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

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cheese_Monster)
    This isn't a character assassination, it is genuine concern for your party. You seem to want to duck your head into the sand, I see a party that has a large MP grouping that is faltering and as my previous posts in the Labour party question thread have indicated, I'm more interested in seeing your party produce more legislation, which would be beneficial to the left and health of the House as a whole. And to assume that my concern for your party would result in you voting against the Green Party is petty and superficial. I will not agree with your party just to retain your support, i'll stick to my principles.
    Yes, and I'll stick to my principles - one of which is to stand by the party when it is attacked by others. Labour's woes are internal and I don't think your attempt at interference really helps, however sympathetic you feel it is. That's not burying my head in the sand, that's paying more attention to where the problem lies - weak leadership, poor activity, and a lack of coherence to bind us all together. In neither circumstance can you do anything.

    Good for you. I'm not lecturing you, if you check my original post it was a question. Also that's incredibly patronising to use the word 'newbie' in a condescending way as if my opinion has no weight at all.
    Interpret it as you will, I'm still not interested in your lecture.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
    Oh for goodness sake. Do you, or CLS94 for that matter, really expect any of us to go "yeah, we know, we're ****"? Or do you expect some kind of fight against that accusation. If it's the former, then jesus you need to get a better understanding of loyalty.
    Rather proved my point there. Incorrect assumptions piss people off.

    As it happens I do think Labour is decaying, for many reasons, but so is most of the HoC. I provided a huge boost to Green activity in the term's first month and now I've gotten bored of it. Similarly, others have finished exams or become available for other reasons. I'm sure labour is capable of regeneration
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    This is nothing new. In the 14th (by the sounds of it, it started earlier) both the Tories and Labour pretty much went into a coma however after a period of time correct procedure took over and VoNC's in leadership took place, by the end of the term things were moving again and this led into the most active parliament on record for all parties. Yes, it's unfortunate that Labour in particular are down at the moment however just look at the Socialists who were dead for the first part of the 15th but got moving again. As Adorno says the problem is internal and either the leadership will be replaced or the leadership will take measures to stimulate activity, you've just got to leave them to it because so long as there are an active few one will at some point use his/her initiative.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    This is nothing new. In the 14th (by the sounds of it, it started earlier) both the Tories and Labour pretty much went into a coma however after a period of time correct procedure took over and VoNC's in leadership took place, by the end of the term things were moving again and this led into the most active parliament on record for all parties. Yes, it's unfortunate that Labour in particular are down at the moment however just look at the Socialists who were dead for the first part of the 15th but got moving again. As Adorno says the problem is internal and either the leadership will be replaced or the leadership will take measures to stimulate activity, you've just got to leave them to it because so long as there are an active few one will at some point use his/her initiative.
    I can't see how VONC's would work though if there's no-one active to vote on it.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Tactical Nuclear Penguin)
    I can't see how VONC's would work though if there's no-one active to vote on it.
    We don't know what's happening in their sub-forum. Back in the 14th the House was pretty much completely dead from November-January largely due to the Tories and Labour however within the parties people like me and David obviously took the initiative because by the end of January i was VoNC'ing the old leader and the party machine was moving again and so we had a few bills and motions out as did Labour.

    Given the size of the party i'd be very surprised if there isn't somebody who's interested in the game enough to gain traction and make a name for himself which may lead to long term success. In my case i probably would not have won had i gone for the leader election in November because i was a new bog standard MP however in just those 2 months of lacking activity i began to take the initiative, got the party machine going and VoNC'd the leader. In two months i'd gone from Mr average to having the support of 80% of MP's. I then by Mhoc standards did okay for myself.

    I'd also add that the mass PM function can affect these thing significantly. In the VoNC i led, 30+ votes were cast in the first 12 hours.

    ................................ .

    Note to Labour - Purely hypothetical, not suggesting you actually do it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
    Yes, and if you had come here with that accusation, I would have agreed with you entirely.

    I'm afraid that I find your original charge wanting for two reasons: the first is that it has zero effect on the internal rot and comes across as merely dancing around a fire in merriment, so I find it distasteful. The second is that it's counterproductive from the point of view of the Left. Labour is dormant, no-one is in a position to deny that, but to aggravate the few remaining active members who would naturally vote with 75% of your legislative programme is folly.

    Y'know, there was a time when I was just about the only active Labour member here and I produced several bills to ensure the semblance of activity from the party. In other words: I have been in this position before and don't need to be lectured by a newbie.

    Things may change, they may not; but until they do, I would have thought it in your interest to retain the support of the few Labour people who are active.
    To be honest with you if it's a choice between a corpse-like Labour Party producing very little legislation and debate in the house with a handful of active members and the inability to fill all their seats at the beginning of the term or an election without the Labour party where the Greens and Socialists may attract your votes towards our parties and thus your seats back to active members the latter would be better for us, and arguably the house.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    You should have been around during the last government, 8 different MP's produced bills and another 4 non-MP's produced bills or motions. Since then the weight of creation has moved towards me i think.
    Only 8 of your MPs producing bill's or motions in an entire government over the course of a term is still pretty dire.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Mad Dog)
    To be honest with you if it's a choice between a corpse-like Labour Party producing very little legislation and debate in the house with a handful of active members and the inability to fill all their seats at the beginning of the term or an election without the Labour party where the Greens and Socialists may attract your votes towards our parties and thus your seats back to active members the latter would be better for us, and arguably the house.
    You may be right, in all honesty, but that's not a choice that can be made by self-righteous folk like T&J and interfering, though clearly sympathetic, folk like Cheese Monster. Labour has to determine its own future; that is how it should be, surely?
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by The Mad Dog)
    Only 8 of your MPs producing bill's or motions in an entire government over the course of a term is still pretty dire.
    We only had 14 MP's at the time and as i said non MP's also did stuff. At any rate we produced the most bills and motions of any government so it can't have been that dire.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cheese_Monster)
    This isn't a character assassination, it is genuine concern for your party. You seem to want to duck your head into the sand, I see a party that has a large MP grouping that is faltering and as my previous posts in the Labour party question thread have indicated, I'm more interested in seeing your party produce more legislation, which would be beneficial to the left and health of the House as a whole.
    Feel free to join if you're that concerned.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mechie)
    Feel free to join if you're that concerned.
    This kind of attitude is utterly ridiculous, the idea that nobody else in the house should be concerned about the activity levels of the largest party is stupid. People aren't trying to have a go at your party here, but logic tells us that are party that holds nearly a quater of the houses seats struggling with activity to the level you guys clearly are isn't a good thing for either your party, or more importantly for the rest of the house..

    Whilst it is the internal affairs of your party to sort out yourselves, our concern is more for the house as a whole than your party. And personally if Labour died tomorrow I'd be glad. You unfairly attract a large proportion of electoral success despite having little in the way of achievements for it and are woefully inactive consistently. Your one of the three parties who can't even scrape together a description for the About the House of Commons page which from an outsiders point of view speaks volumes about your leadership skills, three members of your leadership team and none of them taking the initiative to write/get the party to write a tiny piece for the page despite it being requested months ago is ridiculously inept.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Mad Dog)
    This kind of attitude is utterly ridiculous, the idea that nobody else in the house should be concerned about the activity levels of the largest party is stupid. People can be concerned, yes, but the best way to act on that concern would be to join to try to help them improve. Heck, I joined the greens to help get them up and running.

    People aren't trying to have a go at your party here, but logic tells us that are party that holds nearly a quater of the houses seats struggling with activity to the level you guys clearly are isn't a good thing for either your party, or more importantly for the rest of the house.. It isn't, no, but the Labour party's main concern isn't to be good for the house. It's to try to further ideas that we believe in.

    Whilst it is the internal affairs of your party to sort out yourselves, our concern is more for the house as a whole than your party. And personally if Labour died tomorrow I'd be glad. Good for you. Fortunately you don't decide which parties exist and which do not.

    You unfairly attract a large proportion of electoral success despite having little in the way of achievements for it and are woefully inactive consistently. Not really consistently, lately we've been inactive, but it is nothing like consistently. To be honest, you've not really been here long enough to pass judgement on how consistently Labour are inactive.

    Your one of the three parties who can't even scrape together a description for the About the House of Commons page which from an outsiders point of view speaks volumes about your leadership skills, three members of your leadership team and none of them taking the initiative to write a tiny piece for the page despite it being requested months ago is ridiculously inept. Oops.
    Replies in bold.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mechie)
    People can be concerned, yes, but the best way to act on that concern would be to join to try to help them improve. Heck, I joined the greens to help get them up and running.
    Signing up to say you support it in the party formation thread then never contributing to the party thereafter is a pretty loose definition of joining, and that kind of passive activity isn't going to revive the lingering corpse of your party. When you have 12 MPs you should be trying to boost their individual activity and work out why some of those 12 members who on the whole are voting aren't contributing more, you can blame it on exams but that's ignoring the fact this is clearly a much more long-term issue.

    It isn't, no, but the Labour party's main concern isn't to be good for the house. It's to try to further ideas that we believe in.
    Of course, but if you don't have many active participants, your not exactly going to be in a position to further your own ideas. The primary concerns of parties should be generating debate both internally and within the house, it's only took a handful of people to boost the Greens fortunes into a much wider activity base recently.

    Good for you. Fortunately you don't decide which parties exist and which do not.
    No, fortunately for you a stupidly lenient clause of the guidance document does.

    Not really consistently, lately we've been inactive, but it is nothing like consistently. To be honest, you've not really been here long enough to pass judgement on how consistently Labour are inactive.
    I've been following the house for a year and your activity's been below any reasonable level for the majority of the time, the socialists pretty much ran the last government and capitalised on your inactivity - it's the elephant in the room that the way the socialists used you last term is the reason you lot avoided governments/coalitions this term.

    Oops.
    Given that it's a useful advertising tool linked in the Newbie FAQ thread and Helpful links sidebar that may claw in a couple of members - which is all it takes,oops indeed.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Mad Dog)
    Signing up to say you support it in the party formation thread then never contributing to the party thereafter is a pretty loose definition of joining, and that kind of passive activity isn't going to revive the lingering corpse of your party. When you have 12 MPs you should be trying to boost their individual activity and work out why some of those 12 members who on the whole are voting aren't contributing more, you can blame it on exams but that's ignoring the fact this is clearly a much more long-term issue.
    Exams have been a big issue with us over recent weeks. We're just that clever we've all got important exams to study for, so it's understandable that activity would be lower, compared with other parties which, naturally, aren't nearly as intelligent

    Of course, but if you don't have many active participants, your not exactly going to be in a position to further your own ideas. The primary concerns of parties should be generating debate both internally and within the house, it's only took a handful of people to boost the Greens fortunes into a much wider activity base recently.
    It is, and we're trying to sort it. We don't need your interference, unless perhaps you'd want to join to help us.

    No, fortunately for you a stupidly lenient clause of the guidance document does.
    Feel free to put forward an amendment changing it. Out of interest, how would you want party closing procedures to be run?

    I've been following the house for a year and your activity's been below any reasonable level for the majority of the time, the socialists pretty much ran the last government and capitalised on your inactivity - it's the elephant in the room that the way the socialists used you last term is the reason you lot avoided governments/coalitions this term.
    Yup, although that's not exactly a thing that should be used to attack us. We acknowledge that our activity is lower than it should be, and should be helped to get back on track, not attacked for it. It's in the interests of everyone to have a strong Labour party.

    Given that it's a useful advertising tool linked in the Newbie FAQ thread and Helpful links sidebar that may claw in a couple of members - which is all it takes,oops indeed.
    Yup, it should've been done.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mechie)
    Exams have been a big issue with us over recent weeks. We're just that clever we've all got important exams to study for, so it's understandable that activity would be lower, compared with other parties which, naturally, aren't nearly as intelligent
    Well, that's a novel way of looking for it. (I'll ignore the insinuation that those of us without exams are thickos)

    Feel free to put forward an amendment changing it. Out of interest, how would you want party closing procedures to be run?
    If a party consists of only posts by two (maybe three) or less members for a period of two months it should be shut down. Two/three members isn't enough for an effective party, I doubt Labour has ever gotten to that stage though. Currently one member could theoretically keep a party open indefinitely (until that person died).

    Yup, although that's not exactly a thing that should be used to attack us. We acknowledge that our activity is lower than it should be,
    and should be helped to get back on track, not attacked for it. It's in the interests of everyone to have a strong Labour party.
    Whilst I'm not sure it's in the interests of everyone to have a strong Labour party (I've already stated I'd be dancing on your party's corpse), while your still alive it is in everyone's interest to have a strong Labour Party. I'm open to helping you if I can, but not joining you.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    All this talk of cross party membership at leadership level. What happened to parties being unique and undiluted entities.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Mad Dog)
    Well, that's a novel way of looking for it. (I'll ignore the insinuation that those of us without exams are thickos)
    Probably best you ignored that. I not had that many exams, but I've had a massive report to write (and finish today, actually) so that's been keeping me a bit out the loop.

    If a party consists of only posts by two (maybe three) or less members for a period of two months it should be shut down. Two/three members isn't enough for an effective party, I doubt Labour has ever gotten to that stage though. Currently one member could theoretically keep a party open indefinitely (until that person died).
    Are you going to table such an amendment then?

    Whilst I'm not sure it's in the interests of everyone to have a strong Labour party (I've already stated I'd be dancing on your party's corpse), while your still alive it is in everyone's interest to have a strong Labour Party. I'm open to helping you if I can, but not joining you.
    I believe the house benefits from having a strong Labour, to be honest, just as it does Tories, Greens etc. How can you help then?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mechie)
    Are you going to table such an amendment then?
    I will do if I can find supporters, but I'm doubting it has anywhere near enough support to get off the ground.


    I believe the house benefits from having a strong Labour, to be honest, just as it does Tories, Greens etc. How can you help then?
    I've got an idea, but I'll need to discuss it with the Greens first (and possibly our coalition partners) as it involves all three left wing parties co-operating together and isn't exactly something I'd like to outline now to potentially be told by party "we're not ****ing do that".
    Offline

    12
    (Original post by The Mad Dog)
    I've got an idea, but I'll need to discuss it with the Greens first (and possibly our coalition partners) as it involves all three left wing parties co-operating together and isn't exactly something I'd like to outline now to potentially be told by party "we're not ****ing do that".
    Oh, so you want an active House, but an exclusively left wing active House? That would make for some really interesting debate...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MacDaddi)
    Oh, so you want an active House, but an exclusively left wing active House? That would make for some really interesting debate...
    Do you want to help Labour activity?
 
 
 
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
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
  • 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.