Loser

Labour's Jeremy Corbyn in the House of Commons. Source: Independent (PA)

There was no contrition after Jeremy Corbyn led the Labour Party to a humiliating defeat at the 2019 General Election. He refused to accept any blame and remained in office.

 Ignoring Coronavirus advice from Prof Chris Whitty the Chief medical adviser that people over the age of 70 should take "particular care to minimise their social contact" Jeremy Corbyn said he would not be working from home and would carry on with his duties as normal.

Advice from the Government is designed to keep British citizens as safe as is reasonably possible. 

As Leader of the Opposition, Corbyn set an abysmal example demonstrating that he is a loser the country was fortunate to avoid. 

Hurt

The obvious hurt expressed in this interview by a lifetime Labour supporter whose conscience told him that his Party no longer represented the traditional values he stood for reminds me of the breakup of the Anglican Communion.

The response of the extreme Left which now dominates the Labour Party was to claim that Ian Austin was “employed by the Tories”.

This is reminiscent of the takeover of the Anglican Church by trendy, Left leaning bishops and their feminist allies. If more people had had the guts to speak out for Anglicanism we may have been saved from the actions of mean spirited bishops who ignore scripture and tradition and have no regard for anyone who gets hurt.

The contagion is spreading to Rome. Fortunately some have the guts to speak out while Pope Francis denounces Amazon Synod critics as racist!

Who are they?

Photograph: PA

I recognise the much leaner former Lord Chancellor, 'Charlie' Falconer (top right), ex-Anglican priest and gay activist Chris Bryant (3rd down) for banging on and on about gay people being the same as everyone else but deserving special privileges, and, to his left, Stephen Kinnock mainly for being Stephen Kinnock. The MP above Bryant looks familiar but I can not put a name to the face.

Years ago many of my contemporaries knew most if not all members of the Cabinet and their Shadow ministers. As an elderly friend often reminds me, that is when we had statesmen in government. That does not necessarily imply anything about their relative competence but one thing does. That is to know when their time is up.

Jeremy Corbyn is the surprise 'Leader' of the Labour party who is stuck in the past. He and his supporters see this as a breath of fresh air, a new kind of politics! Few had heard of him until an electoral wheeze backfired and horrified Labour MPs realised what they had done in broadening the field for the sake of appearances.

On Monday the Guardian reported: "Jeremy Corbyn is preparing himself for a leadership contest following a fresh wave of resignations, with 15 members of the shadow cabinet walking out and calling for him to step down from the helm of the party...A source close to Corbyn said the number of resignations was destabilising but ultimately irrelevant unless someone triggered a leadership election. 'In many ways, the shadow cabinet is now stronger. There is no shortage of good people who want to do these jobs. The only way to try to replace Jeremy is to stand against him in a democratic contest,' he said, adding that was now 'likely to happen'."

A report this morning indicates that "more than 40 Labour MPs on Corbyn's front bench and in his shadow ministerial team" have quit.

Ignoring all appeals from fellow MPs who have pointed to his lack of leadership skills and what they regard as his dismal performance or even 'sabotage' in the EU Remain campaign, Corbyn says he will stand again in a leadership election claiming support from the rank and file of the Labour Party. As he faces a No Confidence vote has he thought to ask himself, where were his 'loyal supporters' when he was supposed to be galvanising support for the Remain campaign?

Does it matter one jot if Momentum successfully retains Corbyn as leader if he does not command the confidence of the country? Of course not. Power often involves compromise. It was a hard lesson for Labour to learn but now apparently forgotten again. If they fluff it again they will have only themselves to blame.

Corbyn must make way for someone who is able to lead the Labour party as an effective Opposition and possibly into Government. 

Update [28.06.2016]

Jeremy Corbyn has lost a confidence vote by 172 votes to 40 with 4 abstentions.

Delusions

Delusion 1

Reluctantly, the US authorities have had to conclude that the shooting of 14 civil servants at a Christmas party in California was not the act of a disgruntled employee but one inspired by Islamic fundamentalism: "The investigation so far has developed indications of radicalisation by the killers and of potential inspiration by foreign terrorists organisations".

Nervousness in recognising the facts is understandable. How many more silent potential killers lurk among us? Predictably ISIS have claimed credit but the sad fact is that even when ISIS and all other fundamental Islamist organisations are defeated, the ideology still comes from the book Muslims are required to study from their earliest years. The answer is in proper education, enabling Muslims to question a faith which in Christian terms must be misguided. So long as people are allowed to believe that they can gain a place in paradise by murdering innocent people there will be no change.

In Christianity the greatest of faith, hope and charity (love), is love. By contrast Islam rewards believers at the expense of unbelievers. The characteristics of love and forgiveness are embedded in Christian consciousness, even of nominal and lapsed Christians which leads them to welcome others who reject democracy and regard Christians as inferior. It is a delusion to think that Muslims would allow non-Muslims the same freedom that they demand in our midst yet to question their allegiance is condemned as Islamophobia. If believers cannot question their beliefs and come to their own conclusions they will be forever at the mercy of those who would control them, a devastating lesson learnt all too late by many Christians.

Delusion 2

The leader of the Labour Party was quick to take credit for Labour's victory in the Oldham by-election. Labour Deputy leader Tom Watson said "If this was a referendum on Jeremy Corbyn, then he has won. It was a decisive victory with our share of the vote going up. I hope our MPs look at this result." It was not a referendum. The local verdict was that the electorate simply had confidence in their local lad. It had nothing to do with Jeremy Corbyn's leadership.

The decision of Parliament to ignore the artificial border between Iraq and Syria was a difficult one for MPs. Mr Corbyn likes to base his authority on grass roots support but what is that worth when supporters resort to bullying tactics, sending threats and offensive material to MPs who voted according to conscience?

Delusion 3 

The Anglican Church in this country continues to grapple with the consequences of following the liberal lead of the US Episcopal Church. As attendance continues to decline in line with these liberal innovations the Church of England ("A Christian presence in every community") has even considered a Beeching style closure of churches, leaving a Christian presence in some communities.

The relentless pursuit of a liberal agenda in the Church in Wales where a policy of exclusion continues to operate has resulted in an exercise to keep the current episcopal elite and their supporters in the style to which they have become accustomed by substituting Ministry Areas for Parishes with lay people doing most of the work regardless of whether they are qualified to do so beyond a programme of rudimentary lay training.

Archbishop Morgan thinks it a wonderful idea (here, page 2): "So things are on the move and what has been fantastic about all this is how the parishes concerned have got excited about the prospect, embraced the vision and seen for themselves the advantages that accrue. That is much better than a centrally imposed plan that people do not own."

The question has been raised, "What hope for the Church in Wales?" -  When meetings do not address the problem of alienation there is something wrong with the organisation they exist to serve. Read the alternative view here.

The Resurrection of TINA

It is time for the old Thatcherite mantra ‘There is no alternative’ to be resurrected given its relevance to the new Lib Con coalition Government, what the new Prime Minister likes to call a new form of politics.

The coalition is not what one would have expected given the divide between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats but what was the alternative? The other permutations had little if any chance of success and with the benefit of hindsight (now the most widespread of British attributes) the Labour party appears to be comfortable in opposition taking a rest from the burden of government.

Many Lib Dems have been angered, some even joining or re-joining the Labour party putting principle above pragmatism but politics is about power and making the right judgement at the right time. In doing so concessions have been made by the Conservatives allowing them to ditch some of the promises they probably wish they had not made and the Lib Dems have been given the opportunity put some of their policies into practice. Added to which, the cherished dream of a change in the voting system is much closer with Nick Clegg in charge of making arrangements for the promised referendum. It would be absurd if their party were to fragment now with the possibility of change on the horizon.

More important though is the urgent need to sort out the country’s economic difficulties without causing public anger. The best options for achieving this were explored and a deal done with apparent good will on both sides. In checking reactions to the deal I noticed that Dick Littlejohn of the Mail Online with his usual lack of grace accuses Gordon Brown of dragging British Politics into the sewer. Since he spends most of his time swimming in it he must be best placed though with something large in his eye obscuring natural vision. God forbid that I should have anything in common with the odious little man or his newspaper but even he agrees that everyone has a vested interest in making the coalition work.

There is no alternative.

Voting Dilemma

I thought David Cameron’s claim to power amusing. He has constantly preached change with little attention to detail. His message was the same after the results were published suggesting that the Labour Government had no mandate to govern. An interesting observation looking at the votes in percentage terms with almost two thirds of the votes cast against the Conservatives.

His party has the greatest number of seats but calculated simply on the basis of share of the vote, the number of seats would be 234 rather than 306 while the Lib Dems shoot up from 57 to 149.

Gordon Brown was quick to offer Nick Clegg a referendum on electoral reform which must be tempting for the Lib Dems, far more so than the suggestion of yet another committee of MPs offered by David Cameron.

Back in March The Constitution Society published an article on the Tory proposals for electoral reform. It makes interesting reading:

http://www.re-constitution.org.uk/news/articles/16/ .

Postscript

Far more graphic view on the share of the vote:

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2010/05/electoral-reform-stay-table#reader-comments

Have a look at the John Cleese video for a good titter.

Tory Candidate Scrapes the Barrel for Muslim Vote

If the Tory candidate for Blackburn unseats the Secretary of State for Justice in the coming election the Conservative whip is not the whip he deserves..

The Telegraph reports today that he circulated a leaflet, now withdrawn on the orders of HQ, which challenges Labour’s claim to serve the Muslim vote.

It says:

‘“We cannot be deceived by their hollow claims. We have in front of us a whole saga of atrocities committed in Iraq, in Afghanistan, in Palestine and as if this was not enough, the Labour government allowed the Israeli government to create havoc in Lebanon and Gaza in Palestine, destroying their infrastructure and killing and maiming thousands of innocent civilians. The Labour government did nothing, absolutely nothing for a number of days while the Israelis carried on their inhuman killing of innocent men, women and children.”

It accuses Jack Straw, who is the MP for Blackburn, of insulting “our religion and culture and…our sisters and mothers” by refusing to hold meetings with women constituents wearing a full veil. “We should not forget that today they are criticising our women’s(sic) veil, tomorrow it will be our caps and our beards they will attack,” the pamphlet declares.

It goes on to urge a vote for Mr Law-Riding ‘if you want to see an end to unnecessary and very expensive wars, shedding of innocent blood and save Britain from bankruptcy.”’

It is not just the leaflet that should have been withdrawn. This is not the sort of person who should represent us in British politics.

Leaders Debate, Round 3

The third debate was a disappointing anticlimax.

Perhaps my expectations had been too high giving way to an overwhelming feeling of boredom. Regardless of the questions asked the session became a re-run of the same over-worked lines, the main variations coming from the party leaders’ deliveries.

At last David Cameron delivered as people had expected him to in the previous debates having observed his performance since becoming leader of the Conservative Party. A polished act, far better than before but I thought it weaker on substance. “Change” is all very well and captures the public mood but change to what? Change for change sake could simply result in us being out of the frying pan and into the fire. If he had demonstrated clearly how his vision for change would be for the better, he may have retained his previous higher poll ratings.

Cameron’s lack of clarity has resulted in the momentum for ‘change’ being transferred to Nick Clegg enabling him to offer the electorate a complete change from the two-party system. The Liberal Democrats had been largely ignored until the Clegg bombshell shook the two main parties, and the media, out of their complacency. He had it all to play for last night but failed to deliver a decisive blow and appeared the least confident of the three. Nevertheless he presented a new, clean image which will appeal to many especially the younger voters.

That leaves Labour's Gordon Brown. Once an image of ‘the Joker’ came to mind, probably as a result of his attempts to appear less dour, I was stuck with it despite the fact that he is the Prime Minister and spoke with the authority of experience in office and an obvious passion for what he believes in. But if people have decided they want a change as the polls imply, he has an up-hill struggle even if John Major did manage to surprise the pollsters. So ‘change’ in one form or another appears almost inevitable.

I applaud the BBC for their staging of the final event but illuminating I think not. The TV debate innovation gave Nick Clegg the opportunity to burst the bubble which will no doubt prick the Cameron conscience for ever if he fails to win an outright majority. The irony of it all is that the mood for change that was latched onto by the opposition looks likely to be expressed in a manner none of the leaders could have anticipated.

Don’t forget to vote for the common good.

A Question of Balance

Once again I allowed myself to become irritated by watching Question Time on Thursday. It was like a repeat of the Carol Vorderman show in drag with that offensive little pip-squeak David Starkey ranting from a similar Tory election script. Whilst I welcome a variety of opinions (within reason) such tirades become wearisome especially when formed from a narrow historical perspective. Some will recall his 2009 dismissal of the Scottish, Welsh and Irish nations as ‘feeble’. People in glass houses….

Much was made by most of the panel, and the Chairman of course, of the links between the Labour party and its trade union sponsor Unite as a result of its dispute with British Airways. That was fair game but what are we to make of the report that the Tories have forced the BBC to drop their intensive investigation into the affairs of Lord Ashcroft in the run up to the general election? Can the implication be that they have something to hide? So much for transparency and balance.

Of course funding isn’t a problem for the really high earners in our society. A joke was made on Sport Relief last night that if every footballer donated a week’s wages we could buy Africa. Not being a fan of round ball games I may be biased but I find the astronomically high wages of footballers offensive especially given the bad example many of them set with their aggressive behaviour and disgusting habit of spitting all over the pitch which is then echoed by yobs spitting on the street and spreading diseases. “Spitting spreads germs” is a sign we ancients recall seeing on public transport.

Just as, if not more, offensive is the reported £60m bonanza for the president of Barclays. From the Telegraph: “The package is based on a £384,000 salary, but through a combination of perks including share bonuses, Mr Diamond could earn more than 150 times that amount”. Ignoring the perks, can anyone deservedly earn a salary sixteen times that of the average wage even if he does want to build the biggest investment bank in the world - especially if it is on the back of the tax payer as Vince Cable aptly put it?

David Cameron’s plan to impose a tax on banks to repay the billions used to bail out financial institutions is most welcome as is Alistair Darling’s expected Government support for a global bank tax. Whoever wins the next election and by whatever means, someone needs to do something about these greedy bankers.