corbyns "purge"

it seems that Corbyn is determined to make sure labour is utterly unelectable, not that it was before he decided to make life unlivable for anyone who even mildly disagrees with his left wing extremist stance...

looks like hes set to get rid of any labour ministers who dont march to his tune or are capable of independant thought

not only are they now unelectable, they are now entirely without ANY pretence of credibility...

If he's prepared to act like this to his own ministers, just think of the disdain he will have for you and me....you think camergoon is bad....god help us all if this miserable git gets in sniffing distance of power...

Most amusing! !!

And the idiot has brought that twat thornbury back into the shadow cabinet... remember her?


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/rochester-by-election-labour-mp-emily-thornberry-apologises-for-white-transit-van-and-england-flags-9874088.html

What a load of bollocks.

Now THIS was a revenge reshuffle, when Cameron got rid of 50

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/sep/04/david-cameron-government-reshuffle-cabinet?CMP=share_btn_tw


Meanwhile, back in the real world, the media quietly sideline Cameron pushing through the housing bill that will virtually get rid of social housing in this country (insisting on having the vote at 3 in the morning), and the Conservatives laughing at the plight of flood victims at PMQs and lying they they have spent more on flood defences.   That's the real news.

PS - Emily Thornberry

A former human rights barrister, shadow attorney general and shadow climate change minister with over a decade in Parliament, Emily has been a tough campaigner who took the Tories to task over issues as broad and important as the Winterbourne View care home abuse scandal and pressures on elderly care caused by cuts, fuel poverty and green jobs, white-collar crime and affordable housing. She stood up to many in her own party on protecting civil liberties and resisting the worst of the War on Terror.
She doesn't agree with Jeremy on everything but has always worked with him constructively, and with her common sense stance on weapons of mass destruction alongside her longstanding campaign experience, we're sure she'll make an excellent spokesperson on defence and armed forces issues - including on the estimated 9,000 ex-service personnel experiencing homelessness.

Well said Kate Osamor - on yesterday's regressive Housing Bill:
"The Housing and Planning Bill exposes how the government are doing nothing to stop the widening inequality in Britain.
The regressive piece of housing legislation which went through the Commons yesterday is a fundamental attack on social housing. It is doing nothing to fix Britain’s housing crisis. We must fight against it."

Away from the reshuffle, Corbyn quietly dismantles Cameron at PMQs

Jeremy Corbyn's performance at prime minister's questions today was his best since he became leader. His questioning was relevant, informed and difficult for Cameron to respond to. He showed concern for the victims of flooding while raising vital and specific questions about the government's failure to adequately fund a whole series of flood defences.

By contrast Cameron came across as flippant and even childlike in his responses. While Corbyn asked questions about pump capacity and flood compensation, Cameron answered with embarrassing Shakespeare gags about the Labour reshuffle.

The prime minister's replies to detailed questioning was often simplistic to the point of farce.

Asked about cancelled flood defence funding, Cameron replied that: "We have got the strength to tackle these floods and we will do it in a proper way." Asked why specific projects had been cancelled, he replied that: "We're putting in the money. We're putting it in quickly." Asked about his plans to prevent devastating future flooding, he replied that things would be okay because: "We've got a strong economy and a strong country." Pushed by a Labour MP on his record on floods, he replied that "what I said absolutely stands good".

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2016/01/06/away-from-the-reshuffle-corbyn-quietly-dismantles-cameron-at


To say nothing at the laughter from the Conservative side of the house when JC was talking about specific victims, they found it very funny.

Sassy, sorry, but I know a few labour supporters who are growing concerned about Corbyn's frantic behaviour.
It's almost as though he went on for years and years talking the talk and now he's being asked to walk the walk he's limping along like a blind man in a dark room.
He simply seems a bit "lost" and his eyes say it too.

Really, then they obviously haven't a clue, because there is not frantic behaviour, just a Murdoch press trying to cover up what the Conservatives are doing.   Nothing lost about him.

Being a leader means you have to manage, and managing means you have to get the right team:

Jeremy the serial rebel will know more than anyone that the right to rebel is sacred, which is probably why he has held back with his reshuffle against the urging of many.



Yet the reason principled rebellion is principled is that it has consequences. The rebel must be willing to remain on the backbenches, as the left have been for years (with the exception of Diane Abbott’s brief stint as shadow health secretary.) And even Jeremy may have vocally attacked a Labour government on issues as serious as Iraq, but would not have gone on national TV to attack the leadership over a minor reshuffle, as former shadow chancellor Chris Leslie did yesterday. One cannot expect to relentlessly attack a landslide-elected leader and then be entitled to a place in their core team.



The most common complaint about Labour is not that it is too left- or right-wing. It has been a lack of clarity. Whilst the Tories pushed home brutal and simple messages on the economy Labour’s manifesto was described as ‘vote Labour and win a microwave.’ Some good policies (abolishing the bedroom tax, scrapping some unpaid internships) were obscured by vague slogans and muddled rhetoric, for instance promising to be tougher on benefits than the Tories at the same time as slamming welfare cuts. All those concerned about Labour’s electability surely now realise that the party should stake out a clear position and defend it coherently. A shadow cabinet divided on foreign policy will find this difficult. A shadow cabinet divided on foreign policy to the point where an ‘anonymous shadow minister’ tells the Telegraph Jeremy is putting them at risk of assassination by ISIS will find clarity and coherence impossible.



For the sake of winning in 2020 and for the hundreds of thousands that voted decisively for his vision, Jeremy has to assemble a leadership team that enables him to implement it. He has to be bold about it. Yes, there will have to be compromises in places. Yes, the leadership team should not (and could not) be drawn exclusively from Labour’s left. One can accommodate differing thought without welcoming those who attack Labour party policy from the front bench to thunderous cheers from the Tories. One can compromise without having a top team that spends more time attacking its leader than it does the opposition. A cabinet needs to be able to act in concert – if it cannot agree on its own vision, how on earth does it expect voters to get behind it?



Jeremy’s slogans have been badly lampooned by his internal opponents. ‘Sacked for too much straight talking honest politics’, Michael Dugher’s Twitter bio now reads, while ‘this isn’t very new politics’ has been included in virtually every thinkpiece about reshuffles. It’s a good quip, but it should not be taken seriously. A straight talking, honest approach is one in which there is open debate, democracy and clarity of ideas – not one where Dugher can call his party colleagues ‘nasty and stupid’ without repercussion. A newer, kinder politics is not one free of shadow cabinet repositioning; it’s politics that doesn’t have politicians on both sides of the house to blast immigrants and welfare claimants because it’s politically easy.



The reshuffle process has produced some positive results – a closer alignment of defence policy, and a 17:14 ratio of women to men in a landmark victory for representation. It also dragged on too long, and if I were an already somewhat-critical journalist who had been cooped up in Parliament for the best part of 2016, I would doubtless be preparing even more negative write-ups fuelled by anger at the delay – a delay reportedly caused by threats to resign if Jeremy exercises his right to reshuffle in ways deemed unacceptable by a few career politicians. Even though Hilary Benn was not moved, resignations persisted anyway.


We’ve been here before; Labour’s right are very fond of comparing now to a former left-wing leadership that lost the 1983 election. They forget that the left never managed to complete the process of putting forward a clear vision. The right put obstacles in the way, forced compromise after compromise and a huge chunk left to eventually form the Lib Dems. Of course the 600-page manifesto eventually produced was lacking in the electability factor.

Some moderates have gracefully accepted defeat, worked constructively, and will voice disagreement through the expanded democratic processes that a Jeremy Corbyn leadership will deliver. But a small section have dragged themselves, their leadership and the membership into a tawdry media feeding frenzy, bullied hardworking activists and held the leadership to ransom. It’s for that reason – not for their disagreement with Corbyn’s politics – that talk of a reshuffle had to come at this time.



Getting the top team right is not about revenge, or internal politics. It is about finding people with the qualities to work with each other, Labour members, the public and Jeremy to plan a future that works for all of us.


http://leadersoftheopposition.com/2016/01/06/an-electable-labour-needs-a-coherent-leadership-team/

Regardless, he'd better have some fucking serial killer plan, or he's going to end up with an omelette on his face.
He's losing credibility.

I can't stand Cameron, but I couldn't vote for Corbyn either. There's no one talking any amount of sense at the moment.
If I had to vote for someone right now....I seriously don't think I could vote.

No he's not, he's gaining it, we are still getting new members hand over fist, and they all say they are joining because of him.    Not talking sense, really Eds, think you need to read his policies, they are the only ones that are sense.

sassy wrote:No he's not, he's gaining it, we are still getting new members hand over fist, and they all say they are joining because of him.    Not talking sense, really Eds, think you need to read his policies, they are the only ones that are sense.

I will admit, I'm not up to date with his policies, but I do chat to a lot of staunch labour supporters (and one really is staunch!). They all seem to feel a bit unsure what he's up to. That's not a great feeling to have about your "leader"...?

It isn't, but if they rely on newspapers and tv, I'm not surprised, that's exactly what newspapers and tv are hoping to make them feel.

yeah, and then the cretin puts a bloody veggie (who knows sod all about even how to grow a letteuce) in as farming and environment minister ffs

next thing it will be veggie burgers all round and NO choice, "cos we says so"

sassy wrote:It isn't, but if they rely on newspapers and tv, I'm not surprised, that's exactly what newspapers and tv are hoping to make them feel.

There's probably some truth in that but that also remains true for other leaders too.

No, it really doesn't, they are so far up Camerons backside it's a wonder they can operate the camera lol

It's a shambles!!!

Corvine is a very dangerous person.

Corbachov...!!!

!lol!: