Chilcot, Corbyn and the UK Labour Party caucus.

62 comments on “Chilcot, Corbyn and the UK Labour Party caucus. ”

• Comments are now closed

1. RedLogix 1

   29 June 2016 at 10:44 am

   Well this makes a lot of PLP MP’s ‘accessories after the fact’ does it not?

   We already know the coup was plotted months ago and the Brexit result is nothing but a figleaf. A particularly withered one at that.

   Basically this is going to come down to the Party membership. One of Corbyn’s options is to stand aside, allow Eagles to take the Party leadership on the express condition that if she does not win the upcoming General Election then she and every MP who supports her will also resign from both the Party and Parliament. If they fail in this, he then simply triggers another leadership vote by calling out their inaction on the Chilcot Report.
   • Olwyn 1.1

     29 June 2016 at 11:01 am

     Another thing Corbyn could do is to hang on until a candidate emerges that meets his approval, and then step aside and campaign for that candidate among the members. In fact that is what I think he will do. But I do not think it will ease the tension. Establishment Labour has reached the point where it cannot countenance representing the working class any longer, but cannot openly admit that since it needs their votes, if only on a least-worst basis. But the tighter the noose gets, the less people are interested in the least-worst. It is probable that Blair’s potential situation plays a part, but I think the fear of offending “the market” by letting the working class off the leash plays a larger part.
     • Kiwiri 1.1.1

       29 June 2016 at 2:18 pm

       Corbyn should go ahead and make real progress on further democratising the UK Labour Party:

       “Reselection, recall, a lock on leadership elections that only members can remove. … [b]ring it [on!].”

       http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/jeremy-corbyn-mandatory-reselection-of-labour-mps-leadership-contest_uk_5772b097e4b0d257114a9487
   • Bill 1.2

     29 June 2016 at 11:10 am

     So, I’ve no real idea of who is who and which current Labour MPs could reasonably be said to have a degree of culpability in the Iraq fiasco. But I’m guessing there are a few. Certainly there are prominent ex MPs in the firing line.

     Can you imagine the parliamentary debate on Chilcot if Corbyn is leader of the opposition?

     Possibly, if Blair isn’t protected by the Labour Party poo-pooing any idea of him being held up for war crimes (assuming something’s in the report) and he does stand trial, then a fair few prominent Labour MPs are going to be shitting themselves. Blair won’t go down alone.

     In somewhat related news, Jack Straw is currently fighting off efforts to get him in court over renditions.
     • weka 1.2.1

       29 June 2016 at 11:20 am

       “Blair won’t go down alone.”

       Do you mean MPs will also be charged? Or that they will be examined in the media and public etc and brought down that way?
       • Bill 1.2.1.1

         29 June 2016 at 11:28 am

         If Blair goes down pointing fingers and laying blame, then who knows how it could play out. Would you want to be an MP or an ex MP sitting on damning knowledge that is (ostensibly)only known to you and Tony Blair if Tony Blair is in the dock?
         • weka 1.2.1.1.1

           29 June 2016 at 11:30 am

           Ok, so either or both.
   • Cemetery Jones 1.3

     30 June 2016 at 10:54 am

     Tony Blair post-Chilcot: the only time in history where Corbyn’s opponents *haven’t* been neck-breakingly eager to hand something important over to bureaucrats in Belgium.
2. Anne 2

   29 June 2016 at 11:11 am

   On the basis of this gentleman, Craig Murray’s analysis, the “Labour Right” (more commonly known as the Blairites) would have moved against Corbyn at this time no matter if the vote had gone the other way? Given the relative closeness of the result it could easily have happened. The “damage limitation” theory comes across as totally plausible to me, but perhaps someone could enlighten me what ‘they’ would have done if the vote HAD gone the other way?

   Meanwhile, I suspect a significant number of ordinary MPs voted ‘no confidence’ out of fear of retribution if they had dared to do otherwise. Yes, it was a secret ballot but they would have been easy to identify by a process of elimination.
   • Bill 2.1

     29 June 2016 at 11:25 am

     If the vote had gone the other way, there would still have been talk of an early election anyway. And off the back of that talk, the same “We can’t win with Jeremy” brigade would have rolled out.

     Same shite either way.

     Think of how they rubbished the local election results although they were actually quite good. Or the anti-semitism nonsense that was used as a stick to beat up him and those who supported him. Throw in months and months of the press pumping out anti-Corbyn bullshit. Then there’s the whole thing of laying the blame for Scottish Labour’s demise at Corbyn’s door although it was the Blairites themselves who killed the Labour Party there.

     Remember how he was meant to increase the local election vote off a high? (ie – the vote was boosted last time around and was only ever going to drop) And how he was meant to resurrect the Scottish Labour Party with, I dunno, a wave of his hand?

     I’ll pick, that if he survives until after Chilcot and is still the active leader at the time of its release (one week away), then the rabid frenzies will abate – the ‘war’ will be considered lost.
     • Anne 2.1.1

       29 June 2016 at 12:10 pm

       Thanks for the clarification Bill.
3. weka 3

   29 June 2016 at 11:23 am

   Anyone know what the mechanisms are for replacing a leader of the UKLP? A reference would be good too.
   • lprent 3.1

     29 June 2016 at 12:32 pm

     Not sure exactly.

     However from some of the stuff I was reading this morning, I think that it simply requires 51 MPs to support a alternative candidate ton force a leadership election.

     Since there were 172 (?) who voted for no confidence, then I suspect that you should be able to find 51 who will support an alternative candidate.

     Ummm here we go – a BBC report.

     Anyone wishing to challenge Mr Corbyn needs the backing of 20% of Labour MPs and MEPs. Currently there are 229 Labour MPs and 20 Labour MEPs so any potential candidate needs the formal support of 50 of them.

     If a nominee secures this level of support they must then write to Labour’s general secretary Iain McNicol announcing their intention to run.

     No-one has come forward yet – although potential names said to be in the frame include former shadow business secretary Angela Eagle, former shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper and backbencher Dan Jarvis.

     The wiki page on the 2015 election procedure says

     Following the Collins review, the electoral college was replaced by a pure “one member, one vote” (OMOV) system. Candidates will be elected by members and registered and affiliated supporters, who all receive a maximum of one vote and all votes will be weighted equally.[10] This meant that, for example, members of Labour-affiliated trade unions needed to register as Labour supporters to vote.

     To stand, candidates now needed to be nominated by at least 15% of the Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP), i.e. 35 MPs, at that time. The vote, as in previous elections, was held under the alternative vote (instant-runoff) system. The deputy leadership election was held under the same rules.

     Since there were only 40 MPs opposing the no-confidence, I think that JC will be able to reach 35.

     The whole thing will be pretty messy because I suspect that the UK Labour party membership will hand out the same lesson to the MPs that the NZLP membership handed out to the our MPs. Whoever the right and careerist wings of of the party MPs puts up will get turfed out.

     The membership of the social democratic parties worldwide are not as interested in job prospects of legislators as the legislators themselves are. They’re working to elect them to do a task and whining about the task being set simply isn’t the way to do it. I don’t know the UKLP at all. But I suspect that there will be a short sharp and very painful lesson administered to the no-confidence MPs who haven’t done a lot of constituency work recently..
     • weka 3.1.1

       29 June 2016 at 12:52 pm

       Ta. I found this too, from on of the MPs, which pretty much surmises that the past week was unnecessary. They could have just gone straight to an open leadership nomination and vote.

       Mr Allen said: “I will not be participating in today’s vote of no confidence. It has no standing in our party’s rules. I will not give it, or any faction, any legitimacy by voting today.

       “If MP’s wish to remove a leader there is clear provision in the party’s rules for 51 MPs to nominate a named alternative. If such a step is taken, you and I and every other party member will have the opportunity to assess the records of the candidates and make our decision.

       “It is important however that everyone should then accept the decision of our party and support the Leader whoever it is.

       “In the meantime we should follow due process and cease all the orchestrated activity which is destroying the possibility of our party coming to government in 2020.”

       https://twitter.com/jimwaterson/status/747718822547841025

       (original link was dropping me into spam, but it’s an easy enough find on google).
4. dukeofurl 4

   29 June 2016 at 11:29 am

   The idea that charges could be laid on Blair is a fantasy. Yes it serves as a convenient whipping post but there is no UK law regarding war crimes ( other than the one for german soldiers only in WW2)
   The UN as well has no structure for those who gave a political direction to a war to be tried.
   • Bill 4.1

     29 June 2016 at 11:38 am

     Look up the International Criminal Court.

     Cases for war crimes can be referred there by individual states. That caveat, that a state must make the referral, is what was putting the brakes on the group of individual MPs having Blair tried for war crimes if the Chilcot report provides sufficient grounds for trial.

     Now think it all through in terms of Corbyn as leader of the Opposition as opposed to a lackey being leader of the Opposition.

     I’ll be back this evening. That should give even you enough time to grind those wee brain gears of yours.
5. Tory 5

   29 June 2016 at 12:33 pm

   “Dirty Politics”, Labour Party style
   • lprent 5.1

     29 June 2016 at 12:54 pm

     You mean clear and in the open?

     As opposed to (say) the Shipley method. Wait until your leader is offshore and then organise a coup.

     Or the Slater method. Make shit up about MPs and party officials you and your financial sponsors don’t like, and astroturf it across blogs to try to frame it onto the media.

     That upright behaviour that we expect of the right – how to be unprincipled arseholes.
6. James 6

   29 June 2016 at 12:37 pm

   As someone who is not a fan of labour in the UK (Having lived there many years under the labour government of the time), I find this very amusing.

   Corbyn I believe is unelectable – and have said so when he was standing originally.

   He believes he has the mandate of the members – which he does. So I agree he shouldn’t stand down. He is the leader that labour members want, voted for and deserve.

   The fact that I think he will be the death of the labour party as we know it in the UK is just a side benefit.
   • Colonial Viper 6.1

     29 June 2016 at 3:43 pm

     Corbyn I believe is unelectable – and have said so when he was standing originally.

     Labour’s by-election performance under Corbyn’s leadership has been outstanding.
     • James 6.1.1

       29 June 2016 at 5:16 pm

       Quite different to a general election.

       Hey – Im happy if he goes thru to the next general election. And Ill admit that I was wrong (so very very wrong) if he won.

       But Im pretty comfortable that he wont.
       • ropata 6.1.1.1

         29 June 2016 at 6:56 pm

         Were you also confident in the Brexit referendum keeping the status quo?
7. Kevin 7

   29 June 2016 at 12:50 pm

   “The problem is not his unelectability, the problem is we might elect him – and centrists from both parties will do anything to avoid a socialist PM.”

   Comment from The Guardian this morning.
   • Olwyn 7.1

     29 June 2016 at 2:38 pm

     Bang on! Yesterday I made a comment on another thread about Obama lacking hunger or urgency, which can be generalised to include much of the current parliamentary left in the English-speaking countries. But that lack of urgency only applies to the plight of their constituents – if anyone breaks ranks and starts taking the constituents seriously watch them run.
   • AB 7.2

     29 June 2016 at 3:24 pm

     Yes. Corbyn’s problem has never been unelectability. It’s his electability. His rather moderate ideas on the role of the social democratic state are shared by a fair chunk of the general population. But he will not be tolerated by the business, financial, media and political elites- not to mention the deep state and the military. Interesting times. Most likely he will be removed one way or another.
8. fisiani 8

   29 June 2016 at 1:26 pm

   Corbyn is a dyed in the wool Socialist. Some might say Marxist. This is a discredited 20th century political movement which briefly showed some promise but has universally been discredited given that it has never worked anywhere it has been tried. Corbyn has the cheek to turn up to work knowing that he is reviled by his colleagues and not wanted. An honourable person would have walked the plank. I predict he will remain the leader of what remains of the unelectable Labour Party.
   • adam 8.1

     29 June 2016 at 2:00 pm

     Again woolly think from you fisiani. Do you understand the difference between socialism and Marxism? Or indeed the similarities?

     Because fisiani, socialism worked in NZ for a very long time. A Socialised medical model is the only model that works – with the added bonus that it expands the knowledge base. Socialised housing means that people can reach their potential. And socialised work force means that people can concentrate on what is important to them. This lays a half decent platform so a meritocracy can operate.

     Instead we get your approach to politics which means ever man is for himself. The medical system slowly falls over, and no new research is done for researches sake. Only what is assumed will make money (never a good approach, because addictive drugs become the obvious choice at this point) . Speculative housing means we have empty houses whilst people sleep in cars and under bridges. And shall we talk about waste, and the narrowness of thinking. Actually here you are a shining star of that lack of intellectual growth under a free market.

     This is system is so far removed from a meritocracy that I hear so many right wingers say you are in favour of – it’s a sick joke. You’re approach to politics produces nepotism, woolly thinking, corruption and a decline of democracy. But sure have a go socialism or Marxism or what ever it is you are having a go at because again – you seem a product of this system of Lich.
   • crashcart 8.2

     29 June 2016 at 2:06 pm

     Going straight to Fox news lines now Fisi “Some might say” with no links to anyone other than your self saying.
   • UncookedSelachimorpha 8.3

     29 June 2016 at 3:53 pm

     I suppose to you Fisi, “dyed in the wool Socialist” has negative connotations. Not to me. Where’s the evidence that socialism doesn’t work? We need a lot more of it, in my opinion. Communism as per Soviet Russia etc is a completely other story, but not many are advocating that.

     I haven’t noticed neoliberalism working that super-well lately (or ever).
   • tiger mountain 8.4

     29 June 2016 at 4:29 pm

     fizzy anus doing what he does best…

     it might be news to millions in Scandinavia and the post WWII West that democratic socialism did not work, it is in fact monetarism–Thatcherism–Reaganism–Rogernomics and World Bank/IMF*/EU neo liberal austerity, that has blighted much of the world for the last 35 years
     * the WB and IMF have admitted latterly that meaningful “trickledown” failed to eventuate
   • ropata 8.5

     29 June 2016 at 7:09 pm

     Key is a dyed in the silk Capitalist. Some might say Fascist. This is a discredited 20th century political movement which briefly showed some promise but has universally been discredited given that it has never worked anywhere it has been tried, and leads to financial crises and economic disaster. Key has the cheek to turn up to work knowing that he is reviled by his colleagues and completely untrustworthy. An honourable person would have walked the plank. I predict his hubris and reliance on spin will continue to work on fools like Fisiani but his policies have failed NZ and his party’s incompetence and greed will end in nationwide revulsion and eventual oblivion.

     Gee this is fun, give me another one 😛
9. Siobhan 9

   29 June 2016 at 2:04 pm

   Why should a Party, and its Leader only exist if they are electable? Surely a Party and it’s Leader need to have beliefs and a clear policy vision, and (hell, why not) a moral position.
   If that is not what the electorate wants, well so be it.
   The Left and Labour, UK and NZ, have been chasing votes for a long time now and have transformed themselves into nothing more than a very slightly nicer’ version of National and the Tories.
   Time for a break up, Corbyn and his supporters as Labour, the others can form a new Party, maybe called ‘The Third Way’.
   • adam 9.1

     29 June 2016 at 2:12 pm

     “The Third way” is the ideological underpinning of the Blairite faction. A position put forward by the sociologist Anthony Giddens. Embraced by people like Tony Blair, Brown, and to some extent Obama.

     http://www.polity.co.uk/book.asp?ref=9780745622675

     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way
     • the pigman 9.1.1

       29 June 2016 at 8:54 pm

       *whoosh*
   • UncookedSelachimorpha 9.2

     29 June 2016 at 3:57 pm

     Agree!!
   • Chooky 9.3

     29 June 2016 at 5:19 pm

     +100 Siobhan…Corbyn should stay if he is the choice of the rank and file grassroots Labour membership

     …and I would love to see Tony Blair stand trial for war crimes

     …it would redeem the UK somewhat for its role in the Iraq fiasco…some sort of justice for the poor refugees in the Middle East
10. The lost sheep 10

    29 June 2016 at 2:10 pm

    Some couples grow together, some grow apart.
    It’s blinding clear isn’t it?
    The Center Left and Left Left can barely stand being in the same room any longer, let alone lie happily in bed.
    The marriage is over in all but deed, and divorce is the only option.

    The breakdown may be more advanced in some places than others, but this is generally true of the Left throughout the Western world, incl. Aotearoa.
    But as often happens in a dysfunctional relationship, the only people who can’t see the writing on the wall are the unhappy couple themselves.
    And as is also common, the denial is often connected with an awareness of the immediate trauma and high cost of divorce, and the long period of recovery that is often involved in getting back to a healthy situation.

    But if the love is gone, staying together will always produce the worst outcomes for everyone.
    So please – just get on with it.
11. fisiani 11

    29 June 2016 at 2:28 pm

    Grant Robertson entered Parliament in 2008 and has warmed the Opposition bench for the last 8 years of his life. He has never spent a day in Government and knows that he never will. Labour has lost its modus vivendi. Children no longer go up chimneys and we have a 40 hour week. Unemployment at 5.2% is the lowest since 2009 and more people are employed than ever before. This capitalist economy is going gangbusters growing about 3% a year, higher than forecast by Treasury. Socialism was a failed experiment of the 20th century. It’s a historical relic. Our growing economy enables us to provide free health care to kids and give a massive rise in benefits for those unable to find employment. Take off your cloth cap and join the 21st century.
    • adam 11.1

      29 June 2016 at 2:47 pm

      Unemployment through the late half or socialist part of the 20th century was lower than your figure. The child labour laws were introduced in the 19th century. Socialism is only a failure in your head, because you are a woolly thinker, and can’t accept facts.

      Free heath care to kids is socialism. What massive rise? The 25 dollars – which most landlords gobbled. Oh you compassionate conservative slum lord lover. And BFW because it was your lot that put the disabled, and the out of work in the finical gutter in the first place. You don’t get to crow, when you offer them crumbs after taking away the loaf.
    • mac1 11.2

      29 June 2016 at 3:36 pm

      “modus vivendi”, fisiani?

      Don’t you mean “raison d’être”? Or, “ratio vivendi” if my rusty Latin still works.

      Get better script writers. Misuse of terms which you should know the meaning of rather destroys your credibility, such as still remains here.
      • In Vino 11.2.1

        29 June 2016 at 4:51 pm

        Quite right mac1. Fisiani has a faulty modus cogitandi… I recommend urgent surgery.
        • mac1 11.2.1.1

          29 June 2016 at 8:05 pm

          Surgery for me, or him? I’d recommend radiation- 12 million volts of photons sheds a lot of light on a problem. 🙂
    • UncookedSelachimorpha 11.3

      29 June 2016 at 4:04 pm

      Where is this utopia you speak of?! Sounds like a Brighter Future, no less!

      Well DONE JK and his rich mates, they did it all for the rest of us!! The people sleeping in their cars, with only 10 hours work/week for minimum wage, killed at Talley’s, under a mountain of student debt, in a cold and mouldy home, starving hungry at primary school….etc…must be absolutely thrilled!!!

      (barf)
    • UncookedSelachimorpha 11.4

      29 June 2016 at 4:14 pm

      Fisi’s nonsense contrasts with some of George Monbiot’s words on the Grauniad today:

      “So here is where we find ourselves. The economic system is not working, except for the likes of Philip Green. Neoliberalism has not delivered the meritocratic nirvana its theorists promised, but a rentiers’ paradise, offering staggering returns to whoever grabs the castle first while leaving productive workers on the wrong side of the moat.

      The age of enterprise has become the age of unearned income, the age of the market the age of market failure, the age of opportunity a steel cage of zero-hours contracts, precarity and surveillance.”

      https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/28/brexit-disaster-crisis-changes-left
    • mikes 11.5

      29 June 2016 at 11:37 pm

      Fisiani, we live in a social democracy….(notice the word ‘social’)

      Just as a point of interest for you, the person named New Zealander of the 20th century was a social democrat.

      “provide free health care to kids and give a massive rise in benefits for those unable to find employment. …” – Yep, that’s socialism for ya.
12. Adrian 12

    29 June 2016 at 2:48 pm

    Good to finally see the battle lines drawn, about time for the neo liberal left to go and form their own party, hopefully the remains of that same disastrous crew will leave our Labour party some time soon as well.
    • Vinnie 12.1

      29 June 2016 at 7:55 pm

      Great interview on “against the grain” with Doug Henwood along these lines. https://kpfa.org/player/?audio=236764
13. Puckish Rogue 13

    29 June 2016 at 2:56 pm

    Jeffery Archer is probably going to sell another best seller or two out of this
14. Mrs Brillo 14

    29 June 2016 at 3:28 pm

    I’d like to draw some attention to a very thoughtful piece by LitLov (a Cambridge academic) in her blog Tales from the Reading Room, which addresses Brexit and Corbyn and unwelcome changes to British character, policies and priorities.

    Excerpt:
    “What makes me despair is this: the years since the Second World War have been some of the most peaceful and prosperous in UK history. And what have we done with them? We have worsened climate change and destroyed the environment, we have put house buying out of reach of our children, who are now leaving university with massive debts (when we had our education for free!), and we have voted to shut them out of Europe, out of 27 countries where they could have lived and worked. And we have just voted to set back scientific research for the foreseeable future – there’s a reason why 105 university Vice-Chancellors wrote jointly in favour of Remain, pointing out how dependent their research was on European collaboration and funding. We have not made a better world for our children. We haven’t even preserved the one we had. And now we’re reducing their opportunities to find solutions and improvements. We are what we do (being complicit is an act) and we have been selfish, profligate and greedy.”

    It has a lot of light to shed on similar changes in this country:
    https://litlove.wordpress.com/
    • RedLogix 14.1

      29 June 2016 at 6:27 pm

      It breaks my heart that Jeremy Corbyn, who appears to be a genuinely principled and decent man, is unreadable in our current culture.

      This.
      • Colonial Viper 14.1.1

        29 June 2016 at 6:35 pm

        No one who is “genuinely principled and decent” has a chance against these people.
    • ropata 14.2

      29 June 2016 at 7:22 pm

      +1 well said, thanks for the link & quote
15. Richardrawshark 15

    29 June 2016 at 4:47 pm

    No WMD’s found. But holy cow, the fallout’s horrendous isn’t it /sarc
16. Sanctuary 16

    29 June 2016 at 6:01 pm

    Let’s join some more dots!

    http://www.thecanary.co/2016/06/28/truth-behind-labour-coup-really-began-manufactured-exclusive/

    The PR firm orchestrating the anti-Corbyn coup is full of Blairites. This battle is really all about a fight for the soul of UK Labour.
    • Colonial Viper 16.1

      29 June 2016 at 6:32 pm

      Firms like this do not do this kind of work without serious $$$ in fees. Who is bankrolling this campaign is the next question. Blair himself? Blair through intermediaries?
      • Anne 16.1.1

        29 June 2016 at 6:52 pm

        Lord Ashcroft?
17. stunned mullet 17

    29 June 2016 at 8:07 pm

    What crime do you have to commit to be appointed the British Ambassador to Uzbekistan.
18. the pigman 18

    29 June 2016 at 8:51 pm

    Essential reading on the PR machine active against Corbyn within Labour: https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/
    • Adrian Thornton 18.1

      29 June 2016 at 9:35 pm

      Thanks pigman, good link there, typical amoral PR to be expected from a political ideology that has run out of ideas as of to how to legitimize their actual existence in any half decent society.
19. Gosman 19

    30 June 2016 at 9:39 am

    Do you realise that by casting the vast majority of the Labour MP’s as being in thrall to Blair and trying to stop him being sent to trial as a War criminal you cast aspersions on the democratic process that the Labour party undertakes to select their candidates in elections. Despite you disagreeing with them these people still came through a democratic selection process AND then won their seats in Parliament. You can’t simply get rid of them because you think they are part of some sort of conspiracy to protect a former PM.
20. Gosman 20

    30 June 2016 at 9:39 am

    Do you realise that by casting the vast majority of the Labour MP’s as being in thrall to Blair and trying to stop him being sent to trial as a War criminal you cast aspersions on the democratic process that the Labour party undertakes to select their candidates in elections? Despite you disagreeing with them these people still came through a democratic selection process AND then won their seats in Parliament. You can’t simply get rid of them because you think they are part of some sort of conspiracy to protect a former PM.
21. save nz 21

    30 June 2016 at 10:07 am

    Great post. The Uk public were led astray by fake allegations of WMD to justify the war in Iraq. Apparently it was decided a year earlier with Bush on a handshake and Blair just made the case for war on that, not for Britain.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS