Forum Topics

UK on the wrong side

"UN approves new study on effects of nuclear war" (1/11/24)"Melissa Parke, Executive Director for ICAN welcomed the study: “This new study is an opportunity to bring our understanding of the impact of nuclear war out of the 1980s and into the 21st century.  As the world becomes increasingly more interconnected, we need to make sure that policy decisions are based on science- not dogma and scaremongering. This study is a chance to bring that science together and guide us towards the future we want.”The vote on the resolution was not unanimous. Some of the nuclear-armed states and their allies actively lobbied against this study, possibly out of concern that more knowledge on what these weapons of mass destruction do would further erode any citizens’ support for having nuclear weapons. Only France, the Russian Federation and the United Kingdom voted against the resolution. However, the vast majority of states (144) – ranging from those that lead on disarmament and have been impacted by nuclear weapons testing in previous decades to those whose policies support the use of nuclear weapons – chose to commission this critical study." "Only France, the Russian Federation and the United Kingdom voted against the resolution." There were 30 abstentions, including the US.https://www.icanw.org/un_approves_new_study_on_effects_of_nuclear_warhttps://reachingcriticalwill.org/images/documents/Disarmament-fora/1com/1com24/resolutions/L39.pdfI guess that we know enough already and are not bothered.

David Ainsworth ● 54d3 Comments ● 54d

The Speaker Rebukes Reeves

Sir Lindsay Hoyle has accused Chancellor Rachel Reeves of acting with “supreme discourtesy” towards MPs given her “premature disclosure” of Budget details.The Commons Speaker said it was “totally unacceptable to go around the world telling everybody” about “major” new policy announcements rather than giving the information first to MPs.Sir Lindsay also questioned whether MPs would need to bother attending the House to hear Ms Reeves deliver her first Budget on Wednesday, given “we’ll all have heard it” already.During a round of broadcast interviews while attending the International Monetary Fund meeting in Washington DC, Ms Reeves confirmed a technical change in the way she would measure progress against the target of managing debt.It is expected Ms Reeves will use the Budget to open the door for the Government to spend billions more on long-term infrastructure, such as replacing dilapidated buildings on the public sector estate.Sir Lindsay, making a statement, told the Commons: “In media interviews last week the Chancellor announced that she intended to introduce changes to the fiscal rules relating to the funding of day-to-day spending through tax receipts and to the measurement of the public debt.“These are major new policy announcements with significant and wide-ranging implications for the Government’s fiscal policy and for the public finances.“It is evident to me that this should therefore have been made in the first instance in this House and not to the world’s media.“This principle is clearly and unambiguously set out in paragraph 9.1 of the Ministerial Code. While this can hardly be described as a leak – the Chancellor herself gave interviews on the record and on camera – the premature disclosure of the contents of the Budget has always been regarded as a supreme discourtesy to the House.“Indeed, I still regard it as such.“I am very, very disappointed that the Chancellor expects the House to wait nearly a full week to hear her repeat these announcements in the Budget statement on Wednesday.”Sir Lindsay said he has “always defended” the right of MPs to be the first to hear major Government policy announcements, adding: “Ministers should expect to face proper, sustained scrutiny when these announcements are made from the elected Members of this House and not the American news channels.”He noted Treasury minister Darren Jones would be making a statement to the House on “fiscal rules” on Monday, adding: “Perhaps no coincidence.“Honourable members may be wondering how they’ll get a seat on Wednesday (for the Budget) – to be quite honest, the way it’s going you won’t need to, we’ll all have heard it. It’s not acceptable, I don’t want it to continue and I want to treat this House with the respect it deserves.”Sir Lindsay added: “It’s totally unacceptable to go around the world telling everybody rather than these Members. They were elected by the constituents of this country and they deserve to be treated better.”He went on to note Labour when in opposition complained about the previous Tory government behaving in a similar manner, adding: “Get your acts together, all sides, treat Members with respect.”

Sue Hammond ● 59d16 Comments ● 57d

Starmer's Confusion

I already know about Starmer's confusion and inability to explain what a woman is 🤷🏻‍♀️and now I am confused about HIS confusion over 'working people'🤷🏻‍♀️🤷🏻‍♀️This confusing rhetoric from the government must end pdq because much of Reeve's🙍🏻‍♀️budget is centred around this ambiguous group.  Starmer🤓and his stooges need to have an urgent pow-wow in No 10 to sort this out because time is running out for them. 'Former Bank of England governor Mervyn King described Labour's pledge on national insurance, VAT and income tax as 'very unwise'.He also said the debate around not putting up taxes on working people was a 'terrible illusion' and warned putting up employers' national insurance was likely to depress workers' salaries.Lord King told Sky News: 'All this debate about not putting up taxes on working people is a terrible illusion, really.'Taxes are paid by people, they're not paid by companies or institutions, ultimately, they fall on the amount that people can spend.'And you only can raise significant amounts of money by raising taxes on most people, however you care to define that, but it's most people will have to pay higher taxes.And if they, instead of unwinding the cuts in employees' national insurance contributions, put up employers' national insurance contributions, that will make it less likely that companies will exceed to wage demands, they will press down on that, they will probably be less enthusiastic about creating new jobs.'Ultimately, the impact of these higher taxes has to be on the consumption of most people, however you care to define that group.'Lord King also warned that Ms Reeves' expected Budget plans could have an impact on interest rates.The Chancellor is set to rewrite the Government's fiscal rules to allow her to increase borrowing for public investment by around £50billion.Asked if he thinks the expected plans may have an impact on interest rates, particularly mortgage rates now, Lord King said: 'It could do, it could do.'https://mol.im/a/14007537

Sue Hammond ● 60d13 Comments ● 58d

As Gaza burns, Israeli settlers make 'real estate' plans

"Cheered on by influential members of Netanyahu's far-right coalition, Israel's emboldened settler movement argues that Palestinians should leave the enclave""US Secretary of State Antony Blinken flew into Israel on Tuesday pressing for a ceasefire in Gaza following the killing of Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar.But a ceasefire was the last thing on the mind of the Knesset members, government ministers and hundreds of Israeli settlers who convened a day earlier to plan the future of the enclave.These plans did not include any kind of negotiation. There was one subject under discussion at the conference, timed to coincide with the annual Sukkot religious holiday which marks the exodus of the Jews from Egypt.The event, organised by the settler organisation Nahala, was held just three kilometres from the Gaza frontier.Significantly it was in a closed military zone, and this conference was held under army protection. The regular thud of outgoing artillery fire interrupted speeches, and was greeted by applause and cries of, "God bless our brave soldiers.”Many of the men present carried machine guns or pistols.“In the event of a terrorist infiltration,” boomed the PA announcer, “we ask you please not to fire your weapon. Let the security handle it. This is for everyone’s safety.”Those present at the conference included supporters from the United States, South Africa and Australia.One great grandmother from Melbourne wore a sticker saying in Hebrew that “Gaza is part of Israel” and on the other “Kahane was right”.A number of those at the conference carried stickers celebrating Meir Kahane, the late American-born rabbi and convicted terrorist who advocated that Palestinians should be forced out of Israel.Nahala leader Daniella Weiss, one of the heroes of the conference, boasted that families were ready to move to the edge of the Gaza border, claiming that Nahala had already entered a deal worth “millions of dollars” for temporary housing units as a preliminary to settlement of the Strip.She predicted: “You will witness how Jews go to Gaza and Arabs disappear from Gaza.”Gaza seafront 'a bargain'Which would be excellent business for Or Yomtovyan, an activist for Israeli security minister Itamar Ben Gvir’s far-right Jewish Power party.Yomtovyan is in the property business. Speaking outside the Jewish Power sukkot (tent) he told MEE that settling Gaza would be “a good solution for the real estate problem. We are a small country and there’s big land here we can use.”Asked when Gaza could be occupied, he replied: “First things first. As soon as possible.”Asked by MEE how much seafront property in Gaza might be worth, he replied “it will be a bargain. Properties in Tel Aviv next to the sea cost 20-50 million shekels [$5m-$13m]. Here we can sell cheap.”Yomtovyan said he was 16th on Jewish Power’s parliamentary candidates list, and predicted that its leader, Ben Gvir, would be Israel’s next prime minister after Netanyahu.It would be a serious error to dismiss the conference as a fringe event reflecting the wild fantasies of Israel’s settler movement. Big money and top politicians have a stake in the future of Gaza.The event was attended by senior government ministers and Knesset members, including several from Netanyahu’s Likud party.Finance minister Bezalel Smotrich, who is also in charge of civil administration in the West Bank and has called for Israel to annex the occupied Palestinian territory, was there.But Ben Gvir was the star of the show, joining in communal dancing and hailed by many others present as the next prime minister.Ben Gvir maintained that Hamas-led attacks in southern Israel on 7 October last year, in which about 1,200 Israelis were killed and hundreds more taken hostage, had changed the mindset of Israelis.“We are the owners of this land,” he said. “They understand that when Israel acts like the rightful owners of this land, that is what brings results.”He told his audience that Israel would encourage what he called the “voluntary transfer of all Gazan citizens”, adding “We will offer them the opportunity to move to other countries because that land belongs to us”.Ben Gvir and Smotrich are senior members of the Likud-led coalition that governs Israel.And recent history shows that these two settler leaders get what they want.This is partly a result of growing popular support, but above all because Netanyahu’s government would fall without them. Ben Gvir’s vision of a Palestinian-free Gaza is backed by raw power.Nahala leader Daniella Weiss alluded to this new settler power when she referenced Netanyahu’s statement earlier this year that the idea of Gaza settlement was “unrealistic”.She pointed out that many had made the same observation of the West Bank, which is today overrun by Israeli settlers.“We have the political support, the public support and the experience of 55 years of settling Judea [and] Samaria [the occupied West Bank] and the Golan Heights. More than 330 settlements. We have accumulated a lot of experience to do this politically.”As far as she is concerned, the Palestinians must leave Gaza. She told a crowd of international journalists that they should go “to England, to Africa, to Turkey. Just as people of Afghanistan moved during the war, such as people of Syria, such as people from Ukraine.”The Palestinians, emphasised Weiss “will not stay in Gaza by no means”."Etc.https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/edge-gaza-israeli-settlers-applaud-thud-artillery-fire

David Ainsworth ● 59d31 Comments ● 58d

UK apology sought for British war crimes in Palestine

"The people of al-Bassa got their lesson in imperial brutality when the British soldiers came after dawn.Machine guns mounted on Rolls Royce armoured cars opened fire on the Palestinian village before the Royal Ulster Rifles arrived with flaming torches and burned homes to the ground.Villagers were rounded up while troops later herded men onto a bus and forced them to drive over a landmine which blew up, killing everyone on board.A British policeman photographed the scene as women tended to the remains of their dead, before maimed body parts were buried in a pit.It was the autumn of 1938 and UK forces were facing a rebellion in Palestine, under British control after the defeat two decades earlier of the Ottoman Empire.Britain's raid on al-Bassa was part of a declared policy by the local commander of "punitive" action against entire Palestinian villages - this one after a roadside bomb had killed four British soldiers - regardless of any evidence over who was responsible.""The atrocity was revealed in accounts by soldiers and villagers decades after the UK left. It now forms part of a file being brought to the British government seeking accountability for Palestinians subjected to alleged war crimes by UK forces.The petition, involving a 300-page dossier of evidence, asks for a formal acknowledgement and apology for abuses during the period of British rule in Palestine from 1917 until 1948, after which Britain rapidly withdrew and the State of Israel was declared.A BBC review of the historical evidence involved includes details of arbitrary killings, torture, the use of human shields and the introduction of home demolitions as collective punishment. Much of it was conducted within formal policy guidelines for UK forces at the time or with the consent of senior officers."https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-63145992British rule in Palestine 1917-1948 weakened the majority population and vastly strengthened the incoming minority.

David Ainsworth ● 76d21 Comments ● 70d

New Forest Primary School Update

On Friday 6 September, Roehampton Church Forest School celebrated the official status opening of their Forest School. The Bishop of Kingston, Fleur Anderson MP and Colin Cooper, Chief Executive (Wandsworth and Putney Commons), were welcomed by staff, children, families, Headteacher, Lynn Anderson, and governors for this special occasion.In the church service, Fleur Anderson MP, who read the gospel, shared: “There are so many opportunities in connecting children to the heath and nature through the forest school, including to their health. This is a fantastic initiative by the school”. The Early Years Leader talked about the joy and learning some children in Nursery, Reception and Year Six had already experienced in the forest school. This year, the School will be delivering Forest School learning across all year groups. The school will provide a fully inclusive and engaging forest school experience, with exciting outdoor learning opportunities. Carefully planned by Level 3 trained Forest School staff, sessions develop, compliment and extend the curriculum. the beauty and inspiring opportunities of nature.Please note that there are two remaining open days where you can come along and see a live demonstration of Forest School. The first is on this coming Friday, 18 October and the second is on Friday 22 November. The time of each session is from 09.30 to 10.30am.If interested, you can reserve a place by contacting the School:-245, Roehampton LaneRoehamptonLondonSW15 4AATel: 020 8788 8650Email: info@roehampton.wandsworth.sch.uk

Ted White ● 72d0 Comments ● 72d

Divide, separate, rule

"In the entire area between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River, the Israeli regime implements laws, practices and state violence designed to cement the supremacy of one group – Jews – over another – Palestinians. A key method in pursuing this goal is engineering space differently for each group.Jewish citizens live as though the entire area were a single space (excluding the Gaza Strip). The Green Line means next to nothing for them: whether they live west of it, within Israel’s sovereign territory, or east of it, in settlements not formally annexed to Israel, is irrelevant to their rights or status.Where Palestinians live, on the other hand, is crucial. The Israeli regime has divided the area into several units that it defines and governs differently, according Palestinians different rights in each. This division is relevant to Palestinians only. The geographic space, which is contiguous for Jews, is a fragmented mosaic for Palestinians:Palestinians who live on land defined in 1948 as Israeli sovereign territory (sometimes called Arab-Israelis) are Israeli citizens and make up 17% of the state’s citizenry. While this status affords them many rights, they do not enjoy the same rights as Jewish citizens by either law or practice – as detailed further in this paper. Roughly 350,000 Palestinians live in East Jerusalem, which consists of some 70,000 dunams [1 dunam = 1,000 square meters] that Israel annexed to its sovereign territory in 1967. They are defined as permanent residents of Israel a status that allows them to live and work in Israel without needing special permits, to receive social benefits and health insurance, and to vote in municipal elections. Yet permanent residency, unlike citizenship, may be revoked at any time, at the complete discretion of the Minister of the Interior. In certain circumstances, it can also expire. Although Israel never formally annexed the West Bank, it treats the territory as its own. More than 2.6 million Palestinian subjects live in the West Bank, in dozens of disconnected enclaves, under rigid military rule and without political rights. In about 40% of the territory, Israel has transferred some civilian powers to the Palestinian Authority (PA). However, the PA is still subordinate to Israel and can only exercise its limited powers with Israel’s consent. The Gaza Strip is home to about two million Palestinians, also denied political rights. In 2005, Israel withdrew its forces from the Gaza Strip, dismantled the settlements it built there and abdicated any responsibility for the fate of the Palestinian population. After the Hamas takeover in 2007, Israel imposed a blockade on the Gaza Strip that is still in place. Throughout all of these years, Israel has continued to control nearly every aspect of life in Gaza from outside.Israel accords Palestinians a different package of rights in every one of these units – all of which are inferior compared to the rights afforded to Jewish citizens. The goal of Jewish supremacy is advanced differently in every unit, and the resulting forms of injustice differ: the lived experience of Palestinians in blockaded Gaza is unlike that of Palestinian subjects in the West Bank, permanent residents in East Jerusalem or Palestinian citizens within sovereign Israeli territory. Yet these are variations on the fact that all Palestinians living under Israeli rule are treated as inferior in rights and status to Jews who live in the very same area."From:-https://www.btselem.org/publications/fulltext/202101_this_is_apartheid

David Ainsworth ● 77d7 Comments ● 75d

Hereditary MPs

Thank god they are getting rid of hereditary peers,the privilege the entitlements just stank too too much.Meanwhile back in the lower house there is Hamish Falconer son on Labour peer Charlie. But as Tory web site Guido Fawkes points out "these little connections are everywhere. Morgan McSweeney, the new Downing Street chief of staff, is married to Imogen Walker, the newly-elected Labour MP for Hamilton and Clyde Valley. Liam Conlon, who won the Beckenham and Penge seat for Labour in the election, is the son of Sue Gray. Richard Burgon is the nephew of Colin Burgon, a Labour MP from 1997-2010. Markus Campbell-Savours MP is the son of former Labour MP Dale Campbell-Savours. Lindsay Hoyle, the Speaker and a former Labour MP, is the son of former Labour MP, Douglas Hoyle. Chancellor Rachel Reeves is the sister of Lewisham West MP, Ellie Reeves. Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, is married to Ed Balls, the former MP and minister. Then there’s Hilary Benn (son of Tony) and Stephen Kinnock (son of Neil). There’s Valerie Vaz, who is the sister of former MP, Keith. It is all part of being in the ever-expanding Labour family.To be fair, this kind of thing is not confined to Labour. Plenty of Tories have relatives as former MPs, such as Bernard Jenkin (son of Patrick, who served as a minister under Margaret Thatcher) and Tom Tugendhat (whose uncle Christopher was an MP during the 1970s) – it is just that there are infinitely more on the Labour side of the house"

Hugh Thompson ● 79d12 Comments ● 78d

More Evidence Of Two-Tier Policing, Yvette?

Nigel Farage and Reform UK threatens to bring private prosecution against men accused of attacking cops at Manchester Airport saying failure to charge them yet is evidence of 'two-tier policing'The party has written to the Home Secretary Yvette Cooper over the incident at the airport in July, which sparked accusations of police brutality after officers were filmed kicking an unconscious man in the head while arresting him.The footage of an officer kicking and stamping on the head of Fahir Amaaz, 19, as he and his brother Muhammed Amaad, 25, were restrained by officers, went viral.But further footage, obtained by the Manchester Evening News, emerged days later which showed the immediate lead-up to the incident on July 23, including when two female police officers being hit to the ground before Mr Amaaz was incapacitated with a Taser.In a press conference today Mr Farage and his deputy Richard Tice questioned the delay in charging the men over the attack and said they would bring a private prosecution if it took too long. They are unhappy at the delay, when protesters convicted of crimes during racist riots following the Southport murders were dealt with quickly.An Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) is under way into the incident and nobody has been charged.The letter to Ms Cooper, signed by the party's five MPs, said: 'We have genuine reason to be concerned that in fact the CPS is awaiting for the IOPC to find some fault with the police officers, which will then give them a reason not to progress charges against the assailants. This is totally unacceptable.'The letter added: 'We are therefore serving notice that if the CPS is not going to charge the assailants, then we will organise a private criminal prosecution against them. We have taken initial advice and have a legal team on standby to progress when required.'The letter added that the prosecution would be crowdfunded if necessary.https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13932621/Nigel-Farage-Reform-UK-private-prosecution-Manchester-Airport.html?ito=native_share_article-nativemenubuttonI am really looking forward to hearing Cooper's response. She was very happy carping from the sidelines in Opposition but let's see how she copes doing the job for real?

Sue Hammond ● 80d1 Comments ● 80d

Trump - “We’re poisoning the blood of our country"

"If genealogy is destiny, as Donald Trump believes, then “poison in the blood” – a phrase Trump repeatedly uses – determines the fate of nations. By Trump’s logic, “blood” is the true and final measure. Trump, like Hitler, appears to classify people and countries by “blood” on a scale of their innate racial characteristics. Those features define the essence of nations, which are themselves delineated on a racial pyramid, with the purest and whitest, the most Aryan, at the pinnacle." "Trump has Hitler on the brain in unknowable ways until he lets his admiration seep out. “Well, but Hitler did some good things,” Trump remarked to his White House chief of staff, General John Kelly. “Well, what?” asked Kelly. “Well, [Hitler] rebuilt the economy,” Trump replied. Kelly was outraged. He told him, “Sir, you can never say anything good about the guy. Nothing.” Kelly reflected, “It’s pretty hard to believe he missed the Holocaust, though, and pretty hard to understand how he missed the 400,000 American GIs that were killed in the European theater,” Kelly told Jim Sciutto, the CNN correspondent. “But I think it’s more, again, the tough guy thing” – Trump’s insatiable need to playact.On 17 September, Trump launched a new theme with an old echo. He made a prophecy about who should be blamed if he is defeated in the election. “I’m not going to call this as a prediction, but in my opinion, the Jewish people would have a lot to do with a loss,” he said. Then, he repeated, “If I don’t win this election – and the Jewish people would really have a lot to do with that if that happens because if 40%, I mean, 60% of the people are voting for the enemy …” He complained that as “the most popular person in Israel” he was not “treated right” by American Jews.Trump’s Jewish son-in-law Jared Kushner, his converted Jewish daughter Ivanka, his Jewish grandchildren, his Jewish adviser Stephen Miller, who is poised to be the implementer of the replacement theory and deportation of millions, including legal immigrants, and his Jewish supporters and donors are exempt from his condemnation of “the Jewish people”. Trump’s family ties don’t give him pause from his obsession. His “blood” makes them kosher. In the case of an inconvenient contradiction his narcissism prevails.Trump’s blame game is his version of the Dolchstosslegende – the stab in the back legend – that Germany did not lose the first world war in battle but was betrayed on the home front by Jews and leftists. Hitler traced his political awakening to his understanding of the Dolchstoss.Now, after all Trump has done for the Jews, after all he has done for Israel, “the Jewish people” are ungrateful. Too many of them support “the enemy”. Trump is warming up his myth of a scapegoat."By Sidney Blumenthal"Donald Trump’s Hitlerian logic is no mistake"https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/oct/07/donald-trumps-hitlerian-logic-is-no-mistake"Israelis broadly pick former President Donald Trump over Vice President Kamala Harris as better for Israel's security and in turn favor Trump for the U.S. presidency, albeit with sharp political divisions, a national survey by Langer Research Associates and PORI (Public Opinion Research Israel) finds.Fifty-eight percent of Israelis in the survey, conducted in September, said Trump would be better for Israel's security, vs. 20% for Harris. If they had a vote in the U.S. election, Israelis said they'd pick Trump over Harris by a similar 54%-24%, with the rest taking a pass."ABC News 4/10/24

David Ainsworth ● 80d0 Comments ● 80d

Farage ~ Wants Urgent Debate

Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle is under pressure to call an emergency debate on Monday on Labour's surrender of the Chagos Islands after Nigel Farage complained that the 'damaging capitulation' occurred while MPs were away from Westminster.The Reform UK leader's move comes as diplomatic sources revealed Sir Keir ­Starmer's humiliating handover of the Indian Ocean archipelago to Mauritius, a close ally of China, had been rushed through before a potential Donald Trump victory in next month's US Presidential election.Trump's allies have complained that the deal represents a strategic coup for Beijing.The move – plans for which were first revealed in The Mail on Sunday last year – have triggered fresh speculation about the future of the Falkland islands and Gibraltar after the Prime Minister refused to guarantee that no other British Overseas Territories would be given away.Argentina's foreign minister Diana Mondino said of the Chagos deal: 'We welcome this step in the right direction and the end to outdated practices. With concrete actions and not empty rhetoric, we will recover full sovereignty of Las Malvinas.'In a letter sent this weekend to Foreign Secretary David Lammy and copied to Sir Lindsay, Mr Farage wrote: 'The strategic importance of the Chagos Islands to our nation and to our most important ally, America, is well known... The future of the Chagos Islands was announced when the House was not sitting, meaning that members of all parties remain in the dark about so many aspects of this decision.https://mol.im/a/13927957

Sue Hammond ● 82d3 Comments ● 82d

Rosie Duffield's Resignation Letter

"I can no longer stay a Labour MP under your management of the party, and this letter is my notice that I wish to resign the Labour Party whip with immediate effect.Although many "last straws" have led to my decision, my reason for leaving now is the programme of policies you seem determined to stick to, however unpopular they are with the electorate and your own MPs. You repeat often that you will make the "tough decisions" and that the country is "all in this together". But those decisions do not directly affect any one of us in Parliament. They are cruel and unnecessary, and affect hundreds of thousands of our poorest, most vulnerable constituents.This is not what I was elected to do. It is not even wise politics, and it certainly is not "the politics of service". I did not vote for you to lead our party for reasons I won't describe in detail here. But, as someone elevated immediately to a shadow cabinet position without following the usual path of honing your political skills on the backbenches, you had very little previous political footprint. It was therefore unclear what your political passions, drive or direction might be as the leader of the Labour Party, a large movement of people united by a desire for social justice and support for those most in need. You also made the choice not to speak up once about the Labour Party's problems with antisemitism during your time in the shadow cabinet, leaving that to backbenchers, including new MPs such as me. Since you took office as Leader of the Opposition you have used various heavy-handed management tactics but have never shown what most experienced backbenchers would recognise as true or inspiring leadership. You have never regularly engaged with your own backbench MPs, many of whom have been in Parliament far longer than you, and some of whom served in the previous Labour government. You have chosen neither to seek our individual political opinions, nor learn about our constituency experiences, nor our specific or collective areas of political knowledge. We clearly have nothing you deem to be of value. Your promotion of those with no proven political skills and no previous parliamentary experience but who happen to be related to those close to you, or even each other, is frankly embarrassing. In particular, the recent treatment of Diane Abbott, now Mother of the House, was deeply shameful and led to comments from voters across the political spectrum. A woman of her political stature and place in history is deserving of respect and support, regardless of political differences. As Prime Minister, your managerial and technocratic approach, and lack of basic politics and political instincts, have come crashing down on us as a party after we worked so hard, promised so much, and waited a long fourteen years to be mandated by the British public to return to power. Since the change of government in July, the revelations of hypocrisy have been staggering and increasingly outrageous. I cannot put into words how angry I and my colleagues are at your total lack of understanding about how you have made us all appear. How dare you take our longed-for victory, the electorate's sacred and precious trust, and throw it back in their individual faces and the faces of dedicated and hardworking Labour MPs?! The sleaze, nepotism and apparent avarice are off the scale. I am so ashamed of what you and your inner circle have done to tarnish and humiliate our once proud party. Someone with far-above-average wealth choosing to keep the Conservatives' two-child limit to benefit payments which entrenches children in poverty, while inexplicably accepting expensive personal gifts of designer suits and glasses costing more than most of those people can grasp — this is entirely undeserving of holding the title of Labour Prime Minister. Forcing a vote to make many older people iller and colder while you and your favourite colleagues enjoy free family trips to events most people would have to save hard for — why are you not showing even the slightest bit of embarrassment or remorse? I now have no confidence in your commitment to deliver the so-called "change" you promised during the General Election campaign and the changes we have been striving for as a political party for over a decade. My values are those of a democratic socialist Labour Party and I have been elected three times to act on those values on behalf of my constituents. Canterbury made history when its voters elected their first woman, and only non-Conservative, MP since the seat was created in the thirteenth century. My constituents elected an independent-minded MP who vowed to put constituency before party, and to keep tackling the issues that most affect us here — Brexit fallout, funding for our universities, our desperately struggling East Kent NHS, dire housing situation, repeated sewage pollution and protecting our vital green spaces. I am confident that I can continue to do so as an independent MP guided by my core Labour values. Sadly, the Labour Party has never shown any interest in my wonderful constituency in the seven years that I have been in Parliament. But I am proud of my community and will continue to serve them to the best of my ability. My constituents care deeply about social issues such as child poverty and helping those who cannot help themselves. I will continue to uphold those values as I pledged to do when I first stood before them for election in 2017. As someone who joined a trade union in my first job, at seventeen, Labour has always been my natural political home. I was elected as a single mum, a former teaching assistant in receipt of tax credits. The Labour Party was formed to speak for those of us without a voice, and I stood for election partly because I saw decisions about the lives of those like me being made in Westminster by only the most privileged few. Right now, I cannot look my constituents in the eye and tell them that anything has changed. I hope to be able to return to the party in the future, when it again resembles the party I love, putting the needs of the many before the greed of the few."Wow!! Don't hold back Rosie!! 😹

Sue Hammond ● 88d4 Comments ● 88d

What are Labour's policy commitments fir this Parliament ?

Can anyone list or point me to a list of the policies that Starmer has promised the Labour Party will legislate for and commit to delivering in this Parliament ?By this I mean policies that have some measurable base and target and are not just woolly platitudes such as Miliband's 'tackling the climate crisis that imperils our world'.Though to be fair to him he did make a measurable promise that we would have 'zero carbon electricity by 2030' which would then save families “up to £300” on their bills per year'.So that's one to watch out for.There will also be a 'The Railway Services Bill - bringing our railways back into public ownership.'Now that will raise a cheer from every £65,000 a year (plus pension and other benefits) train driver.Also especially for their leader Mick Lynch whose annual renumeration package is worth some £124,886 -  a £89,962 gross salary, Employers' NI contributions of £11,590 and pension contributions of £23,334.Will he take a pay cut as he will be negotiating, not with the wicked Tories, but with the Party which shares his political viewpoint and which he supports and is thus more likely to give him what he asks for ?An improvement in service will doubtless result from this Bill with performance targets set, monitored and published one hopes.Furthermore we have been promised an improvement in the NHS presumably in terms of efficiency and outputs.Again we should look for targets and measured achievements.Though no member of the Government has any experience in working in business or industry, one hopes they will adopt many of their performance measurement approaches.

John Hawkes ● 92d12 Comments ● 90d

Is Starmer Unfit For The Job?

There's a very insightful article about Starmer written by Peter Hitchens in the Mail on Sunday. It is behind a paywall so I have copied it below. Look away now if you think Starmer a top man in the top job ...Can it be that the Great Prosecutor Starmer is a colourless empty nobody unfit for the top?Is it possible that Sir Keir Starmer simply isn't up to the job the Labour Party tried so hard to get for him? Anyone who observes modern politics knows that many who now struggle to the top of the greasy pole are deeply unwonderful. I am always amused by journalists who boast of their conversations with 'ministers', as if such people are especially intelligent, informed or talented. Most of them are dullard careerists who hope for an easy route to wealth and status.How could Sir Keir, for instance, not have realised that his childlike readiness to accept shiny gifts was a danger childlike readiness to accept shiny gifts was a danger? Honestly, free suits for him and free dresses for his wife? VIP seats at concerts and football matches? This would be a very cheap price to accept for your soul, if you thought you had one, as he doesn't. Perhaps the free glasses failed to improve his vision and made him unable to spot approaching disaster.We are always told he is the great prosecutor, but really, is heading a staff of trained lawyers, with all the prestige and money of the state on your side, so hard? I'd be more impressed if he were a penniless defence counsel who won his cases against the odds.I've many times drawn attention to Sir Keir's past as a wooden-headed, hard-Leftist, revolutionary dogmatist. He doesn't actually disown this past, though nobody has ever properly questioned him about it. He's still an atheist, perhaps the flattest and most boring world-view known to man. It is empty of hope or depth, based on the view that the universe is nothing but a cosmic car crash in which nothing can therefore matter very much.Amazingly (to me anyway) he confessed before the election that he does not have a favourite book or a favourite poem. Some people say he was afraid of getting into trouble if he revealed such things. But I believe him. He acts at all times as if he has no imagination, and no poetry. It is in the imagination that we work out how our actions will affect others, and with poetry we surprise ourselves by finding out what really moves us.We also know he has an unfavourite work of art, a painting of Margaret Thatcher that so got on his nerves that he had it put in some (as yet unidentified) boxroom. This is in the same class as the leaden decision of his equally colourless Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, to tolerate no paintings in the State Room in 11 Downing Street, except pictures of or by women.When he felt safe to do so, he used to call for the abolition of the monarchy, another crude and unpoetic opinion. Now that this position would lose him votes, he mumbles vaguely nice things about the monarch and accepts various honours from the Crown. But I haven't heard him say he actually prefers a constitutional monarchy to a republic. He has also followed the Blairite practice of displaying Union Jacks everywhere, in the hope that this will fool people into thinking Labour is a traditionalist, patriotic party. But what do you think he really thinks?And this is why he is making such a mess. He has long-term dogmatic aims – his Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson, for example, is pursuing those with vigour and spite. But he only ever wanted to be Chief Commissar and Chief Bureaucrat. The ancient splendours of Downing Street, as the King's First Minister, as heir of Pitt, Wellington, Disraeli, Gladstone, Lloyd George and Churchill, mean little to him. He is an uninteresting man, scuttling about in vast echoing halls and chambers built for far bigger people.https://mol.im/a/13876179

Sue Hammond ● 95d13 Comments ● 90d