...who hasn't realised that Starmer's a stone liar?
The claim is that the two ousted members “demonstrated the type of support for the Liberal Democrats that is incompatible with chapter 2, clause I.5.B.vi of the Labour party rule book”. In principle, that’s a necessary rule: members can’t back parties standing against Labour, or the multitude of prohibited anti-Labour groupuscules. But, as Wafer wrote to party officials in his defence, many had “worked together during the election campaign to do everything we could locally to help secure a Labour government, by ridding the country of as many sitting Tory MPs as possible. In Lewes, Labour couldn’t win, but the Tories could lose. Getting the Tories defeated in Lewes made a direct contribution to Labour’s victory in July.”
Did you expect gratitude, then, Polly? It's a human emotion, but do we have a human prime minister?
Next time Labour may well be in coalition, and electoral reform will be the price. As Ford warns them: “Be nice to people when you’re on top, as you’ll need them on your way down.” Treating near-allies as the enemy looks arrogant. Lewes’s sensible tactical voters are not Labour traitors.
Perhaps they aren't worried about what happens when they aren't on top anymore, because they will have already feathered their nests?
2 comments:
Perhaps to Labour 'purity of thought' is everything... until the next policy change.
The problem with TTK is which country is he referring to? It's certainly not this one.
Penseivat
Post a Comment