westlondonmist Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 5 hours ago, Hannibal Scorch said: I find it hilarious that of all people Suella Braverman was saying it should be scrapped on Monday considering she voted for it. But the facts are its going to cost about £3b to fund, the economy is already in the shit and it won't change over night unfortunately. How can they scrap it without finding away of closing that gap? Yeah that was insane. Also part of a government that squandered money meaning things like the 2 child cap had to be brought back in. Obviously will try and blame a previous leader and say she was always against it when she becomes leader, the public has short memories. 7 hours ago, Carbomb said: Don't see why they should. Starmer's lot are reaping what they've sown. If they'd shown the same unity with those MPs when they were in charge of Labour, they might have been able to persuade them to vote against their consciences. There's never been any attempt by the PLP to heal the rifts it's created repeatedly and ceaselessly with the left of the party, not even an acknowledgement that it's pulled some absolute fuckery, and they clearly haven't learned from some of the election results that there are consequences to treating people the way they have those like Faeza Shaheen, so why should those fucked over by it slavishly march in lockstep? The PLP needs to know it's not going to have everything its own way. They do need to know things won't go there own way but I feel the party should have known certain people were going to vote a certain way and those voting against their party should have been clear. If discussions still lead to them voting against probably has preparation saying we will not be suspending as in theory we agree that the bill is not right, we need to work on the budget to look at what and how we can fund. The 7 voting against could come out and say we're disappointed but we hope we can deliver something to help child poverty asap. I'm not blaming this purely on the rebels, i think it's a party fuck up. They need to try and put up a United front. If people rebel now and carry on then the party looks shit come the next election. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fog Dude Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 Starmer's first-ever was a softball question about how bad the Tories performed on sewage and basically asking "are you going to fix it in the exact way your manifesto said?" which is pretty standard for an opener. The second was from one of his own backbenchers who loyally voted with him last night who basically asked "one of my constituents is worried about her trans kid's life being made a misery - could you perhaps not do that?" and his response was a long-winded way of saying "no" while hiding behind the discredited Cass Review. Start as you mean to go on, I guess... As for the two-child cap: means-tested benefits ultimately cost more to administer than universal ones. The Tories effectively introduced an expense to the policy where there previously was none. Wouldn't a fiscally responsible Chancellor want to remove that cost, even if they don't actually care about reducing child poverty? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Dead Mike Posted July 24 Paid Members Share Posted July 24 1 hour ago, westlondonmist said: I'm not blaming this purely on the rebels, i think it's a party fuck up. They need to try and put up a United front. If people rebel now and carry on then the party looks shit come the next election. When any party has a massive majority the opposition will come from within as there's nothing the other parties can do, purely because of the numbers. The fact that this group of Momentum MPs rebelled isn't a surprise, the timing is the strangest thing tbh. Making a move like this straight after a King's speech that has been well received srrms like a political clanger. This isn't the ERG rebelling against May's Brexit, safe in the knowledge she needed their numbers for other votes so couldn't touch them. This lot don't have that kind of leverage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Devon Malcolm Posted July 24 Paid Members Share Posted July 24 I just can't talk to people who are more interested in the optics of suspending 7 MPs for voting to try and make the lives of countless families more comfortable than what that vote would actually mean. I feel like we're, at most, 5 posts away from someone saying "magic money tree" unironically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SuperBacon Posted July 24 Author Members Share Posted July 24 3 minutes ago, Dead Mike said: the timing is the strangest thing tbh. Timing is irrelevant surely if they feel that strongly against it? Otherwise they're giving Starmer leeway as he's still in his probation period and doing his e-learning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Dead Mike Posted July 24 Paid Members Share Posted July 24 3 minutes ago, SuperBacon said: Timing is irrelevant surely if they feel that strongly against it? Otherwise they're giving Starmer leeway as he's still in his probation period and doing his e-learning. It would be if this were a rebellion based on strong personal beliefs rather than blatant political maneuvering. The fact that the 7 MP's in question are all vocal Momentum/Corbynites is a crazy coincidence! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SuperBacon Posted July 24 Author Members Share Posted July 24 2 minutes ago, Dead Mike said: It would be if this were a rebellion based on strong personal beliefs rather than blatant political maneuvering. The fact that the 7 MP's in question are all vocal Momentum/Corbynites is a crazy coincidence! Are you saying those 7 all voted for the amendment in a politically motivated move against Starmer rather than the fact that they believe the cap should be removed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Devon Malcolm Posted July 24 Paid Members Share Posted July 24 2 minutes ago, Dead Mike said: The fact that the 7 MP's in question are all vocal Momentum/Corbynites is a crazy coincidence! Two coincidences, in fact - they also all want to do something urgently about child poverty! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Dead Mike Posted July 24 Paid Members Share Posted July 24 3 minutes ago, SuperBacon said: Are you saying those 7 all voted for the amendment in a politically motivated move against Starmer rather than the fact that they believe the cap should be removed? The two aren't mutually exclusive but it was clearly politically motivated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SuperBacon Posted July 24 Author Members Share Posted July 24 2 minutes ago, Dead Mike said: The two aren't mutually exclusive but it was clearly politically motivated. Ok, let me ask you this then. Was Rosie Duffield a huge Corbynite as well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Dead Mike Posted July 24 Paid Members Share Posted July 24 3 minutes ago, SuperBacon said: Ok, let me ask you this then. Was Rosie Duffield a huge Corbynite as well? I don't think so. I had no idea of her voting intentions until you posted this tbh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SuperBacon Posted July 24 Author Members Share Posted July 24 4 minutes ago, Dead Mike said: I don't think so. I had no idea of her voting intentions until you posted this tbh. Right so that's my point. If she had been able to vote in support of the amendment, what would it have been then, "7 vocal Momentum/Corbynites and a Duffield"? Surely for your point to work that they all did this to spite Starmer, she'd have had to have been in on this little power play as well? They voted because they believed it was the right thing to do. The fact that they were all largely Corbynites (pathetic fucking word to be honest) is merely coincidence, not a big anti Starmer conspiracy in my opinion (and it is just my opinion) That "magic grandpa" really does continue to have his rent paid for him doesn't he? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d-d-d-dAz Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 I think the word 'Corbynite' is something he, and the people who supported him, should be extremely proud of. It's a sign that he commandeered significant support and left an impact on the political consciousness. That's really only true of our biggest political figures. In the past 40 years there has been Thatcherites, Blairites, maybe Brownites if you're being massively generous and Corbynites. Before that there was Bennites, and a few others. But those are the people who - whether you agreed with them or not - actually had a strong sense of personal mission and vision beyond just playing safe and following the consensus 'centre' blindly. I think the fact there's a lasting idea of what 'Corbynism' is is great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Dead Mike Posted July 24 Paid Members Share Posted July 24 4 minutes ago, SuperBacon said: Right so that's my point. If she had been able to vote in support of the amendment, what would it have been then, "7 vocal Momentum/Corbynites and a Duffield"? Surely for your point to work that they all did this to spite Starmer, she'd have had to have been in on this little power play as well? They voted because they believed it was the right thing to do. The fact that they were all largely Corbynites (pathetic fucking word to be honest) is merely coincidence, not a big anti Starmer conspiracy in my opinion (and it is just my opinion) That "magic grandpa" really does continue to have his rent paid for him doesn't he? 7 MP's and a Duffield doesn't stop it being politically motivated. The idea that MPs vote on the 'right thing to do' is bizarre. This suggests that all the MP's that didn't rebel don't care about child poverty. Which is ridiculous. If you honestly don't think that factions in the Labour party aren't already planning/making moves on Starmer just wait. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SuperBacon Posted July 24 Author Members Share Posted July 24 6 minutes ago, d-d-d-dAz said: I think the word 'Corbynite' is something he, and the people who supported him, should be extremely proud of. It's a sign that he commandeered significant support and left an impact on the political consciousness. Its very, very rarely used in the positive though is it, let's be honest. It's an easy go-to in order to talk about the "left" of the party, and usually in a derogatory manner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.