Labour Party facing bankruptcy
- This topic has 171 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 4 months, 3 weeks ago by
.
-
Posts
-
We all know that the aim of the Labour Party is for its leading members to be the government. That is their priority and everything else is subordinate to it. Policy doesn’t come into it except as vote-catching promises. Once in office they may begin by trying to improve things but will soon find out that all they can do is manage the day-to-day affairs of the capitalist state in the context of a capitalist economy whose operations no government can control. That won’t worry them particularly since, as career politicians, they will have achieved their ambition of becoming government ministers. And there are people calling themselves socialists who say we should vote for this particular bunch of careerists. Yes, we mean you SWP, SPEW, CPB, etc, etc, etc
If there were a general election this month:
Labour would win 77% of the seats!
The Conservatives – 9%!
The SNP – 8%
The Liberal Democrats – 3%
SOURCE: https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html
I once wrote on here that I didn’t think a party would ever win a comfortable or super majority ever again. I got that wrong! (although that was before the energy crisis).
Stephen Kinnock, the shadow immigration minister, has raised the prospect of a Labour government introducing ID cards to help count how many people there are in Britain and reduce irregular immigration.
What a shower of shits they are ! There’s practically no difference between them and the Tories, as can be seen by the fact that the only criticisms they have of the Tories are the behaviour of ministers blown up out of all proportion.
According to this, the Starmer clique who control the party have been selecting candidates in their own image:
Starmer’s quiet purge of his would-be MPs
byu/kontiki20 inLabourUKAnd still the trade union leaders want a Labour government and are mobilising their members to vote Labour. They have no dignity or self-respect.
Whenever a politician raises the prospect of ID cards being introduced, this immediately comes to mind: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8BA7adK6XA
“Starmer has been accused of “marginalising” black leftwing Labour MPs after they claimed they were not invited to a crunch event aimed at regaining the confidence of BAME party members.”
“Diane Abbott described the event as a “PR exercise” and criticised the party for excluding MPs including Clive Lewis, Bell Ribeiro-Addy, Dawn Butler, Florence Eshalomi and Marsha de Cordova.”
“How can you have an event about black issues and not invite black MPs?” Abbott said. She added: “This was a PR exercise rather than a genuine attempt from the party to find out the concerns of black members.”
I see the Labour Party is adopting the Blair government’s policy of going for irrelevant constitutional reforms recognising that they can’t do much to tame the way the capitalist economy works.
What else can they offer since they fully accept private enterprises seeking to make the biggest profit they can as the driving force of the economy?
Whatever they do won’t make any difference, except a few more troughs for career politicians to get their snouts into while the profit system continues unchanged.
Here, for what their worth, are the details of what they are proposing or at least considering:
The UK is a group of nations, peoples and places and which have come together
in a shared Parliament at Westminster to provide together what can be better
provided together than separately:
• The UK as a union aims to provide security and safety for all its citizens
through a shared foreign affairs and defence policy.
• The UK also ensures the rule of law and the provision of domestic security and
order, and common civil and political rights irrespective of race, sex, gender or
religion.
• The UK seeks to provide economic opportunity and security for the whole
country through a shared economic system with a common currency and
macroeconomic framework and an efficient single domestic market for goods,
services and capital, as well as a common UK labour market which provides
opportunities for workers while protecting their rights.
• The UK is also a social union, recognising its obligation to guarantee Social
Security and pensions, universal education, universal health care free at the
point of need and other social support to all, irrespective of whether they live
in more or less prosperous parts of the country and with a view to ensuring
that no child, no family and no elderly citizen need live in poverty.Great, they are going to enshrine management bullshit into law. We’re getting a UK mission statement., be still my beating heart.
Health: Every person entitled to healthcare in the UK, will receive it free at the point of
need, wherever they are in any part of the UK; no person shall be denied emergency
treatment.
Education: every child shall be entitled to free primary and secondary education, wherever
they are in any part of the UK
Poverty: So that no child, family or elderly citizen need live in poverty, every person
legitimately present in the UK shall be entitled to social assistance in relation to periods of
unemployment, disability or old age, in accordance with the relevant laws.[bold] No person shall
be left destitute.[/bold]
Housing: every person shall be entitled to decent accommodation, in accordance with the
relevant law relating to housing and homelessnessand of course, rights, heavily caveated.
We therefore recommend a new, statutory, forum to oversee intergovernmental
relations and promote joint working between every level of government: a Council of
the Nation and Regions.
This should be a statutory body, explicitly linked to the requirement for cooperation in
the solidarity clause, with an independent secretariat which has the power to call
meetings and set agendas.This will create a power centre to rival Westminster, and seems to be taking the UK down a model to resemble the EU…
The Council of the Nations and Regions in its fullest form would bring together
the devolved nations but also representatives of the different parts of England,
Scotland, Wales and NI, with a focus on coordinating economic development
• A Council of the UK, to manage relations between the Scottish, Welsh, Northern
Irish and UK Governments each of which is responsible to its own legislature
• A Council of England to bring together English local government and metro
mayors with central governmentSo that’s a clever wheeze, and maybe finally solves the West Lothian question.
There is too much foreign money in British politics. Quite simply, there should be
none. No British political party should accept donations from foreign citizens, foreign
businesses or from institutions registered in tax havens outside the United Kingdom,
and they should be obliged to make sure that they do not do so. This is already a
criminal offence, yet it is concerning that no prosecution has ever been made, despite
evidence of inappropriate overseas donations taking place.Blithering nationalist bollocks.
Unsurprisingly, therefore, a substantial majority of the public do not regard the
House of Lords as a democratic institution in which they have confidenceThis may be because it is not a democratic institution.
But the House of Lords does nevertheless discharge an important constitutional
function. Its scrutiny of legislation can be more thorough and effective than the
Commons, leading to changes of approach or amendments, sometimes against the
will of the government. The work of its committees is often of a very high quality,
largely because of the experience and expertise of their members (for example the
work of the Constitution Committee, established after the recommendations of the
Wakeham Report of 2001). This is because many Peers demonstrate a highly
commendable and often lifelong commitment to public serviceNo, no it doesn’t: ‘revisiing’ could be done by ad hoc expert committees if so desired, there is no case for peers who have a universal voting competence.
Simply abolishing the House of Lords would therefore leave a significant gap in our
constitution.No, no it wouldn’t.
It seems that Brown and Starmer are making the same mistake as the Scots, Welsh and Irish nationalists — that the problem is where decisions are made (London not Edinburgh, Cardiff or Dublin) rather than what decisions capitalism’s political administrators (what Zeitgeist has described as capitalism’s middle management) are obliged to make (not undermining profit-making).
But changing who makes these decisions, and where, won’t make any difference to the way capitalism operates. Which means that their proposals are utterly irrelevant and not worth the paper they are printed on. Those who say that there are more important problems to be dealt with are right.
It remains to be seen if a future Labour government really will abolish the House of Lords. They’ve been promising to do that since 1910 but despite numerous terms in office have somehow never got round to it. The chances are they won’t.
Where have i heard all this before?
Starmer promises a “decade of national renewal”
“…There is no substitute for a robust private sector, creating wealth in every community.”
” we won’t be able to spend our way out of their mess ….the party won’t be “getting its big government chequebook out again”.
“…There is no substitute for a robust private sector, creating wealth in every community.”
Somebody else who thinks that capitalism is the only game in town.
Starmer’s coded language
“Look, I’ve always made the case against austerity,” he says. “I’m against austerity. But I know we’re going to have to be fiscally disciplined.”
Still blaming Corbyn and his supporters
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-64248136
“Labour is taking the five Corbyn supporters to the High Court for conspiring to put the document into the public domain.
But some in the party are concerned that the commissioner’s decision could make the case less likely to succeed.
If it fails, lawyers for the Corbyn supporters say they will seek to recover their costs.”As if we didn’t know
Starmer, attending the World Economic Forum meeting in Davos, said Labour would push to “bring global investors back”.
Shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves, who is also attending the meeting said Labour would “work in partnership with business” to boost investment.
“With Labour in government, Britain will be open for business,” said Ms Reeves.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.