Vocal Voices

Corbyn is saying that when new constituencies are formed, probably by 2018, reducing the number of MPs from 650 to 600, all Labour MPs will have to stand for reselection. This has ruffled more than a few feathers and looks like Corbyn playing hard-ball with Blairites and moderates.

Apparently the current (Labour) rules say that selections following boundary changes are open only to sitting MPs. However, these are not boundary changes in the old sense where attempts are made to keep constituencies of a similar size. The new changes are about scrapping constituencies to reduce the number of MPs, so the old rules do not apply.

If Corbyn can enforce what he is saying then there will be a new type of Labour party fighting the 2020 election. A lot of people will be very pleased if that happens.

In the mean time he will attempt to completely replace the selection committees so that a whole swathe of MP's become deselected.

If he does enough, then he could create a whole new party. Forget SD, that was a few high profile Labour defects. Think 70 or 80 deselected MP's. That's a real party if they could win their seats. Labour would have to fight long and hard to recover.

Suff wrote:If he does enough, then he could create a whole new party. Forget SD, that was a few high profile Labour defects. Think 70 or 80 deselected MP's. That's a real party if they could win their seats

They will not be MPs any more. They will have to stand against candidates chosen to be Labour MPs by local CLPs, as well as candidates from other parties. Then they form a new party; a new Greens or English democrats?

Like it or not, a Labour party cleansed of Blairites and Nu Labour would go down well in the country with ordinary voters. This is not over by a long chalk.

True. But many of these Labour MP's have a loyal following and the voters don't so much see them as Blairite but as their MP...

I recall helping to topple the Tories in North East Fife. When Sir John Gilmour stepped down the seat went Lib Dem and stayed there till SNP took it. Sir John had a very loyal voter base.

Were the deselected to get together, campaign together and form a party during the election, Corbyn might find he has a real battle on his hands. Remember that the "thinking voter" doesn't tend to like Corbyn all that much. They also gave him the finger over the EU and defied his "instructions". He leaves himself open to accusations of hard left wing Communist tactics (which he is deploying so it's not a slur) and of anti democratic practises where he uses a very small number of people (the party) members, to completely subvert the choice facing the voters. This was always Communist doctrine and was used to good effect by the Unions who would strike ballot in obscure places at odd times of the day.

It's going to be a fight because Corbyn has no intention of stepping away no matter what. I hope the shop goes down with him...

I hear what you are saying, Suff, but I am not so sure.

Most people vote for a party, first and foremost; there is a tribal mentality and it applies to all parties and in all areas. Some just happen to have bigger tribes than others.

Deselected MPs will no longer be Labour they will be something else, an unknown quantity. Many will be seen as deserving of deselection and voters will prefer the new name, chosen locally by the LLP, who will be seen to be one of 'them', Even if they are not a local they will have been selected by the local party.

West and South Yorkshire, and I guess many other areas, are riddled with Blairite "parachutists" and many voters would love the chance to elect a "real" Labour candidate and get rid of the puppets.

I agree with you re Corbyn's tactics, but I will put forward this. Communism's heyday, if it ever had one, is so far in the past that the average under thirty-five would not recognise it if it bit them in their rear end. Corbyn and his few allies are already putting his thoughts across as democracy in action. When he speaks of the anti-democratic actions of MPs, and especially those of the "nasty" Tory party, in ignoring the wishes of their constituents it resonates well with many people.

I have never voted Labour, and never will, but I refuse to write them off when so many people support them regardless of who is leader. Labour might be down but it is certainly not out.

Workingman wrote:many voters would love the chance to elect a "real" Labour candidate and get rid of the puppets.

Ah but what puppet would they elect? Because you can be dead sure Corbyn's selection committee will elect rubber stampers...

Communism is an interesting beast. It presented itself as the Democratic answer to the monarchies. Everyone got a vote and everyone voted for who they wanted. Just one little problem, you could only vote for "the party". That communism produced neo monarchies in which the only real difference between itself and the monarchies was that you got to choose your master. From a list provided by the masters.

If you want to look at democracy, Labour was much more for overriding the referendum and "deciding" in parliament what the people would get re: the EU.

That is the radical Labourite's view of "democracy" and how it's supposed to work. Basically you vote for who I tell you to vote for and the I get on with telling you what you may or may not do..

The sad fact is that, as so many Russians found out before they died, the people at the top have a very different idea of what the people at the bottom should be doing.

Why go there? Ah, yes, I forgot, Democracy.

To be honest if you want more conspicuous democracy you should vote Liberal Democrat. Not Labour.

Democracy is an illusion, always has been and always will be.

All political parties, be they Conservative, Republican, Socialist, Labour, Communist, Christian Democrat, Liberal, all of them choose who we get to vote for. There is not one iota of democracy in the way any of them work.

However, democracy is seen as the best of a bad lot and it is sold to us as being the ideal. Corbyn is selling the tags of democracy and anti-democracy as part of what he stands for, and it could work. The reason for that is because the overwhelming majority of ordinary people have been beaten over their heads with the democracy stick so often that they now believe that what we have today is democracy. Also it does not have to be Corbyn doing it, anyone with political ambitions would be mad not to run a democracy ticket.

Sorry the point about Communism was that you got to vote for the "party", one, singular and they chose the candidates for the one party and the top of the party was appointed to the politburo.

Hardly what we would call democracy and they would no more think of having a referendum than we would running naked down the street. Yet is was sold as "Democracy".

Even the so called Labour "democracy" in choosing their candidates is not really. Party members only, half a million, then put them to the 50m to vote on them. But it is about the best we can get. Multi party system and a list of candidates. At least you can vote for the oddball if you don't want the rest of them...

It will be interesting to see if the Labour party eventually splits. Even if "new party" candidates, original sitting MPs or not, don't get elected, they could seriously split the left-wing vote in traditional heartlands. UKIP could well be the beneficiaries .....

Suff wrote:Even the so called Labour "democracy" in choosing their candidates is not really.

And the Conservative, LibDem and SNP systems are so much better: NOT! Anyone would think that Labour are devils and all the rest are angels.

They all have lists and quotas, slightly different emphasis but quotas nonetheless, and as soon as a list gets made under those rules democracy has flown.

The nearest we could possibly get to democracy would be if anybody from the local party could put themselves forward, so long as they had been a local member for x months. If ten people came forward there would be a series of devil-take-the-hindmost elections of all local members until one was left standing. The committee, collectively, and its members, individually, would be barred from campaigning for any candidate.

It would put a stop to parachutists dropping in on the whim of central HQ. We would almost certainly get more local people as MPS, a broader range of skills in parliament and a reduction in the numbers of Oxbridge PPE graduates.

Ossie, I believe that all the 'split' talk is bluff and bluster precisely because of what you just mentioned. All Labour members know that a split will leave both factions with less influence than the Socialist Workers' Party.

As for UKIP, it is going the same way as the 'Gang of four's' SDP. It was necessary in some ways, and it had its time in the limelight, but it is slipping back now that its raison d'être ceases to exist.