Skip to main content

Vote 2005 and Respect

Vote 2005 is an interesting exercise. It involves an online debating forum with a large number of parliamentary seats identified. It is a better forum than the traditional usenet uk.politics.electoral which has been the online location generally where political activists debate from many places. Usenet, however, has a number of problems which means that it can take a lot of time to review matters.

George Galloway's - Respect the Unity Coalition not to be confused with respectcoalition.co.uk - the "lunacy coalition" have been floating around for some time now.

This is an attempt by the Socialist Workers Party to build an organisation that people will actually vote for. Previously they had Socialist Alliance which had some marginal success locally where they had hard working candidates.

Their plan was to turn the Stop the War campaign into a political party. In doing so they have lost a lot of the support and activists the SWP had without gaining that much.

Through the internal contradictions in the nature of the SWP and the rest of Respect they have now created a situation in which they are "considering" supporting Blairite pro-War Labour Candidates against anti-War Conservatives or Lib Dems.

To that extent they have now completely undermined their starting thesis.

They have also accepted that as with the Lib Dems they "support the Troops".

The difficult question, of course, is how quickly they end up falling apart on the basis of the internal contradictions. Personal loyalties do hold organisations together even when they lose their way (vide New Labour).

Sources of information: The resolutions at the Respect October Conference http://www.respectcoalition.com/pdf/041103_resolutions.pdf
which includes the text:
"Consequently we will not challenge anti-war Labour MPs and will consider calling for a vote for Labour in those areas where Respect is not standing and where there is no other credible left candidate. "

Comments

mary said…
Please be careful when you Buy Tramadol Online.

Please be careful when you Cheap Tramadol.

Please be careful when you Buy Cheap Tramadol.

Please be careful when you Tramadol hcl.

Please be careful when you Buy Tramadol.

Please be careful when you Discount Tramadol.

Please be careful when you Order Tramadol.

Please be careful when you Tramadol Online.

Please be careful when buying Tramadol.

Please be careful when you Buy Tramadol online.

Please be careful when you Buy Fioricet Online

Please be careful when you Buy Fioricet online

Please be careful when you buyloss weight

Please be careful when you Buy Tramadol.

Please be careful when buying Tramadol.

Please be careful when buying Tramadol.

Please be careful when buying enlargement penis pill .

Please be careful when buying enlargment penis pill .

Please be careful when buying penis pill .

Please be careful when you
buy tramadol .

Please be careful when buying
tramadol .

Please be careful when buying tramadol .

Please be careful when you buy tramadol online .

Please be careful when you buy tramadol .
Will said…
Doesn't that Respect resolution say they are prepared to support anti-War Labour MPs, not loyal Blairites?
john said…
The resolution follows. Respect are not standing in all seats in which there are pro-War Labour MPs.

Hence "will consider calling for a vote for Labour in those areas where
Respect is not standing and where there is no other credible left candidate."

Applies where the Labour candidate is a blairite Pro-war as much as anything else.

I accept the adjective "consider" exists.




1. That we will enter discussions with all left candidates in order to avoid, as far as possible,
more than one left challenge to the establishment parties in the forthcoming general election.
We will pursue such electoral agreements whether or not other candidates are willing to call
for a vote for Respect in those constituencies where Respect is the only or the main left
challenger.
2. That, where there is no Respect candidate standing, we will call for a vote for those left of
Labour candidates that are willing to call for a vote for Respect in similar circumstances.
3. That the Labour Party is, unlike any of the other left parties, a mass party to whom millions
of working people still owe their allegiance. If Respect is to prosper it is predominantly from
among these people that we will need to gain support. Consequently we will not challenge
anti-war Labour MPs and will consider calling for a vote for Labour in those areas where
Respect is not standing and where there is no other credible left candidate.
4. That the decisions about who to support in those areas where Respect is not standing can
only be made after local discussions have been completed. The National Council will make
a final decision on this issue.
Bob Piper said…
Personal loyalties do hold organisations together even when they lose their way (vide New Labour).

And the SDP....

Popular posts from this blog

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.


I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…

Gender Issues comparison of candidates

John Hemming believes that an MP should represent everyone in their constituency.  This should be regardless of their race, religion, gender, abledness, sexual orientation or anything else.  It should be everyone.

When he was an MP he worked on issues relating to men, those relating to women and those relating to non-binary people. Everyone.

For example here is John Hemming on a demonstration outside the courts with the campaign group Women Against Rape (it related to the case of a mother who had her child removed from her because the mother was raped).




Jess Phillips, who campaigns on women's issues, notwithstanding the questions asked about her appointments in her parliamentary office, had the following response when asked for a debate on issues specifically relating to men:

The Labour Candidate's Book Promotion Tour and Why It Matters

In the 2015 General Election the Labour Candidate criticised John Hemming for having an external interest and made a pledge that she would be a "Full Time MP for Yardley and my only other job will be mom & carer ...".  Here is a copy of that pledge:


Since that point she has been working on paid Television Programmes and has also written a book. John Hemming has made no secret of the fact that he chairs the board of the company he founded in 1983. This involves one meeting a month. When he was the MP for Yardley he was a full time MP and the Job of being MP for Yardley came first. The Labour candidate has reported 1,274 hours of work other than being an MP in the two years she has been elected and her income in the last year was over £131,000.

Ignoring the question as to how she reconciles that with her "pledge" the question is raised as to what extent her external activity conflicts with the role of Member of Parliament for Yardley. She is supposed to de…