[TopHat]

I'm actually working on an Amendment along those lines - a Policy Review. A non-legislative way of discussing what the House has done.

[Rakas21]

Does the entirety of the Labour party condone the militant actions of some of its MP's?

I refer to the transport petition in which some members have voted against railway investment simply because it is not nationalised (a 'if its privatised then it should get nothing' approach), the effect of this being that without the needed investment the customer would receive a worse service at a higher cost.

Also, when will Labour be attempting to nationalise the railways, i will take great enjoyment in defeating such a leftist bill.

[Mechie]

(Original post by Rakas21)
Does the entirety of the Labour party condone the militant actions of some of its MP's?

I refer to the transport petition in which some members have voted against railway investment simply because it is not nationalised (a 'if its privatised then it should get nothing' approach), the effect of this being that without the needed investment the customer would receive a worse service at a higher cost.

Also, when will Labour be attempting to nationalise the railways, i will take great enjoyment in defeating such a leftist bill.

You're missing the point, dear fellow. The entirety of the Labour party doesn't have to condone the views of our MPs. If someone wants to take a specific view on something (within reason) then they can, it's not as if everyone has be believe in the same thing within the party.

And I'm not going to answer that question as it contains such Rakasy arrogance and competitiveness that I don't like

[stanlas]

Does the Labour party no longer support increased spending on infrastructure and stimulus to the economy?

[stanlas]

To clarify what I meant in my question, I am of course talking about the fact that out of 14 MPS, so far 6 have voted against and 3 have abstained on proposals to spend money on much needed spending projects, which have clear and well calculated benefits for the economy. I can't help noticing how the party has not actually debated against the matter in the petition thread, only to suddenly vote against the petition (actually, that is not entirely true; one of your members did eloquently comment 'no,' followed by the well argued explanation that 'HS2 is awesome') .

I also can't help noticing how both the prime minister and the deputy prime minister, who are economically more right wing than this party, have backed the proposals at petition stage. Perhaps this is not surprising from a party whose leader once infamously declared "abstained because I don't care" on important crossrail proposals, while he was prime minister.

[JPKC]

Oh, so that's why you've joined the Lib Dems!

[stanlas]

(Original post by JPKC)
Oh, so that's why you've joined the Lib Dems!

Not the only reason of course (and certainly not the main one). I found that I generally tended to agree more with the Lib Dems on most issues.

[JPKC]

(Original post by stanlas)
Not the only reason of course (and certainly not the main one). I found that I generally tended to agree more with the Lib Dems on most issues.

They don't have any opinions on most issues, so I'm not quite sure I get that. What are these issues? They favour HS2, you don't, so it can't be just transport. I mean, I can see why you'd join them because as a Party they're small, soulless and listless so you'll basically be driving their agenda if you keep writing bills profusely. Gluck.

[stanlas]

(Original post by JPKC)
They don't have any opinions on most issues, so I'm not quite sure I get that. What are these issues?

You seem to have a personal dislike of the Lib Dems. If you want to discover their policies, then look no further then the election manifesto. The only reason why it has been difficult to enact them so far is because the Lib Dems only have 5 MPs out of 50.

(Original post by JPKC)
They favour HS2, you don't, so it can't be just transport.

True, though I was never against it; I just wanted further inquiry into the matter. Besides, on their other transport policies (and they do have quite a lot of ideas) I agree with them.

(Original post by JPKC)
I mean, I can see why you'd join them because as a Party they're small, soulless and listless so you'll basically be driving their agenda if you keep writing bills profusely. Gluck.

Not everyone acts out of opportunism. If I only wanted more power, I would have joined Labour who have almost three times as many MPs (and hence increase my chances of being one).

Anyway, this is the Labour Question Time. If you have further questions, please post them on the Lib Dem one

[JPKC]

(Original post by stanlas)
You seem to have a personal dislike of the Lib Dems. If you want to discover their policies, then look no further then the election manifesto. The only reason why it has been difficult to enact them so far is because the Lib Dems only have 5 MPs out of 50.

I don't hate them I just think they're a bit crap, there are definitely very clear reasons for this view based on their actions as a RL party and on here. And the 5/50 is brill, both you and I have produced more bills as individuals than they have as a whole party this term.

Not everyone acts out of opportunism. If I only wanted more power, I would have joined Labour who have almost three times as many MPs (and hence increase my chances of being one).

The Lib Dems sure do!

[TopHat]

(Original post by stanlas)
To clarify what I meant in my question, I am of course talking about the fact that out of 14 MPS, so far 6 have voted against and 3 have abstained on proposals to spend money on much needed spending projects, which have clear and well calculated benefits for the economy. I can't help noticing how the party has not actually debated against the matter in the petition thread, only to suddenly vote against the petition (actually, that is not entirely true; one of your members did eloquently comment 'no,' followed by the well argued explanation that 'HS2 is awesome').

I can't speak for my party, as people are by and large free to make their own choice. Personally, I voted in favour. However, you are quite right that I did not debate in favour of the petition, beyond offering my vote. I have been concerned with the Monarchy referendum and my exams lately, so I hope that's a valid explanation as to why I've not been as active in Bills, Motions and Petitions, lately.

[Birchington]

(Original post by JPKC)
As a Party they're small, soulless and listless.

Not sure that's correct, somehow.

[paperclip]

(Original post by stanlas)
You seem to have a personal dislike of the Lib Dems. If you want to discover their policies, then look no further then the election manifesto. The only reason why it has been difficult to enact them so far is because the Lib Dems only have 5 MPs out of 50.

That's a load of bull. The socialist party has worked with less MPs in the past and still managed to get reasonable offers of coalitions and bill support because people know that we spend a lot of energy/time writing and researching bills, and that we have an opinion on everything. The libertarians have been the same in the past. The only way that this would negatively impact the Liberal Democrats is if they had little ideology/bases for their bills (which is evident in your division on the monarchy) and motivation to become successful. Sitting on the sidelines complaining you don't have enough seats isn't gonna get you anywhere, you need to earn those seats. Indeed, the socialists only had 3 more seats then you this term, but have picked one up (from JPKC) by demonstrating we are a driven party.

For a centrist party this shouldn't be difficult. The socialist party typically has to make decisions between writing far left bills that won't pass, or betraying our values in order to win votes from Labour and the Lib Dems. Your party can attempt to appeal to any side of the political spectrum, as you lack a backbone.

[Birchington]

This thread is for discussing Labour, and it is a shame to see some are using it purely to make unparliamentary attacks on the Lib Dems.

[TopHat]

Why is there all this antagonism? The left is spending more time bickering amongst thenselves than they are trying to write good bills. I argued within our party for establishing a United Left coalition of the Socialists, Labour and the Liberal Democrats to take government, and I still think we could do. Sure, some of us are more extreme or more moderate than others, but we all believe in broadly the same principles. But no. Instead we spend more time picking out practically irrelevant differences and magnifying them into casus belli. Why can't we just get along better? When I joined this House, I was actually stuck for a very long time between whether I should join the Socialists, Labour, or the Liberal Democrats, and I'm not afraid to admit it. I admire and respect all three of the parties. It just disappoints me that we're all so unwilling to co-operate.

[Birchington]

I agree, Tophat. I would love to see further co-operation on the left, but unfortunately some seem to have narrow-minded vested interests or vendettas that damage relations in the House.

[stanlas]

(Original post by Birchington)
I agree, Tophat. I would love to see further co-operation on the left, but unfortunately some seem to have narrow-minded vested interests or vendettas that damage relations in the House.

(Original post by TopHat)
QFA

I agree as well. I apologise if my comment was interpreted as a general attack on Labour. I am attacking a specific policy/voting pattern, and certainly not the party as a whole.

[paperclip]

(Original post by TopHat)
Why is there all this antagonism? The left is spending more time bickering amongst thenselves than they are trying to write good bills. I argued within our party for establishing a United Left coalition of the Socialists, Labour and the Liberal Democrats to take government, and I still think we could do. Sure, some of us are more extreme or more moderate than others, but we all believe in broadly the same principles. But no. Instead we spend more time picking out practically irrelevant differences and magnifying them into casus belli. Why can't we just get along better? When I joined this House, I was actually stuck for a very long time between whether I should join the Socialists, Labour, or the Liberal Democrats, and I'm not afraid to admit it. I admire and respect all three of the parties. It just disappoints me that we're all so unwilling to co-operate.

The liberal democrats are not 'the left'. The liberal democrats write bills about unsupervised tanning shops whilst the socialists make efforts to actually make a difference in reality, this takes considerable time and energy. Moreover, until recently, i was defending the Liberal Democrats and morgsie in particular when i was criticising Matt L for his unjust attacks, despite not agreeing with his ideology. However, as this seems to have been a fruitless endeavour, has resulted in our party/members being attacked and his politics are questionable at best, i can safely say that i have no interest in working with him or his party whilst he remains in leadership. That being said, Birchington seems to be quite a reasonable fellow, and whilst i don't know much about his ideology i wouldn't be against working with him*. The labour party i'm indifferent towards, and therefore would work with, although i can pick out some MPs i disagree severely with - hence a coalition is out of bounds. The socialist party isn't interested in forming any coalition that leads to compromises of ideology, and as such, labour would have to make a grand shift to the left to appeal to us.

*This is why i maintain that the liberal democrats are a farce of a party. They attempt to unite liberalism with social democracy, which evidently doesn't work - in the RL party there are vast divisions between the yellow and orange bookers. Such a division is also evident in their TSR party at the moment, which is probably why they get little done. Liberalism entails the assumption that the free market is the best medium of exchange, something that should undermine the values of any social democrat. Any social democrat within the liberal democrats need to ask themselves what they truly believe

[DebatingGreg]

(Original post by stanlas)
To clarify what I meant in my question, I am of course talking about the fact that out of 14 MPS, so far 6 have voted against and 3 have abstained on proposals to spend money on much needed spending projects, which have clear and well calculated benefits for the economy. I can't help noticing how the party has not actually debated against the matter in the petition thread, only to suddenly vote against the petition (actually, that is not entirely true; one of your members did eloquently comment 'no,' followed by the well argued explanation that 'HS2 is awesome') .

I also can't help noticing how both the prime minister and the deputy prime minister, who are economically more right wing than this party, have backed the proposals at petition stage. Perhaps this is not surprising from a party whose leader once infamously declared "abstained because I don't care" on important crossrail proposals, while he was prime minister.

I was 99% sure I voted for it, but apprently I abstained I can't really see how it happened, as they're not next to each other on the poll, but I guess I was on touchscreen, but still it's weird.

Anyway, I'll ask Metro to change my vote, and thanks for posting that

[RoryS]

Can we keep the discussion on here related to only asking/answering questions Labour related? This is what this thread is for...