Why Are The B B C Allowing News Readers...
Film, Media & TV0 min ago
Labour's Worse Under Jeremy Corbyn Than It Was With Militant In The Eighties, Claims Tony Blair
He said Labour is in “much worse” shape now than during the Eighties under Michael Foot’s leadership.and claimed Jeremy Corbyn had allowed “extreme elements” to adopt dominant positions in the party.
“Now is worse,” he said. “Much worse, because it’s happening with the support of the leadership. They are bringing back the more extreme elements that were either outside the party or marginalised.”
His words will deepen the alarm felt by centrist Labour MPs about the rise of the Left under Mr Corbyn, whose allies last week secured a majority on the National Executive Committee and took over the chair of the party’s powerful disputes committee.
Labour MP Mary Creagh warned the party leadership not to be inward-looking amid reports that up to 50 MPs will be targeted for deselection by Leftists.
https:/
Right or wrong?
“Now is worse,” he said. “Much worse, because it’s happening with the support of the leadership. They are bringing back the more extreme elements that were either outside the party or marginalised.”
His words will deepen the alarm felt by centrist Labour MPs about the rise of the Left under Mr Corbyn, whose allies last week secured a majority on the National Executive Committee and took over the chair of the party’s powerful disputes committee.
Labour MP Mary Creagh warned the party leadership not to be inward-looking amid reports that up to 50 MPs will be targeted for deselection by Leftists.
https:/
Right or wrong?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
//It wasn't a copy of the Tories, it was a dive for the centre//
A bit rose-tinted this, sp. New Labour's innovation to the Tory programme was to introduce social liberalism - pro-gay rights, pro-immigration, liberal stance on race, pro-gender equality, anti traditional family. Substantive changes, to be sure. For social conservatives (like Peter Hitchens) they are the be-all and end-all of politics. But the party adopted wholesale just about every Thatcherite principle about how the country was actually to be governed. In fact, it introduced even more extreme Thatcherite policies - it's hard to imagine Thatcher even in her insane third term trying to introduce markets to the NHS, privatising Royal Mail, or so aggressively setting up PFI for political gain as Blair's government did. Those policies are fundamental to the serious problems in the modern public sector, which is supposed to be Labour's turf.
A bit rose-tinted this, sp. New Labour's innovation to the Tory programme was to introduce social liberalism - pro-gay rights, pro-immigration, liberal stance on race, pro-gender equality, anti traditional family. Substantive changes, to be sure. For social conservatives (like Peter Hitchens) they are the be-all and end-all of politics. But the party adopted wholesale just about every Thatcherite principle about how the country was actually to be governed. In fact, it introduced even more extreme Thatcherite policies - it's hard to imagine Thatcher even in her insane third term trying to introduce markets to the NHS, privatising Royal Mail, or so aggressively setting up PFI for political gain as Blair's government did. Those policies are fundamental to the serious problems in the modern public sector, which is supposed to be Labour's turf.
the Manifesto says
///Labour will reintroduce maintenance grants for university students, and we will abolish university tuition fees.///
https:/
Oh, the tuition fees thing again.
It is quite obvious that Corbyn deliberately allowed everyone to think he was committed to scrapping tuition fees. He constantly railed about how awful the system is during the election campaign and did not correct anyone when they reported him as being in favour of removing fees. He only ever started backing away from the promise after the campaign was over.
Whether or not this explains why students voted in numbers they did in the last election is another matter. In general, past voting is a very high predictor of voting again in future - so the fact they voted once means it's likely they will again. IMO they will probably vote for Labour again even if the stance on fees is unclear, because it was never really about that alone. But I've been wrong on here before.
It is quite obvious that Corbyn deliberately allowed everyone to think he was committed to scrapping tuition fees. He constantly railed about how awful the system is during the election campaign and did not correct anyone when they reported him as being in favour of removing fees. He only ever started backing away from the promise after the campaign was over.
Whether or not this explains why students voted in numbers they did in the last election is another matter. In general, past voting is a very high predictor of voting again in future - so the fact they voted once means it's likely they will again. IMO they will probably vote for Labour again even if the stance on fees is unclear, because it was never really about that alone. But I've been wrong on here before.
The Tories with the worst Prime Minister in decades are not being hurt politically by Corbyn. I don't like Blair one bit - he always came across to me as cunning and devious -smarmy even, so I don't put much stock in his opinions. David Miliband would have been a better choice than Ed too. I actually like Corbyn and would be more in tune with his outlook than any other leader - however, he's not damaging the Tories and that's a weakness. I would support him as a Prime Minister - at least he wouldn't take the country into a stupid, unwinnable war as the earlier phony Larbour leader Blair did.
http://
//But leader Jeremy Corbyn went further in an interview with the NME during the election campaign, suggesting existing debts could be wiped.//
//But leader Jeremy Corbyn went further in an interview with the NME during the election campaign, suggesting existing debts could be wiped.//
http://
//“I don’t have the simple answer for it yet - I don’t think anybody would expect me to, because this election was called unexpectedly; we had two weeks to prepare all this - but I’m very well aware of that problem,” he said.
“And I don’t see why those that had the historical misfortune to be at university during the £9,000 period should be burdened excessively compared to those that went before or those that come after. I will deal with it.” //
He obviously used ambiguous language to suggest he was committed to it and maintain deniability later.
//“I don’t have the simple answer for it yet - I don’t think anybody would expect me to, because this election was called unexpectedly; we had two weeks to prepare all this - but I’m very well aware of that problem,” he said.
“And I don’t see why those that had the historical misfortune to be at university during the £9,000 period should be burdened excessively compared to those that went before or those that come after. I will deal with it.” //
He obviously used ambiguous language to suggest he was committed to it and maintain deniability later.
Suggesting, not promising. From your link :::
"The Labour MP said it was a "huge amount" and the party would not commit to doing it "unless we can afford to".
Isn't this "suggestion" exactly the same as the "suggestion" that an extra £350m every week could be spent on the NHS, if we came out of the EU ?
"The Labour MP said it was a "huge amount" and the party would not commit to doing it "unless we can afford to".
Isn't this "suggestion" exactly the same as the "suggestion" that an extra £350m every week could be spent on the NHS, if we came out of the EU ?
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.