Display: Sort:
More Fibs from The Dour Leader | 59 comments (59 topical)

Re: More Fibs from The Dour Leader (#5)

by Mikael on Mon May 21, 2007 at 07:51:45 PM GMT

Not true, GH. Some of this things he stands for (stood on), such as the the re-nationalisation of rail, were actually included in the Labour party manifesto back in '97.


[ Parent ]

Re: More Fibs from The Dour Leader (#6)

by Mikael on Mon May 21, 2007 at 07:52:09 PM GMT

"some of the things", of course!


[ Parent ]

Re: More Fibs from The Dour Leader (#7)

by Glass House on Mon May 21, 2007 at 07:53:33 PM GMT

Yes, I accept that some of McDonnell's policies are accepted by conference.

Just because some of McDonnell's policies were conference-passed, doesn't mean they all were - Grim implies that they were.


[ Parent ]

Re: More Fibs from The Dour Leader (#8)

by jkitleft on Mon May 21, 2007 at 08:09:04 PM GMT

he wasn't calling for mass-nationalisation. wants to re-nationalise the rails.


[ Parent ]

Re: More Fibs from The Dour Leader (#9)

by Glass House on Mon May 21, 2007 at 08:12:45 PM GMT

Didn't I hear that he wanted to nationalise a tonne of industry too?


[ Parent ]

Re: More Fibs from The Dour Leader (#12)

by jkitleft on Mon May 21, 2007 at 08:28:55 PM GMT

which ones?


[ Parent ]

Re: More Fibs from The Dour Leader (#15)

by doctordunc on Mon May 21, 2007 at 08:39:48 PM GMT

Just had a quick flick through the manifesto and couldn't see anything of that sort (not that John and lots of people on the left don't favour more common ownership in a general sense - I don't think there were any proposals other than renationalising rail and opposing further privatisation).

Have a look across some online policies if you like.


[ Parent ]

Re: More Fibs from The Dour Leader (#18)

by Glass House on Mon May 21, 2007 at 08:55:22 PM GMT

I could have sworn he said it in an interview I watched.


[ Parent ]

Re: More Fibs from The Dour Leader (#16)

by doctordunc on Mon May 21, 2007 at 08:42:14 PM GMT

But anyway - you're right: some of the policies weren't passed at conference (withdrawing the troops, for example). It was a Labour left agenda. But Gordon describing it as 'far left' was Gordon being silly (as he has a worrying tendency to be).


[ Parent ]

Re: More Fibs from The Dour Leader (#19)

by Glass House on Mon May 21, 2007 at 08:55:49 PM GMT

Most of the country would regard them as "far left"


[ Parent ]

Re: More Fibs from The Dour Leader (#29)

by grimupnorth on Tue May 22, 2007 at 07:52:31 AM GMT

Gordon isn't "silly".He's very very scary


[ Parent ]

Re: More Fibs from The Dour Leader (#30)

by doctordunc on Tue May 22, 2007 at 08:34:27 AM GMT

There's also a good deal of the ridiculous about him. The spectacle of him going around the country debating himself - if I weren't so angry - would be hilarious.


[ Parent ]

Re: More Fibs from The Dour Leader (#17)

by Mikael on Mon May 21, 2007 at 08:45:19 PM GMT

McDonnell's platform is far closer to Conference policy than New Labour's. Is there anything more that you need to know.???

One thing New Labour can't do is hiding behind Conference policy - they've drifted far away from it and constantly neglect its decisions - so don't even try... It would be both pointless and ridiculous to do so!


[ Parent ]

Re: More Fibs from The Dour Leader (#23)

by JR on Tue May 22, 2007 at 01:25:15 AM GMT

McDonnell's platform was too close for comfort to the ones put forward when we lost four general elections in a row. That's all you need to know.


[ Parent ]

Re: More Fibs from The Dour Leader (#43)

by fluffymike on Thu May 24, 2007 at 05:14:27 PM GMT

Ah yes - those would be the general elections when we got more votes than we did last time I assume? Don't think that just because New Labour won against a totally demoralised and confused opposition that that represents a rejection of left-wing policies amongst the general public. In the 80s Thatcher developed a selfish me-first agenda that a lot of people signed up to - more than who have signed up to Blair/Brown's agenda incidentally. The fall in voter turnout is partly due to those who fully believe in the policies of true Labour and who cannot bring themselves to vote for this NuLab version. Once (if) the Tories get their act sorted out, they will probably destroy NuLabour unless it starts to bring back those who it has deserted. The numbers are there for a fourth term - but not without reinvigorating the old labour voters who have drifted away. Speaking to them on doorstep after doorstep, they simply don't care who wins the next election - they see Blair and Brown as the same, and they don't like it. Without those people coming back, Brown will take us to an ignominious defeat in 2010.


[ Parent ]

Re: More Fibs from The Dour Leader (#46)

by JR on Fri May 25, 2007 at 12:38:32 AM GMT

None of the last seven general election victories (through Thatcher, Major and Blair) could hardly be described as leftie victories - indeed the last one which could be described as this was in 1974. This, to me, represents a rejection of left-wing politics. This clearly still exists today since either Brown or Cameron will win the next one and neither of them are lefties. In Britain and in the clear majority of the Labour party, there is just no appetite to return to the bad old days.


[ Parent ]

Re: More Fibs from The Dour Leader (#48)

by fluffymike on Fri May 25, 2007 at 08:22:17 AM GMT

Thanks for that reply totally ignoring what I'd actually said, or indeed any point that I'd made... But I guess that's how some people operate these days - ignoring difficult points and deflecting the discussion onto irrelevant tangents. Are you an MP yet? If not, I'm sure you'll be signed up for a safe NuLab seat soon :-)


[ Parent ]

Re: More Fibs from The Dour Leader (#51)

by JR on Sat May 26, 2007 at 12:05:17 AM GMT

You argued that there was no 'rejection of left-wing politics' and I explained why I disagreed. I don't see what the problem is.


[ Parent ]

Re: More Fibs from The Dour Leader (#59)

by fluffymike on Sun May 27, 2007 at 06:43:05 PM GMT

My problem is that you seemed to ignore the point I was making. My point was that, numerically, there have been more voters willing to support 'left-wing' Labour agendas in the past than have voted for the last two Blairite govts. It was argued that we only won those elections because even less people were inspired enough to go out and vote Tory. If we'd had a more 'left wing' agenda, then we might well have inspired the numbers that voted for a more 'left-wing' agenda in the past. The relevance of this is that now the Tories have a leader who might inspire more people to vote for him than his previous muppets, Labour need to get back to the level of voters that we inspired in, say 1992, as without the votes of those people who feel let down by the past 10 years of Labour govt, we will lose. Thus, to win in 2010, we need a manifesto with a more 'left wing' stance, and we need a couple of years of more socially inclusive actions to back any future manifesto up with.


[ Parent ]

Re: More Fibs from The Dour Leader (#26)

by grimupnorth on Tue May 22, 2007 at 07:47:26 AM GMT

Conference last year voted against more NHS privatisation.Also direct investment in council housing and more trade union rightts (including supportfor Gate Gourmet workers and secondary picketing).Conference also opposed top-up fees. as anyone who read John's campaign literature will know, these formed the key part ofhis policy platform.To suggest these are "far left" is risible


[ Parent ]

More Fibs from The Dour Leader | 59 comments (59 topical)
Display: Sort: