Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by davidmarsh01)
    Personally, the reason I abstained on your petition was because I disagree with re-examining HS2. I see it as an essential upgrade to our nations infrastructure, and should be looked at being extended, not being re-examined on whether we should have it at all. I agreed with the rest of it to an extent, I'm not exactly an expert in trains though, so I decided to abstain instead of voting against. I honestly don't see what you're trying to achieve by slandering Labour because some of our MPs disagreed with you, or even just didn't fully agree with you.
    As I wrote later on, my intention was never to slander the party as a whole. I simply want to find out why such a large part of the party has opposed something which in theory it would usually support (increased infrastructure spending), without giving any reasons against in the debate thread.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by JPKC)
    QFA
    I respect, but disagree with your opinion. You're probably best to directly QFA Morgsie if you want a reply to your question.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
    So much win in this post Clippy!
    Merci. I suspect you'll like our edits to the abandoned housing bill too
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (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 moment I saw this I almost threw up in my mouth. If that ever were to happen, I'd walk out on the Socialists without a moment's hesitation. There is absolutely nothing similar between Labour, the Lib Dems and the Socialists. The only similarity that we have to Labour is that, apparently, we both have a so-called "love" for Socialism. However, our love for Socialism involves the preservation of the ideology, whereas Labour's love for Socialism involves tearing it apart completely so that not even those on the left of the spectrum would feel inclined to trust it. And the less said about the Lib Dems, the better.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PoGo HoPz)
    The moment I saw this I almost threw up in my mouth. If that ever were to happen, I'd walk out on the Socialists without a moment's hesitation. There is absolutely nothing similar between Labour, the Lib Dems and the Socialists. The only similarity that we have to Labour is that, apparently, we both have a so-called "love" for Socialism. However, our love for Socialism involves the preservation of the ideology, whereas Labour's love for Socialism involves tearing it apart completely so that not even those on the left of the spectrum would feel inclined to trust it. And the less said about the Lib Dems, the better.
    That's... quite sad. Respectfully, I think your distrust of us is helpful to neither us, nor you. I'm somewhat puzzled as to how you think a socialist society would work - surely it would rely on give and take, and the ability to compromise your own desires for the desires of your neighbour, to make a communal decision? I see nothing communal about your attitude. I think your attitude is damaging you. There is only one piece of legislature in the entire TSR statute book that was sponsored by the Socialist Party alone - the Faith Schools Act. The Socialists have less passed sponsored Bills than any other party, even UKIP. Perhaps you could get more material through the House if you were willing to listen a little more. I'd like to work alongside you, and I'm interested in what you say. It just seems like you are cutting your nose off to spite your face - the "purity" of your ideology is preventing you from actually passing anything.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by TopHat)
    The Socialists have less passed sponsored Bills than any other party, even UKIP. Perhaps you could get more material through the House if you were willing to listen a little more. I'd like to work alongside you, and I'm interested in what you say. It just seems like you are cutting your nose off to spite your face - the "purity" of your ideology is preventing you from actually passing anything.
    Absolutely spot on - it needed saying.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Birchington)
    Absolutely spot on - it needed saying.
    Harsher than was necessary. The Socialist position has been, for a very long time I might add, to stand up for socialist principles and not water them down just to meet the approval of other parties. For a good while I was able to bridge the gap between the Socialists and Labour by putting forward proposals that stood up to the Right. But I could be guaranteed that the one party who would vote no en bloc would be the Liberal Democrats. I would garner votes from Libers, from UKIP (well Paddy) and occasionally secular Tories but never Liberal Democrats. So the point TopHat makes about building a unified Left involving your party, I'm afraid is daft. There are two parties that can and should work together - the Labour Party and the Socialists. But it would require a lot from both sides to convince one and other that unity is possible. With the current Labour leadership, I don't think the Socialists would bite.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
    Harsher than was necessary. The Socialist position has been, for a very long time I might add, to stand up for socialist principles and not water them down just to meet the approval of other parties. For a good while I was able to bridge the gap between the Socialists and Labour by putting forward proposals that stood up to the Right. But I could be guaranteed that the one party who would vote no en bloc would be the Liberal Democrats. I would garner votes from Libers, from UKIP (well Paddy) and occasionally secular Tories but never Liberal Democrats. So the point TopHat makes about building a unified Left involving your party, I'm afraid is daft. There are two parties that can and should work together - the Labour Party and the Socialists. But it would require a lot from both sides to convince one and other that unity is possible. With the current Labour leadership, I don't think the Socialists would bite.
    Same could be said with regards Labour and Lib Dem's working together. There is a group amongst Labour who would like us (Lab+Lib Dem's) to work together.

    Working together involves negotiations and compromises.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Morgsie)
    Same could be said with regards Labour and Lib Dem's working together. There is a group amongst Labour who would like us to work together.
    There may be a group within Labour that wants to work with the Lib Dems but that would certainly sour relations with the Socialists. Given the latter have more MPs, it would make more sense to work effectively with the Socialists rather than trying to forge some kind of centrist bloc. Why open up the entire left flank to the Socialist Party when you would forge a power Leftist bloc and balance the increasingly powerful Rightist block in the House. That would force your party to choose. Is it an Orange Booker like you, or a social democrat like Birchington.

    Working together involves compromises.
    Yes, I'm familiar with the notion of pragmatism but you can only work together if you have common enough ground.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Morgsie)
    Same could be said with regards Labour and Lib Dem's working together. There is a group amongst Labour who would like us (Lab+Lib Dem's) to work together.

    Working together involves negotiations and compromises.
    I actually think that there are compatible areas between the Tories and your party and hope that we can work together in the future, potentially even in a future coalition.
    Offline

    12
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    I actually think that there are compatible areas between the Tories and your party and hope that we can work together in the future, potentially even in a future coalition.
    Bump
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by MacCuishy)
    Bump
    Explination?
    Offline

    12
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Explination?
    I suppose that you will normally be able to look to the Libers for support in most of your bills.

    Not in a coalition. The Libers as a party are quite anti-coalition.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Are you for or against public sector pay freezes and pension reform?
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by MacCuishy)
    I suppose that you will normally be able to look to the Libers for support in most of your bills.

    Not in a coalition. The Libers as a party are quite anti-coalition.
    Indeed, there is a good amount of support for co-operation, its a shame you guys rejected a coalition offer last time.

    With that being said, Ukip in its current guise is brilliant, a very good coalition partner.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Indeed, there is a good amount of support for co-operation, its a shame you guys rejected a coalition offer last time.
    Being in government isn't something that interests us generally. We manage to pass bills that stick with our principles easily enough without having to cater to negotiations/whips in a coalition.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    So when will the Labour party be removing Top Hat as an MP, will it be before or after he votes against the minimum wage?

    If you don't understand the motivations for my question, here is a history of the labour party, http://www.labour.org.uk/history_of_the_labour_party
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
    Harsher than was necessary. The Socialist position has been, for a very long time I might add, to stand up for socialist principles and not water them down just to meet the approval of other parties. For a good while I was able to bridge the gap between the Socialists and Labour by putting forward proposals that stood up to the Right. But I could be guaranteed that the one party who would vote no en bloc would be the Liberal Democrats. I would garner votes from Libers, from UKIP (well Paddy) and occasionally secular Tories but never Liberal Democrats. So the point TopHat makes about building a unified Left involving your party, I'm afraid is daft. There are two parties that can and should work together - the Labour Party and the Socialists. But it would require a lot from both sides to convince one and other that unity is possible. With the current Labour leadership, I don't think the Socialists would bite.
    I am trying to forge stronger relation between Labour and the Socialists!
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by davidmarsh01)
    I am trying to forge stronger relation between Labour and the Socialists!
    You should try to make sure that your MPs represent this in the House (support for the anti-NMW bill is a bit disconcerting), and it's difficult enough that several of them have negative histories within the Socialist Party. I personally would like to see these closer relations happen, so I'll be arguing for them. I think we both believe in democratic socialism, we both just need to show it more - Labour could focus on policies that matter (the bill you have in the house is a good example, and you've said yourself that you like the Scottish Socialist Party so maybe look at them for some ideas, perhaps?). Likewise, the Socialists could maybe have a more tolerant attitude towards you guys. It's silly to write you all off as soft-left centrists.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by davidmarsh01)
    I am trying to forge stronger relation between Labour and the Socialists!
    There are some in your Party who want to rebuild the bridge between our Parties and have good working relations with us.

    Your approach is concerning because possibly the moderates may feel alienated and isolated.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: December 8, 2017
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.