Skip to main content

Labour Candidate faces integrity test on Nukes slur

The Labour Candidate has recently claimed that John Hemming was campaigning for unilateral nuclear disarmament at the 2015 General Election. This has been done on twitter and this is what she has said:

She also seems to be confused between multilateral disarmament and unilateral disarmament.

The Lib Dem position in 2015 and now was one of keeping nuclear weapons, but having fewer of them. In a world with rogue nations such as North Korea we cannot throw away the nukes as Jeremy Corbyn would do. It was recently confirmed that even though many Labour MPs wish to keep the nuclear weapons, Jeremy Corbyn might still scrap them as PM.

John Hemming's view has been one wishing to see multilateral nuclear disarmament (where everyone in the world gives up having nuclear weapons), but of course with North Korea doing what they are doing this is not possible now and is unlikely to be possible for many years. He has not supported unilateral nuclear disarmament (where the UK throws away the nuclear weapons whilst everyone else keeps theirs).

The Labour Candidate relies on the fact that John Hemming was photographed with the three General Election Candidates from 2015 who supported unilateral disarmament to substantiate her case. In 2015 three of the candidates organised a joint stall in Acocks Green. John Hemming was in Acocks Green on the same day and took a photograph of the new Post Office.

He also discussed nuclear policy with those campaigning for unilateralism as is clear from this.

This tweet from Teval Stephens (one of the candidates) makes it clear that his view not one of unilateralism.

The notes from the hustings at South Yardley Library also make that clear.
So it is clear that what the Labour Candidate has said is untrue. This should have been obvious to anyone who read the twitter account of Teval Stephens (which is where her original tweet sources the image)

This is the integrity test for the Labour Candidate

Will she:
a) Say it was a mistake and retract it ... or
b) Leave it without any clarification so it becomes a lie?


Comments

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…

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

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: