Jeremy Corbyn (Vol. 4)

[Scrump]

Continued from here:
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...

[JagLover]

Let's go Corbyn neutral by Christmas

[Johnnytheboy]

If he loses his second GE will he resign?

[Zirconia]

Johnnytheboy said:

If he loses his second GE will he resign?

Going to guess that Len and Jon will have a chat (time to go now chum, hand over the reigns etc.), Corby decides that now is the right time to stand aside and let a younger person lead the party forward to the next election etc. bull shine etc. waffle etc. By election in his safe seat and another converted to the cause parachuted in.

Will the MP's see what the problem is and sort it or will Len and Momentum tighten their grip.

[768]

Johnnytheboy said:

If he loses his second GE will he resign?

I doubt it.

Can he be pushed?

[andy43]

Jewemy, can you explain likely changes in inflation under your economic proposals?

[Garvin]

JagLover said:

Let's go Corbyn neutral by Christmas

It would be a good Christmas present indeed.

As to whether JC will resign if he loses another GE. Well he didn’t when he lost a vote of no confidence so I doubt he will resign over another GE loss! If Labour take a beating in line with the current polls and JC remains as leader then it must surely signify the beginning of the end of Labour.

[Elysium]

Johnnytheboy said:

If he loses his second GE will he resign?

I hope he does. Our democracy requires a credible opposition party.

[turbobloke]

Garvin said:

JagLover said:

Let's go Corbyn neutral by Christmas

It would be a good Christmas present indeed.

As to whether JC will resign if he loses another GE. Well he didn’t when he lost a vote of no confidence so I doubt he will resign over another GE loss! If Labour take a beating in line with the current polls and JC remains as leader then it must surely signify the beginning of the end of Labour.

Hopefully Corbyn will stay put but a McDonnell take-over would be the next best thing.

[ORD]

Elysium said:

I hope he does. Our democracy requires a credible opposition party.

Credible as in "sensible", rather than "capable of winning an election". This bunch of lefty loons are doing just fine in the polls.

[CambsBill]

turbobloke said:

Hopefully Corbyn will stay put but a McDonnell take-over would be the next best thing.

I can't see the party ultimately allowing it though - Corbyn would be 75 in 5 years time, McDonnell 73, hardly likely to appeal to the younger voters.

[turbobloke]

CambsBill said:

turbobloke said:

Hopefully Corbyn will stay put but a McDonnell take-over would be the next best thing.

I can't see the party ultimately allowing it though - Corbyn would be 75 in 5 years time, McDonnell 73, hardly likely to appeal to the younger voters.

Yet at the present time Corbyn is meant to be appealing to younger voters!

You've got the idea though, I'd prefer a Labour Party that has the likes of Corbyn and McDonnell in charge as they are more unelectable.

The idea of a strong opposition is an odd one. Any opposition facing a government with a working majority is effectively impotent. All they can legislate for is their own hot air (and salary, and expenses, where agreement is more likely).

The Lords is another matter, they can interfere and block legislation (rather than hone it) if the numbers are wrong and that needs to be prevented.

Speeches are ho hum, votes count.

[rxe]

You want a viable opposition to hold the government to account and stop stupid policies - on both sides. Even if they are nowhere near power, the fact that they are credible and asking hard questions is enough. One of the reasons the Conservatives have been so crap is that Labour have descended into madness.

[turbobloke]

rxe said:

You want a viable opposition to hold the government to account and stop stupid policies

When a government has a working majority can you explain how an opposition alone can stop a stupid policy (put to one side that stupid may not be how others see it, just explain the mechanism please). Amendments can be put down then voted down. It requires government consent to amend legislation (blocking via Lords numbers isn't about HM Opposition).

[jakesmith]

turbobloke said:

rxe said:

You want a viable opposition to hold the government to account and stop stupid policies

When a government has a working majority can you explain how an opposition alone can stop a stupid policy (put to one side that stupid may not be how others see it, just explain the mechanism please). Amendments can be put down then voted down. It requires government consent to amend legislation (blocking via Lords numbers isn't about HM Opposition).

Obviously it is indirect - because if they are credible, argue well, work effectively with the media, present a logical or more appealingcounter to government proposals, they can influence public opinion & that puts pressure on the government. The government frequently u-turns on proposals that don't play well with the public and an effective opposition can contribute to that

[turbobloke]

jakesmith said:

turbobloke said:

rxe said:

You want a viable opposition to hold the government to account and stop stupid policies

When a government has a working majority can you explain how an opposition alone can stop a stupid policy (put to one side that stupid may not be how others see it, just explain the mechanism please). Amendments can be put down then voted down. It requires government consent to amend legislation (blocking via Lords numbers isn't about HM Opposition).

Obviously it is indirect - because if they are credible, argue well, work effectively with the media, present a logical or more appealing counter to government proposals, they can influence public opinion & that puts pressure on the government. The government frequently u-turns on proposals that don't play well with the public and an effective opposition can contribute to that

Certainly public opinion can change policy, so indirect influence exists. Even so, if a government is determined to go down its preferred path there's nothing HM Opposition can do about it, with or without the public voice behind them. This may lead to subsequent electoral defeat, but a self-inflicted one. The Lords can block legislation tabled by an elected government in the Commons and that needs to be sorted. The Parliament Act(s) have limited scope iirc.

[CambsBill]

turbobloke said:

When a government has a working majority can you explain how an opposition alone can stop a stupid policy (put to one side that stupid may not be how others see it, just explain the mechanism please). Amendments can be put down then voted down. It requires government consent to amend legislation (blocking via Lords numbers isn't about HM Opposition).

If nothing else, a credible, coherent opposition keeps any government keenly aware that they might lose their majority at the next election and have their dafter enactments reversed.

[motco]

I wonder how many people heard what I heard on R4 'Today' last week with regard to McDonnell?
He is a "...one-time trainee Catholic priest..."

[jakesmith]

turbobloke said:

jakesmith said:

turbobloke said:

rxe said:

You want a viable opposition to hold the government to account and stop stupid policies

When a government has a working majority can you explain how an opposition alone can stop a stupid policy (put to one side that stupid may not be how others see it, just explain the mechanism please). Amendments can be put down then voted down. It requires government consent to amend legislation (blocking via Lords numbers isn't about HM Opposition).

Obviously it is indirect - because if they are credible, argue well, work effectively with the media, present a logical or more appealing counter to government proposals, they can influence public opinion & that puts pressure on the government. The government frequently u-turns on proposals that don't play well with the public and an effective opposition can contribute to that

Certainly public opinion can change policy, so indirect influence exists. Even so, if a government is determined to go down its preferred path there's nothing HM Opposition can do about it, with or without the public voice behind them. This may lead to subsequent electoral defeat, but a self-inflicted one. The Lords can block legislation tabled by an elected government in the Commons and that needs to be sorted. The Parliament Act(s) have limited scope iirc.

So apart from forcing policy u-turns, presenting the threat of loss of power, and within a pre-determined timeline removing power if they are credible in the face of a government that ignored the people, what else have the Romans ever done for us

[turbobloke]

jakesmith said:

turbobloke said:

jakesmith said:

turbobloke said:

rxe said:

You want a viable opposition to hold the government to account and stop stupid policies

When a government has a working majority can you explain how an opposition alone can stop a stupid policy (put to one side that stupid may not be how others see it, just explain the mechanism please). Amendments can be put down then voted down. It requires government consent to amend legislation (blocking via Lords numbers isn't about HM Opposition).

Obviously it is indirect - because if they are credible, argue well, work effectively with the media, present a logical or more appealing counter to government proposals, they can influence public opinion & that puts pressure on the government. The government frequently u-turns on proposals that don't play well with the public and an effective opposition can contribute to that

Certainly public opinion can change policy, so indirect influence exists. Even so, if a government is determined to go down its preferred path there's nothing HM Opposition can do about it, with or without the public voice behind them. This may lead to subsequent electoral defeat, but a self-inflicted one. The Lords can block legislation tabled by an elected government in the Commons and that needs to be sorted. The Parliament Act(s) have limited scope iirc.

So apart from forcing policy u-turns, presenting the threat of loss of power, and within a pre-determined timeline removing power if they are credible in the face of a government that ignored the people, what else have the Romans ever done for us

Straight roads can reduce tyre wear.

It's not always clear that the Opposition leads public opinion rather than follows it on the bandwaggon once the balloon has gone up.