Re: After Corbyn
Posted: Sat Apr 04, 2020 9:46 am
OMG!!
What a shock.
What a shock.
My promise to you is that I will maintain our radical values and work tirelessly to get Labour in to power – so that we can advance the interests of the people our party was created to serve.
Based on the moral case for socialism, here is where I stand.
1. Economic justice
Increase income tax for the top 5% of earners, reverse the Tories’ cuts in corporation tax and clamp down on tax avoidance, particularly of large corporations. No stepping back from our core principles.
2. Social justice
Abolish Universal Credit and end the Tories’ cruel sanctions regime. Set a national goal for wellbeing to make health as important as GDP; Invest in services that help shift to a preventative approach. Stand up for universal services and defend our NHS. Support the abolition of tuition fees and invest in lifelong learning.
3. Climate justice
Put the Green New Deal at the heart of everything we do. There is no issue more important to our future than the climate emergency. A Clean Air Act to tackle pollution locally. Demand international action on climate rights.
4. Promote peace and human rights
No more illegal wars. Introduce a Prevention of Military Intervention Act and put human rights at the heart of foreign policy. Review all UK arms sales and make us a force for international peace and justice.
5. Common ownership
Public services should be in public hands, not making profits for shareholders. Support common ownership of rail, mail, energy and water; end outsourcing in our NHS, local government and justice system.
6. Defend migrants’ rights
Full voting rights for EU nationals. Defend free movement as we leave the EU. An immigration system based on compassion and dignity. End indefinite detention and call for the closure of centres such as Yarl’s Wood.
7. Strengthen workers’ rights and trade unions
Work shoulder to shoulder with trade unions to stand up for working people, tackle insecure work and low pay. Repeal the Trade Union Act. Oppose Tory attacks on the right to take industrial action and the weakening of workplace rights.
8. Radical devolution of power, wealth and opportunity
Push power, wealth and opportunity away from Whitehall. A federal system to devolve powers – including through regional investment banks and control over regional industrial strategy. Abolish the House of Lords – replace it with an elected chamber of regions and nations.
9. Equality
Pull down obstacles that limit opportunities and talent. We are the party of the Equal Pay Act, Sure Start, BAME representation and the abolition of Section 28 – we must build on that for a new decade.
10. Effective opposition to the Tories
Forensic, effective opposition to the Tories in Parliament – linked up to our mass membership and a professional election operation. Never lose sight of the votes ‘lent’ to the Tories in 2019. Unite our party, promote pluralism and improve our culture. Robust action to eradicate the scourge of antisemitism. Maintain our collective links with the unions.
I want to know what you think.
The future of our party will not be built by any one person. I want you to tell me how you think our Party can be more open, respectful, creative and engaging.
Fill in this form to let me know – I look forward to hearing from you.
Keir Starmer
These are good. Some deliberate distancing from Blair (4 and 5), a bit of a dig at Corbyn (10) but also language like "moral case for socialism" and "no stepping back from our core principles". It will be interesting to see how this translates into effective Parliamentary strategy and, eventually, policy.Pucksoppet wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 10:15 amOK, so Starmer/Rayner
Pledges to keep to 10 pledges:
My promise to you is that I will maintain our radical values and work tirelessly to get Labour in to power – so that we can advance the interests of the people our party was created to serve.
Based on the moral case for socialism, here is where I stand.
1. Economic justice
Increase income tax for the top 5% of earners, reverse the Tories’ cuts in corporation tax and clamp down on tax avoidance, particularly of large corporations. No stepping back from our core principles.
2. Social justice
Abolish Universal Credit and end the Tories’ cruel sanctions regime. Set a national goal for wellbeing to make health as important as GDP; Invest in services that help shift to a preventative approach. Stand up for universal services and defend our NHS. Support the abolition of tuition fees and invest in lifelong learning.
3. Climate justice
Put the Green New Deal at the heart of everything we do. There is no issue more important to our future than the climate emergency. A Clean Air Act to tackle pollution locally. Demand international action on climate rights.
4. Promote peace and human rights
No more illegal wars. Introduce a Prevention of Military Intervention Act and put human rights at the heart of foreign policy. Review all UK arms sales and make us a force for international peace and justice.
5. Common ownership
Public services should be in public hands, not making profits for shareholders. Support common ownership of rail, mail, energy and water; end outsourcing in our NHS, local government and justice system.
6. Defend migrants’ rights
Full voting rights for EU nationals. Defend free movement as we leave the EU. An immigration system based on compassion and dignity. End indefinite detention and call for the closure of centres such as Yarl’s Wood.
7. Strengthen workers’ rights and trade unions
Work shoulder to shoulder with trade unions to stand up for working people, tackle insecure work and low pay. Repeal the Trade Union Act. Oppose Tory attacks on the right to take industrial action and the weakening of workplace rights.
8. Radical devolution of power, wealth and opportunity
Push power, wealth and opportunity away from Whitehall. A federal system to devolve powers – including through regional investment banks and control over regional industrial strategy. Abolish the House of Lords – replace it with an elected chamber of regions and nations.
9. Equality
Pull down obstacles that limit opportunities and talent. We are the party of the Equal Pay Act, Sure Start, BAME representation and the abolition of Section 28 – we must build on that for a new decade.
10. Effective opposition to the Tories
Forensic, effective opposition to the Tories in Parliament – linked up to our mass membership and a professional election operation. Never lose sight of the votes ‘lent’ to the Tories in 2019. Unite our party, promote pluralism and improve our culture. Robust action to eradicate the scourge of antisemitism. Maintain our collective links with the unions.
I want to know what you think.
The future of our party will not be built by any one person. I want you to tell me how you think our Party can be more open, respectful, creative and engaging.
Fill in this form to let me know – I look forward to hearing from you.
Keir Starmer
This.Opti wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 11:44 amI've had a few posts on my FB feed from a number of people crowing that they've resigned their LP membership. f.cking good. A great many have been saying that they won't be able to criticise Israel anymore.
They just don't see that they're the problem.
f.ck off to the SWP then, that's obviously where you belong.
https://twitter.com/redalphababe/status ... 7621567488Opti wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 11:44 amI've had a few posts on my FB feed from a number of people crowing that they've resigned their LP membership. f.cking good. A great many have been saying that they won't be able to criticise Israel anymore.
They just don't see that they're the problem.
f.ck off to the SWP then, that's obviously where you belong.
Bit puzzled. Surely they get behind the democratically elected leaderjimbob wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 2:51 pmhttps://twitter.com/redalphababe/status ... 7621567488Opti wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 11:44 amI've had a few posts on my FB feed from a number of people crowing that they've resigned their LP membership. f.cking good. A great many have been saying that they won't be able to criticise Israel anymore.
They just don't see that they're the problem.
f.ck off to the SWP then, that's obviously where you belong.
Spoiler:
Edit: actually it looks like a Poe
Well, IF you subscribe to the view that Oxbridge are la crème-de-la-crème, then having them over-represented in an organisation might not be a bad thing.
Who would say that though and why are their opinions worth speculating about?Pucksoppet wrote: ↑Tue Apr 07, 2020 6:55 pmWell, IF you subscribe to the view that Oxbridge are la crème-de-la-crème, then having them over-represented in an organisation might not be a bad thing.
Please note the big boldface IF there.
Oxbridge graduates, who as a group are over-represented in positions of power.discovolante wrote: ↑Tue Apr 07, 2020 7:25 pmWho would say that though and why are their opinions worth speculating about?Pucksoppet wrote: ↑Tue Apr 07, 2020 6:55 pmWell, IF you subscribe to the view that Oxbridge are la crème-de-la-crème, then having them over-represented in an organisation might not be a bad thing.
Please note the big boldface IF there.
Since both Oxford and Cambridge use interviews to help select students, and politicians get elected based (at least partly) on how well they present themselves to the electorate, I would expect there to be a correlation as those who present themselves as well placed to benefit from an opportunity have an advantage in both.Pucksoppet wrote: ↑Tue Apr 07, 2020 8:58 pmOxbridge graduates, who as a group are over-represented in positions of power.
There are at least two issues
1) Is the absolute difference in ability (if it exists) between Oxbridge graduates and other universities significant? I think Ken McKenzie could throw some interesting information into that debate. I think the tl;dr is that although the results of students entering Oxbridge are indeed in the top percentile, after the time in university, it is not so clear cut.
Obviously not. Politicians should be drawn from those who get elected. As indeed they are. The electorate get to decide and if they want to elect Oxbridge graduates they are perfectly entitled to do so.2) Should politicians be drawn from the ranks of the people best at passing university final exams? In other words, does the ability to get a good result in a PPE exam translate into political excellence? Passing exams is not the same as actually doing the job, and good degree results may be a good indicator of someone who would do well in academia studying politics, rather than practising it.
I would expect the correlation between how well someone presents themselves to subject matter experts/nerds in interviews almost entirely focused on that subject, which is what Oxbridge interviews have been like for at least the last 20 years, and how well someone projects themselves to the electorate, to be extremely weak, and possibly negative.Millennie Al wrote: ↑Thu Apr 09, 2020 3:37 amSince both Oxford and Cambridge use interviews to help select students, and politicians get elected based (at least partly) on how well they present themselves to the electorate, I would expect there to be a correlation as those who present themselves as well placed to benefit from an opportunity have an advantage in both.Pucksoppet wrote: ↑Tue Apr 07, 2020 8:58 pmOxbridge graduates, who as a group are over-represented in positions of power.
There are at least two issues
1) Is the absolute difference in ability (if it exists) between Oxbridge graduates and other universities significant? I think Ken McKenzie could throw some interesting information into that debate. I think the tl;dr is that although the results of students entering Oxbridge are indeed in the top percentile, after the time in university, it is not so clear cut.
For the first part, yes-and-no. In a safe seat the party can put some fairly unelectable people up and they'll still get elected. My parent's constituency (Farnham/Surrey South West) voted in Harold McMillan's son 6 times, although before then he'd lost 4 of the 6 elections he stood for as an MP.Millennie Al wrote: ↑Thu Apr 09, 2020 3:37 amObviously not. Politicians should be drawn from those who get elected. As indeed they are. The electorate get to decide and if they want to elect Oxbridge graduates they are perfectly entitled to do so.Pucksoppet wrote: ↑Tue Apr 07, 2020 8:58 pm2) Should politicians be drawn from the ranks of the people best at passing university final exams? In other words, does the ability to get a good result in a PPE exam translate into political excellence? Passing exams is not the same as actually doing the job, and good degree results may be a good indicator of someone who would do well in academia studying politics, rather than practising it.
Democracy is based on a strong presumption that ability to get elected is strongly correlated with the ability to run the country.
cf. Zac Goldsmith in the Lords.Martin_B wrote: ↑Thu Apr 09, 2020 6:02 amFor the first part, yes-and-no. In a safe seat the party can put some fairly unelectable people up and they'll still get elected. My parent's constituency (Farnham/Surrey South West) voted in Harold McMillan's son 6 times, although before then he'd lost 4 of the 6 elections he stood for as an MP.Millennie Al wrote: ↑Thu Apr 09, 2020 3:37 amObviously not. Politicians should be drawn from those who get elected. As indeed they are. The electorate get to decide and if they want to elect Oxbridge graduates they are perfectly entitled to do so.Pucksoppet wrote: ↑Tue Apr 07, 2020 8:58 pm2) Should politicians be drawn from the ranks of the people best at passing university final exams? In other words, does the ability to get a good result in a PPE exam translate into political excellence? Passing exams is not the same as actually doing the job, and good degree results may be a good indicator of someone who would do well in academia studying politics, rather than practising it.
Democracy is based on a strong presumption that ability to get elected is strongly correlated with the ability to run the country.
It's interesting (to me) the way that one of the differences between American and British governments is that in Britain you elect MPs to run the country, while in America the government (Secretaries of State, Defence, Industry, etc) are people who get appointed by the President, and not people who have just won their elections to the House of Representatives or Senate. If a member of congress or senator takes up a cabinet position they have to give up their seat in the House (and that position is filled by the state governor until another election can be called). Hence, you end up with John Ashcroft, who was voted out of his Missouri senate seat to a dead man, but then appointed as Attorney General by Dubya.
Ah yes, I'd forgotten that Britain had a work-around for that. I wonder how the people of Richmond feel about seeing the man they voted out as MP remaining as a Minister of State for Foreign Affairs (is this like discussing Ugandan affairs?)headshot wrote: ↑Thu Apr 09, 2020 7:00 amcf. Zac Goldsmith in the Lords.Martin_B wrote: ↑Thu Apr 09, 2020 6:02 amFor the first part, yes-and-no. In a safe seat the party can put some fairly unelectable people up and they'll still get elected. My parent's constituency (Farnham/Surrey South West) voted in Harold McMillan's son 6 times, although before then he'd lost 4 of the 6 elections he stood for as an MP.Millennie Al wrote: ↑Thu Apr 09, 2020 3:37 am
Obviously not. Politicians should be drawn from those who get elected. As indeed they are. The electorate get to decide and if they want to elect Oxbridge graduates they are perfectly entitled to do so.
Democracy is based on a strong presumption that ability to get elected is strongly correlated with the ability to run the country.
It's interesting (to me) the way that one of the differences between American and British governments is that in Britain you elect MPs to run the country, while in America the government (Secretaries of State, Defence, Industry, etc) are people who get appointed by the President, and not people who have just won their elections to the House of Representatives or Senate. If a member of congress or senator takes up a cabinet position they have to give up their seat in the House (and that position is filled by the state governor until another election can be called). Hence, you end up with John Ashcroft, who was voted out of his Missouri senate seat to a dead man, but then appointed as Attorney General by Dubya.
Another interesting point, and one where I would suggest that other abilities might have a better correlation. The House of Lords is an example.Millennie Al wrote: ↑Thu Apr 09, 2020 3:37 amDemocracy is based on a strong presumption that ability to get elected is strongly correlated with the ability to run the country.