

25 minutes ago, bickster said:

The Forde Enquiry is and always was, utterly pointless and should be thrown in the bin. It is now irrelevant. It should always have been left to the ICO and never started in the first place. It was only done to appease the Corbynites

But Corbynites are Labour members and they voted for Starmer in their droves - I can't agree it was appeasement of some baying unreasonable mob - more about what happened back then should be out in the open and fairly dealt with so that Labour can move forwards united. For whatever reason there is now a need for the ICO to report first (this wasn't a reason for delaying the Forde Inquiry report last summer when it was last due) all those suspended in the wake of the leak, were last week admitted back to the party including Jonathan Ashworth's wife Emilie Oldknow. This is game set and match and labour have moved on without settling the problem - reinforcing a rift rather than publicly trying to heal it and risking more negative civil war headlines - feels very much like the political calculation that has been made here. 

[bickster]

13 minutes ago, Jareth said:

But Corbynites are Labour members and they voted for Starmer in their droves

Yes of course they did, that is just silly.

14 minutes ago, Jareth said:

I can't agree it was appeasement

Can you give a reason as to why it was set up other than that, when the matter had already been reported to the ICO? (and this was public knowledge inside and outside the Party)

15 minutes ago, Jareth said:

more about what happened back then should be out in the open and fairly dealt with so that Labour can move forwards united.

You want the Labour Party to illegally prejudice a legal inquiry to satisfy your curiosity?

16 minutes ago, Jareth said:

This is game set and match and labour have moved on without settling the problem - reinforcing a rift rather than publicly trying to heal it and risking more negative civil war headlines - feels very much like the political calculation that has been made here. 

Labour cannot do anything, it is currently not in their purview. Your feelings on the matter are simply wrong, if any political calculations were made it was a) by Fomby by reporting to the ICO (but also her legal duty to do so) and b) by Starmer when starting the Forde Inquiry.which because the ICO was already involved was massively irrelevant and a stunt.

You are of course entitled to your opinion but it just doesn't hold up to scrutiny, it flies against the facts as currently known.

Starmer is at fault for starting the Forde Inquiry in the first place. It was posturing, pure and simple. Starmer is an incredibly sharp lawyer who knows the legal process. He will have known this all along.

[OutByEaster?]

Today was a bad day for Starmer.

Polls showing he's lost 1% of the vote to The Greens (which is probably to be expected as left leaning Labour voters look for something more to their liking) but gained nothing from the Tories (which appears to be his number one aim).

He's also had his PPS Carolyn Harris say of the (extremely popular) policies of former (unpopular) leader Mr Corbyn; "Kier needs to...get rid of all that nonsense and come forward with credible policy". That'll be another box unticked for a lot of Labour voters.

And there's some nonsense from the Socialist society of lawyers who he left in 2008 but have decided now is the time to say that they won't have him back because he is demonstrably not a socialist. Which in itself matters not a jot, other than it allows for headlines to be written in small places and adds to the picture being painted.

It'll be interesting to see how he deals with this first real test of his leadership, there's a growing image of him as Blue Kier that he doesn't seem to be in any hurry to dispel, it's a dangerous and peculiar game to play.

 

[blandy]

47 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

Today was a bad day for Starmer.

Polls showing he's lost 1% of the vote to The Greens (which is probably to be expected as left leaning Labour voters look for something more to their liking) but gained nothing from the Tories (which appears to be his number one aim).

He's also had his PPS Carolyn Harris say of the (extremely popular) policies of former (unpopular) leader Mr Corbyn; "Kier needs to...get rid of all that nonsense and come forward with credible policy". That'll be another box unticked for a lot of Labour voters.

And there's some nonsense from the Socialist society of lawyers who he left in 2008 but have decided now is the time to say that they won't have him back because he is demonstrably not a socialist. Which in itself matters not a jot, other than it allows for headlines to be written in small places and adds to the picture being painted.

It'll be interesting to see how he deals with this first real test of his leadership, there's a growing image of him as Blue Kier that he doesn't seem to be in any hurry to dispel, it's a dangerous and peculiar game to play.

Nah, I don’t see it like that. The tories have picked up in the polls because vaccination is going well. That’s all. As for policies, Starmer doesn’t decide them, or make them up, that’s not how labour works.

it’s true that the honeymoon period is over, but nothing more, IMO. It’s just chatter and noise.

[darrenm]

I've had 5 years being called a trot, dog and antisemite because I thought we should probably do something pretty quickly about the climate emergency, we should make all education free and no-one should be on the streets.

The BBC have done nothing to push back against the fallacy that the left of Labour is overrun with antisemites. The narrative was pushed by all of the right wing papers and they accepted it and sensationalised it. So I'm angry with the BBC.

Half of the Labour Party hostile to Jeremy Corbyn and the left faction also pushed this and used it against them.

When we were out knocking doors in the cold, wind and rain to get MPs elected who would rather have a Tory government than make the leader we democratically elected PM, it's understandable that there's some anger there.

The leak came out and put into context everything that had happened. The content wasn't disputed by anyone, only the context of some of the comments. It confirmed that the antisemitism crisis was poorly handled by those hostile to the left while the left got the blame.

We just wanted everything out in the open. Whatever the truth was, expose it so we can all move on as one. Starmer commissioned the Forde inquiry and it felt like the left who elected Starmer could get behind him.

It's not my battle any more though. I haven't been a member for a few months now. I'm just trying to get across how hurtful the whole thing has been for a lot of people who have been maligned simply for backing the leader at the time. There's a lot of anger around at this. While Starmer and Evans are in charge, I won't go near Labour. I'm not even on the left. Perhaps I'm an outlier and not representative anyway and the flag waving will attract enough voters back to make up for 70 years losing them.

[bickster]

12 minutes ago, darrenm said:

We just wanted everything out in the open. Whatever the truth was, expose it so we can all move on as one. Starmer commissioned the Forde inquiry and it felt like the left who elected Starmer could get behind him.

The reason it isn't out in the open is Jennie Formby, she set the wheels in motion for the ICO investigation. The second sentence absolutely nails why the Forde Inquiry was called in the first place

I should also add that I don't think Formby had any option but to report it to the ICO, she would have been guilty of covering up any data breach, a crime in itself

Once it had been reported to the ICO any internal investigation was pointless but members wanted it regardless. Members were given what they wanted. What should have happened was that honest politicians should have said it's in the ICO's hands now and we will await their outcome. It would have gone down like a lead balloon in some quarters but at least it would have been the truth.

Now in its place it has become some sort of conspiracy theorists dream because what it sought to achieve was impossible, You'll see above that Jareth thinks its some sort of cover up / sweeping under the carpet, when in fact what has been announced today was inevitable and it was thus before members even demanded it

[Davkaus]

40 minutes ago, darrenm said:

I've had 5 years being called a trot, dog and antisemite because I thought we should probably do something pretty quickly about the climate emergency, we should make all education free and no-one should be on the streets.

 

Add to this, "the disabled and unemployed shouldn't have to beg for charity, or be humiliated by government stooges". How did this become radical left wing policy? 

[Jareth]

13 minutes ago, bickster said:

Now in its place it has become some sort of conspiracy theorists dream because what it sought to achieve was impossible, You'll see above that Jareth thinks its some sort of cover up / sweeping under the carpet, when in fact what has been announced today was inevitable and it was thus before members even demanded it

I am suspicious, but I think it's pure politics, kicking a radioactive potato down the road into the long grass and never ever going looking for it - it's what Boris would do. @darrenm I believe accounts well and reasonably for why there is genuine hurt out there - and should this issue be delayed indefinitely that hurt is going to cause Labour problems in the future, but maybe the calculation is priced in, throw the lefties some policies they want (when we finally hear some) and woo the 'patriotic' northerners. It might work yet - but it's not for me ta, my vote's up for grabs (though never Tory!). 

[bickster]

4 minutes ago, Jareth said:

I am suspicious, but I think it's pure politics, kicking a radioactive potato down the road into the long grass and never ever going looking for it - it's what Boris would do. @darrenm I believe accounts well and reasonably for why there is genuine hurt out there - and should this issue be delayed indefinitely that hurt is going to cause Labour problems in the future, but maybe the calculation is priced in, throw the lefties some policies they want (when we finally hear some) and woo the 'patriotic' northerners. It might work yet - but it's not for me ta, my vote's up for grabs (though never Tory!). 

This is silly. You need to look at the facts of the matter.

If there was an imaginary murder, what you want is a Private Detective to announce who did it and why, then publish his findings in a newspaper so everyone can see who is guilty before the Police have the opportunity to present their case against the accused in a court of law.

That is the equivalent of what you want. In reality no one should have hired the Private Detective in the first place

 

[Jareth]

40 minutes ago, bickster said:

This is silly. You need to look at the facts of the matter.

If there was an imaginary murder, what you want is a Private Detective to announce who did it and why, then publish his findings in a newspaper so everyone can see who is guilty before the Police have the opportunity to present their case against the accused in a court of law.

That is the equivalent of what you want. In reality no one should have hired the Private Detective in the first place

 

I hardly think taking verbatim the explanation for an incendiary report's delay without question is a wise or sensible idea either - we shall just have to respect our differences...

[bickster]

8 minutes ago, Jareth said:

I hardly think taking verbatim the explanation for an incendiary report's delay without question is a wise or sensible idea either - we shall just have to respect our differences...

FFS it's the law. You should be angry at Starmer for promising and commisioning an inquiry that could never report it's findings, that's where your anger should be, not that the report is being buried (because it isn't).

You can't question due process, it is what it is. Your anger is completely misplaced

[Jareth]

45 minutes ago, bickster said:

FFS it's the law. You should be angry at Starmer for promising and commisioning an inquiry that could never report it's findings, that's where your anger should be, not that the report is being buried (because it isn't).

You can't question due process, it is what it is. Your anger is completely misplaced

Yes let’s all just move on, there’ll be no report but it’s nobody’s fault, god save the queen!