Jump to content

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


Demitri_C
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Moderator
2 minutes ago, bickster said:

Yes and even in that situation people need to be able to switch off for a few minutes between appointments

But I think if I worked in a building and I was on my way from one meeting to another and someone who also worked in the building stopped me and asked a question, I'd manage more than just walking past and ignoring her. A nod or a sorry takes a second and makes you look like a much better person, which is important when looking like a good person is an important part of your job.

It's not the biggest thing in the world though and I don't think it makes him an arsehole.

(Although I do think he's an arsehole.)

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dispatches from Labour Party Conference - Day 3

8am start, meeting up with my delegation to discuss our position on the motions for the day, and to talk though our motions. 

Got into the Conference easy enough, and avoided the rush. Had a bit of chat with my general secretary about the football. He likened Jose Mourinho to some of the CEOs he'd had to deal with over his time in the union (in so much as he now goes in somewhere, brings in his ways which he thinks still work, upsets everyone and then leaves. I laughed, cus I'm a sycophant like that. 

Morning session, and Ed Miliband's speech was pretty decent to be fair. Green New Deal had two motions, the second one headed up by GMB to protect their members in the nuclear power industry. Can't blame them for that, but it was clear that the first motion was the favoured motion. 

The rest of the motions got moved, including ours. Some great speeches from some of the union big wigs. Followed by votes. Everything passed unanimously, with the exception of GMB's Green New Deal motion that went to a card vote. 

Off to lunch, put ketchup on my burger without listing it on the menu. Wasn't happy. 

Back for the next session. Emergency motion on Grenfell from the FBU, which was unanimously supported. Then the Housing and Transport debate. Nothing contentious, everything agreed with no issues.

Then the constitutional amendments. I'm not gonna talk about the first part. The second debate about the threshold for votes from PLP to go on a leadership ballot felt like a stich up. Dave Ward, CWU GS got up and called out Starmer for not consulting the unions, despite them saying they did. Matt Wrack FBU GS spoke against it too. Went through the votes, and away home to the hotel. Got fish and chips on the way home. They cost a tenner and were shit. Also saw clocked Mandy walking down the sea front. Was tempted to make him get in the sea. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator
1 minute ago, foreveryoung said:

Kier Starmer really needs to start concentrating on his own party, rather than put down every comment the Tories say or do. Every time I hear him, he has nothing else to say!

The LOTO slagging off the Government is kinda in the job description. A lot of posters in this topic are criticising him for the exact opposite of this.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Seems like they're tying themselves up in knots again over whether "only women have a cervix".

Not sure why the national debate has degenerated to this kind of level tbh. There's queues at petrol stations and shelves bare but all some of the Labour MP's want to discuss is what genitalia the person in the toilet stall next to them has.

They're a shambles.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He doesn't seem to have even discussed the change in policy with his shadow business secretary.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/26/starmer-labour-would-not-nationalise-big-six-energy-firms

Quote

Labour’s energy policy has been become mired in confusion after Keir Starmer blindsided shadow business secretary Ed Miliband by ruling out nationalising the big six energy companies.

It is understood Miliband was frustrated by Starmer’s comments, as he had been keen to keep open the option of nationalising parts of the energy sector to aid the economy’s transition to net zero.

Appearing on BBC One’s Andrew Marr Show on Sunday, hours before Labour delegates passed a radical motion calling for a “socialist green new deal”, Starmer was asked directly whether he would consider nationalising the main energy providers to tackle the energy crisis. He replied: “No.”

Instead, speaking shortly before Miliband was due to deliver his conference speech, he said Labour would advocate nationalisation only in certain circumstances.

“When it comes to common ownership, I’m pragmatic about it,” he said. “Let me spell it out. What that means is that where common ownership is value for money for the taxpayer and delivers a better service, then I’m in favour of common ownership.”

By contrast, Miliband suggested on Newsnight earlier in the week that the party was about to renew its commitment to common ownership of energy and other public resources.

“We haven’t changed that commitment,” Miliband said. “If we’re going to make this green transition, then public ownership is the right way to go.”

The shadow business secretary has not yet set out which elements of the system Labour would take into public ownership – but it is understood he was not ready to rule out nationalising energy providers, preferring to set out details closer to the next general election.

The “big six” controlled about 70% of the energy supply market in 2019.

A senior Labour source, asked whether Miliband or Starmer were setting out Labour’s stance, said the party’s policy was “what Keir says it is”.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • VT Supporter
4 minutes ago, MessiWillSignForVilla said:

I believe that's more than both the 2017 and 2019 manifesto pledged, so it'll be interesting to see how it's treated by the wider media.

I believe the term they last used was 'Magic Money Tree'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter

It's utterly meaningless as they'll never be in the position to implement it. And it won't get enough media attention to push the matter to move the Tories given how the story so far is Starmer's attempts to reform internal matters to ensure his successors are not from the left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter
1 hour ago, Davkaus said:

You can see why he spends so much time with a fence firmly lodged up his arse, it's a lot easier to hide your lies when you say absolutely nothing of substance. He should be removed at the earliest oppurtunity.

It seems... sensible... to let him get the much needed voting reforms through then bin him off lest another Worzel get in and institute the camps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator
56 minutes ago, Chindie said:

It seems... sensible... to let him get the much needed voting reforms through then bin him off lest another Worzel get in and institute the camps.

The Kinnock analogy still holds

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MessiWillSignForVilla said:

I am very pleasantly surpised by this! Just hope there's no big catch involved:

I believe that's more than both the 2017 and 2019 manifesto pledged, so it'll be interesting to see how it's treated by the wider media.

where is that doctor evil gif with ''100 million billion dollars'' ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Moderator
Just now, darrenm said:

It's a fantastic policy but I'm just puzzled why Starmer why so evasive with the girl asking for £85bn when he's just pledged way more than that?

Because its rude and an obvious set up. Like I said the SOP for getting doorstepped by anyone will be say nothing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, darrenm said:

It's a fantastic policy but I'm just puzzled why Starmer why so evasive with the girl asking for £85bn when he's just pledged way more than that?

He did completely the right thing there IMO.

Anyone who dislikes that purely does so as they dislike him.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of use Terms of Use, Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Â