Fucking hate her

she reminds me of CG

Always intrigued to find out which novel new reasons people can come up with to complain about stuff he does. Apparently this time his Shadow Cabient is too ā€œLondon-centricā€ according to the Guardian. Great stuff.

Diane Abbott is quite loud and a bit annoying sometimes but you know what, given how appalling the PM and Home Secretary have been recently, having someone like that holding them to account might not be a bad thing.

This shadow cabinet contains more MPs from northern cities, I thought.

Good to see Luke Akehurst spouting racist guff about Abbott’s appointment too.

No idea if it was intentional or not but I think Labour having a black woman unequivocally calling out the racism of a white woman (Amber Rudd) is a good move. Its likely to be far more convincing than if it was a white person doing the same, and obviously at the same time it’s much harder for a man to go on the attack against a woman.

1 Like

@colinzealuk I’m moving this to the Corbyn thread.

I don’t even know where to start with your first paragraph. I really wish it were the case, but I don’t think a single assertion you’ve made is actually what would happen. The day after he conceded on Trident renewal is the day Tonybe rounded on him for not even holding out an olive leaf, much less a branch to his MPs or public opinion. If that’s what people in the media who are on Labour’s side were writing when he did make a move towards the centre, imagine what those against Labour would have written in a situation where he repeatedly said ā€œcentre groundā€ in a speech that called for nationalisation of key public services, redistribution, greater corporate taxation and so on.

So Lewis, the actual MP with a service record, is gone from Defence and it looks like that olive branch was actually a mistake to be rolled back. It’s also worth bearing in mind that the day Lewis took a consensus position on Trident was the same day that Corbyn once again kept mandatory reselection alive. At this point even Jon Lansman is saying it’s unhelpful but Corbyn keeps saying that most MPs have nothing to worry about. I didn’t read that as conciliatory.

Look, I’m not saying this is easy but it’s also not impossible. If I didn’t think Corbyn could do it I wouldn’t waste my time thinking about it. You say he can’t deliver a speech on nationalisation that can be recognised as a pitch to the centre ground, but the majority of the nation supports renationalising the railways and has concerns over Hinkley point. You could hit British values, resilience, and practical state craft in one go by promising to set up private and public competition to prove that nationalised railways work, and point to East Coast rail’s brief time in public control as the example. You then criticise the Hinkley point plan across the board and pledge to invest in British nuclear design because it turns out the thing we’re actually good at is designing, smaller, flexible reactors, which are actually better for the grid. And fortunately everyone’s cool with state investment now too.

His biggest problem isn’t framing a debate for the centre ground, it’s the fact that he’s still hopelessly isolated. That’s the other reason Toynbee can take shots at him - because no one she likes is standing next to him. He needs the cover of allies and the issues. Once he gets that the infighting will drop a little and he’ll start to get personal traction. Hopefully there’s something still to come in the reshuffle because at the moment the senior figures in the Cabinet are a north London ivory tower that no one has a problem throwing rocks at.

Shadow Business is a much more high profile position than Shadow Defence, especially in a time of Brexit.

Putting Keir Starmer up against David Davis is a very good move too.

If it’s just that then grand, though I suspect it will be a case of the title giving him opportunity to comment rather than the role giving him anything to scrutinise. Shadowing Fox will basically be the same as shadowing Prince Andrew.

It probably is, yes. That’s balanced by the fact that I’m not keen on Diane Abbott; I think she’s been promoted above her ability and giving her one the only available top job while an excellent decision from a representation point of view (I think she’s the first black person to get one of the traditional 4 great offices in shadow or actual cabinets isn’t she?) doesn’t do much for the much vaunted reaching out to the rest of the party. I kind of hope that big hitting ā€œmoderatesā€ with a liberal approach to immigration were approached and turned Corbyn down rather than Abbott being his first choice to replace Burnham.

That said, she’ll hopefully at least give Rudd a hard time and manage to get more positive press attention for Labour than Andy Burnham did (not I might add for the want of trying on his part).

mate

Jo Stevens has already denied that Trident is going to be revisited this morning.

Of course not. It’s confirmation bias. I see it as Corbyn saying exactly what you or Geoff asked for a couple of months ago - the party has rules already that cover new constituency boundaries, that unfortunately there’s a few areas where there’s probably going to be MPs competing for a seat but the vast majority of MPs will be fine. But again - confirmation bias. The statement wasn’t 100% clear… maybe deliberately so.

This we almost agree on… I actually think Milne is a bigger problem for him, but his isolation certainly is a problem. We just disagree on some (not all) but some of the reasons behind that - I believe too many of his MPs deliberately isolated him and chose not to help him because they were playing the internal game from day one, you believe that he’s caused most of them to step away because they had no choice. And we could go over that ground again today, but it’s probably wasted time :slight_smile:

I think she said that the parliamentary party had voted on it and she couldn’t imagine it being an ongoing issue. By contrast, Nia Griffith, the new Shadow Defence Secretary is very anti-Trident, and Jo also voted against renewal, as did the new Nic Brown Chief Whip, and Sarah Champion, the shadow Women and Equalities minister. Griffith is one of those returning following resignation, Champion resigned and I think returned early when her brief was unfilled, Stevens worked for Smiths campaign, and Brown is a Brownite, so none of them are in Corbyn’s camp. It’s all quite interesting.

As to the phrasing regarding reselection, I absolutely agree that his statements aren’t 100% clear either way. It’s been the same with every answer he’s given on the subject. I personally suspect he doesn’t want to impinge on what he sees as an issue for the membership rather than the leader, which might be fine except that the issue is fraught, the atmosphere febrile, and the actions of the membership tied directly to him, which means this is ticking time bomb. Really it’s another occasion where he could easily make life easier for himself with a more specific message but he doesn’t, which leads us on to Milne…

I certainly agree that he’s a significant liability for Corbyn, and I think that his presence and Corbyn’s isolation are two sides of the same coin. I think Milne positioned Corbyn very poorly at the start of his leadership and I sincerely hope the unions succeed in getting him replaced. That said there’s a good chance that Milne outside the tent will be as annoying to Corbyn’s camp as someone like Mcternan is to the moderates. I suspect he does a great line in self righteous.

I have no real desire to enter into the meat of this debate, but I do find the use of east coast as the poster child for rail nationalisation a bit odd. A minor issue is that there are specifics to that contract that open it up to countering, but the main issue for me is that there is a far far better posterboy for public sector transport, the carrier of the largest number of rail passengers by far in the UK: Transport for London.

Sounds a bit London-centric to me m8.

Well it was a glib suggestion and I’m far from an expert on transport policy. I guess on instinct I tend not to use anything related to London as an example to appeal to the rest of country, but equally I’m sure you could make a good argument for not keeping a positive, functional system just for London.

TBF, East Coast is probably used as the posterboy because the private sector failed there twice in quick succession. (2006 and 2009). It’s an easy (and as asita says non-London-centric) example to point at.

1 Like

He’s an utter tool.

just took me 10 seconds to remember who owen smith was after seeing his name on twitter

Yeah, the SWP thing is really disappointing - and he doesn’t have the excuse that he wasn’t aware of the issue either. As others have said, Momentum need to step up and outflank the SWP on events like this - we shouldn’t be in a situation where every march or event in pursuit of a progressive cause is run by, or used by the SWP.

On the bright side, it’s nice to see that the ā€˜moderates’ are standing behind the likes of Black Lives Matter on something, I guess?

Strong bit of whataboutery there.

This SWP thing at the weekend is odd. Apparently Corbyn had initially said he’d pull out because of the SWP co-organisation but then he went along and spoke at it anyway. Just shows tremendously poor judgement.

No, initially his team had said that he wouldn’t be there because he was scheduled to appear at an event in Scotland, which was subsequently postponed.

I don’t know what happened. I can imagine that turning down a SUTR and UAF would also have been used against him in some way too.