The only way for a divided party to win an election is if the other main contender for government is even more divided. Banking on that would clearly be the strategy of an idiot. Given that, the events of Tuesday 10th January are a cause for concern. We all know that the media is ever ready to pounce as soon as the Labour leader says anything which could be construed as indicating confusion and difference within Labour. There is therefore an obvious onus on the leadership to be very careful about the coordination of how Labour’s messages are put over. Tuesday 10th was not, in that respect, a good day. Continue reading
Posted by David Pavett
What is the National Policy Forum Doing? The Case of Education
The National Policy Forum (NPF) is the body where Labour Party Policy is developed (or so the LP Rulebook tells us). It presents reports to Labour’s Annual Conference each year and these are supposed to be the basis for Labour’s next election manifesto. The first thing to be said is that, if the talk within Labour of getting into gear for an early general election is sincerely meant, then it would have appear not to have reached the ears of the organisers of the NPF or its constituent Policy Commissions.
After 6 years of onslaught on our education service in which the majority of secondary schools have been ripped out of the sphere of local democracy to become state-funded independent institutions, a period in which teacher training has been undermined and in which great strides have been made towards various forms of privatisation of education, what does Labour have to say in response? Continue reading
Share:
Free movement: Labour’s great non-debate
Free movement and the left: facing in different directions
Nothing illustrates better the ideological and policy differences at all levels of the Labour Party than the contradictory opinions being offered on the issue of free movement. The Shadow Home Secretary (Diane Abbott) says free movement is essential. She has even said “Ending free movement has become a synonym for anti-immigrant racism”. The Shadow Brexit Secretary (Keir Starmer) and the Shadow Chancellor (John McDonnell) say that movement of people should be managed/controlled.
What does the Party leader (Jeremy Corbyn) think? Continue reading
Share:
Whatever happened to Trident?
Among the reasons for concern that Labour has still not broken with its tradition of forming policy out of sight of party members, and with scant concern for their views, is the handling of policy on Trident. Our ‘independent nuclear deterrent’ became something of an iconic issue for the left and a subject where the left and centre of the party could unite.
The Left Futures website illustrates the importance given to the issue by the number of articles devoted to it. The subject has been returned to probably more than any other issue except austerity. Since January 2013 there have been thirteen articles on Trident. Four of them were published earlier this year. Not a single one found any case for renewing our nuclear weapons. The only article with anything positive to say about Trident was one by a trade union official which considered Trident renewal without nuclear weapons. Continue reading
Share:
The “right to free movement”
The British Empire was a source of large-scale migrations to satisfy labour markets.
There have been recent signs of a change of tone in the Labour leadership on the question of freedom of movement. Some have opposed any sort of controls but in recent months John McDonnell has spoken of “managed migration” and Keir Starmer has said that when it comes to freedom of movement within the single market we should be “open to adjustments”. It is time to dig a bit deeper into the underlying assumptions. Continue reading
