Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2019 21:18:17 GMT
Llyod Russell-Moyle, who supported composite 13, said a card vote may have been close among members. I assume that despite Unison and Usdaw backing composite 13 the union bloc was overwhelmingly opposed. Sources told Kuenssberg that 75% of members would need to back composite 13 for it to pass. So if it was only close amongst members as Llyod said and not the 3/4 Kuenssberg said was needed amongst members then it doesn't sound like composite 13 had enough support to justify a card vote Nonetheless, the General Secretary should not have over-ruled the Chair. A card vote would have settled it. i think we can all agree the chair handled it poorly. Ami right in thinking that the chairs decision could challenged with a 2/3 maj?
|
|
CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,294
|
Post by CatholicLeft on Sept 24, 2019 21:23:21 GMT
Nonetheless, the General Secretary should not have over-ruled the Chair. A card vote would have settled it. i think we can all agree the chair handled it poorly. Ami right in thinking that the chairs decision could challenged with a 2/3 maj? Correct, but the rules of Lord Citrime would have made it clear that the Chakr's initial decision was final and not challengeable by the General Secretary. Only them can it but challenged from the membership/floor. I am increasingly convinced that it was an appalling decision.
|
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823
|
Post by timmullen1 on Sept 24, 2019 21:45:53 GMT
Partly the result; I can’t remember a close vote on an issue of such import not going to a card vote, but also the decision of the Chair is ultimately supposed to be final, and it is not the job of the General Secretary (and the guy sitting on her other side) to influence the Chair into changing her decision. My CLP delegate who has been to some 20 conferences as a steward prior to being a delegate this year, is also adamant that a large number of people, over 100, as she described it “charged into the room” as the vote was being taken and raised their hands. Presumably they were counted by Ms Formby but we have no way of knowing if they were delegates; if they were why arrive en-masse at the very end of an extended debate? The result, combined with the tone of the debate - if you supported the composite you were being disloyal to Jeremy, despite Emily Thornberry getting a standing ovation for backing it a couple of hours earlier - convinced me that loyalty to Jeremy is more important than the future of the country or our electoral prospects, and there is zero tolerance for any kind of deviance from The Word of Jeremy. Llyod Russell-Moyle, who supported composite 13, said a card vote may have been close among members. I assume that despite Unison and Usdaw backing composite 13 the union bloc was overwhelmingly opposed. Sources told Kuenssberg that 75% of members would need to back composite 13 for it to pass. So if it was only close amongst members as Llyod said and not the 3/4 Kuenssberg said was needed amongst members then it doesn't sound like composite 13 had enough support to justify a card vote It’s also worth adding that coming out of the compositing meeting the night before the CLP vote was not close, it was reported by multiple sources within the room as unanimous. Yes the union position meant it was going to be tight, but there was an overwhelming feeling amongst those present, clearly including Thornberry and Starmer, that it had the votes to pass. There then appears a Momentum briefing, contradicted on Twitter by Lansmann, that the Composite was a media inspired attempt to undermine Jeremy and instructing their delegates to oppose and the room goes from giving Thornberry a standing ovation when she says in her speech that she “expects Conference to vote later” in favour of an unequivocal Remain position to speaker after speaker making spurious claims about plots against Jeremy, according to the delegate from Erith and Thamesmead those supporting the Composite were being paid by neo-liberals to sell off the NHS. Though not normally suspicious minded I suspect the reason there was no card vote was because a lot of CLP delegates broke their mandate from their CLP’s and voted against the Composite under the cover of a lack of a recorded vote.
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Sept 24, 2019 21:57:42 GMT
Llyod Russell-Moyle, who supported composite 13, said a card vote may have been close among members. I assume that despite Unison and Usdaw backing composite 13 the union bloc was overwhelmingly opposed. Sources told Kuenssberg that 75% of members would need to back composite 13 for it to pass. So if it was only close amongst members as Llyod said and not the 3/4 Kuenssberg said was needed amongst members then it doesn't sound like composite 13 had enough support to justify a card vote It’s also worth adding that coming out of the compositing meeting the night before the CLP vote was not close, it was reported by multiple sources within the room as unanimous. Yes the union position meant it was going to be tight, but there was an overwhelming feeling amongst those present, clearly including Thornberry and Starmer, that it had the votes to pass. There then appears a Momentum briefing, contradicted on Twitter by Lansmann, that the Composite was a media inspired attempt to undermine Jeremy and instructing their delegates to oppose and the room goes from giving Thornberry a standing ovation when she says in her speech that she “expects Conference to vote later” in favour of an unequivocal Remain position to speaker after speaker making spurious claims about plots against Jeremy, according to the delegate from Erith and Thamesmead those supporting the Composite were being paid by neo-liberals to sell off the NHS. Though not normally suspicious minded I suspect the reason there was no card vote was because a lot of CLP delegates broke their mandate from their CLP’s and voted against the Composite under the cover of a lack of a recorded vote. I'm pretty sure our delegates would have voted against 13 but given the composite itself was only drawn up the night before I'm never sure how much there really can be very firm mandating. You always get this sort of thing though. Remember how Blair always used to wheel out John Prescott to do one of those totally incoherent rabble-rousing rants which never amounted to much more than a bit of tub-thumping with exhortations to support the leadership
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Sept 24, 2019 21:59:18 GMT
Llyod Russell-Moyle, who supported composite 13, said a card vote may have been close among members. I assume that despite Unison and Usdaw backing composite 13 the union bloc was overwhelmingly opposed. Sources told Kuenssberg that 75% of members would need to back composite 13 for it to pass. So if it was only close amongst members as Llyod said and not the 3/4 Kuenssberg said was needed amongst members then it doesn't sound like composite 13 had enough support to justify a card vote Nonetheless, the General Secretary should not have over-ruled the Chair. A card vote would have settled it. Strictly speaking she didn't as the Chair consulted her. I can't see why. The show of hands really wasn't that close. 60-40.
|
|
CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,294
|
Post by CatholicLeft on Sept 24, 2019 22:12:02 GMT
Nonetheless, the General Secretary should not have over-ruled the Chair. A card vote would have settled it. Strictly speaking she didn't as the Chair consulted her. I can't see why. The show of hands really wasn't that close. 60-40. Check the video, that is not what happened - Jenny Formby corrected her without being asked.
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Sept 24, 2019 22:14:23 GMT
Is there no unity in shared wishy-washyness? As you know, I am far from wishy-washy. Sorry - wasn't aimed at you, more the broader longing for so-called moderation in politics at large (though quite what is moderate about ignoring a referendum is unclear)
|
|
CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,294
|
Post by CatholicLeft on Sept 24, 2019 22:15:12 GMT
Llyod Russell-Moyle, who supported composite 13, said a card vote may have been close among members. I assume that despite Unison and Usdaw backing composite 13 the union bloc was overwhelmingly opposed. Sources told Kuenssberg that 75% of members would need to back composite 13 for it to pass. So if it was only close amongst members as Llyod said and not the 3/4 Kuenssberg said was needed amongst members then it doesn't sound like composite 13 had enough support to justify a card vote It’s also worth adding that coming out of the compositing meeting the night before the CLP vote was not close, it was reported by multiple sources within the room as unanimous. Yes the union position meant it was going to be tight, but there was an overwhelming feeling amongst those present, clearly including Thornberry and Starmer, that it had the votes to pass. There then appears a Momentum briefing, contradicted on Twitter by Lansmann, that the Composite was a media inspired attempt to undermine Jeremy and instructing their delegates to oppose and the room goes from giving Thornberry a standing ovation when she says in her speech that she “expects Conference to vote later” in favour of an unequivocal Remain position to speaker after speaker making spurious claims about plots against Jeremy, according to the delegate from Erith and Thamesmead those supporting the Composite were being paid by neo-liberals to sell off the NHS. Though not normally suspicious minded I suspect the reason there was no card vote was because a lot of CLP delegates broke their mandate from their CLP’s and voted against the Composite under the cover of a lack of a recorded vote. This my feeling. Michael Chessum expressed concerns earlier in the day that delegates were cheering speeches against Comp. 13, despite their mandates. A card vote would have dealt with this.
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Sept 24, 2019 22:15:30 GMT
Nonetheless, the General Secretary should not have over-ruled the Chair. A card vote would have settled it. Strictly speaking she didn't as the Chair consulted her. I can't see why. The show of hands really wasn't that close. 60-40. So long as it wasnt 52-48
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Sept 24, 2019 22:18:09 GMT
Strictly speaking she didn't as the Chair consulted her. I can't see why. The show of hands really wasn't that close. 60-40. Check the video, that is not wnat happened - Jenny Formby corrected her without being asked. If she hadn't there would have been an outcry because it so very obviously was lost - TV did a pan over the show of hands. Given that we know the two big unions were split but that most voted against, and the show of hands indicated the constituencies voted that way too. Perhaps there is room for reform of the voting system? There are simple technological solutions now available Also - the rules don't actually allow for mandates of delegates largely because of the compositing process. Although when I was delegate I did try to follow the CLP view if I clearly knew it. Mind you that was when we had stopped having proper votes on anything.
|
|
carlton43
Non-Aligned
Posts: 48,543
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Sept 24, 2019 22:37:36 GMT
Is there no unity in shared wishy-washyness? As you know, I am far from wishy-washy. Oh Yes You Are!!!
|
|
middyman
Conservative
"The problem with socialism is that, sooner or later, you run out of other people's money."
Posts: 8,050
|
Post by middyman on Sept 24, 2019 22:44:59 GMT
The chaos and manipulation of votes by a show of hands is exactly why Unions were banned from calling for industrial action by such votes. This was opposed of course.
|
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Sept 24, 2019 23:59:28 GMT
Is there no unity in shared wishy-washyness? As you know, I am far from wishy-washy. What else can we consider you when your left your party over a supposedly extremely important point of principle, only to quickly rejoin it and then to quickly leave again. How many more times will you change your mind? You are either a complete fool or totally lacking in principles. Either way "wishy-washy" seems like a good description for you.
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Sept 25, 2019 0:27:36 GMT
The idea of calling a card vote and counting the votes properly would have been totally against the spirit of the Maoist frenzy to which the Labour Party has degenerated itself, and would thus have been an anti-democratic anti-Corbyn anti-progressive reactionary bourgeois deviation.
|
|
|
Post by gasman2019 on Sept 25, 2019 7:24:29 GMT
Can we safely say there wont be a Labour Conference poll bounce and could be a dip like last year?
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Sept 25, 2019 7:25:03 GMT
The idea of calling a card vote and counting the votes properly would have been totally against the spirit of the Maoist frenzy to which the Labour Party has degenerated itself, and would thus have been an anti-democratic anti-Corbyn anti-progressive reactionary bourgeois deviation. The Labour Party does seem to have turned into a personality cult.. I am waiting for the first city to rename itself in honour of the Great Leader.
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Sept 25, 2019 7:47:29 GMT
The idea of calling a card vote and counting the votes properly would have been totally against the spirit of the Maoist frenzy to which the Labour Party has degenerated itself, and would thus have been an anti-democratic anti-Corbyn anti-progressive reactionary bourgeois deviation. The Labour Party does seem to have turned into a personality cult.. I am waiting for the first city to rename itself in honour of the Great Leader. There's a Scottish town in Northamptonshire which would only need one letter added!
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 13,683
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Sept 25, 2019 7:49:04 GMT
The idea of calling a card vote and counting the votes properly would have been totally against the spirit of the Maoist frenzy to which the Labour Party has degenerated itself, and would thus have been an anti-democratic anti-Corbyn anti-progressive reactionary bourgeois deviation. The Labour Party does seem to have turned into a personality cult.. I am waiting for the first city to rename itself in honour of the Great Leader. Isn't there already Corby?
|
|
|
Post by mrpastelito on Sept 25, 2019 8:26:52 GMT
As you know, I am far from wishy-washy. What else can we consider you when your left your party over a supposedly extremely important point of principle, only to quickly rejoin it and then to quickly leave again. How many more times will you change your mind? You are either a complete fool or totally lacking in principles. Either way "wishy-washy" seems like a good description for you.
He's fallen victim to wishful thinking. It happens.
|
|
carlton43
Non-Aligned
Posts: 48,543
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Sept 25, 2019 8:55:49 GMT
The idea of calling a card vote and counting the votes properly would have been totally against the spirit of the Maoist frenzy to which the Labour Party has degenerated itself, and would thus have been an anti-democratic anti-Corbyn anti-progressive reactionary bourgeois deviation. The Labour Party does seem to have turned into a personality cult.. I am waiting for the first city to rename itself in honour of the Great Leader. Widnes to Corbyngrad Slough to Abbotgrad
|
|