Change UK: Chuka Umunna resigns from Labour party and launches Independent Group

[SpineyNorman]

To be fair the notion of the Labour PLP having a shared set of principles and abiding by any kind of basic party discipline disappeared a while ago.

Emphasis on "supposed to be". I think the principle we can all agree labour should adhere to is antiracism so when they enforce that I'm not going to complain.

 

[LDC]

All he said was that the party has been too apologetic on anti-semitism. Which is fine as far as free speech goes. What is all this censorship that goes on these days?

Now you've had a look at the tread posted by killer b what do you think Argonia?

 

[SpackleFrog]

Emphasis on "supposed to be". I think the principle we can all agree labour should adhere to is antiracism so when they enforce that I'm not going to complain.

Is it adhering to a principle of anti-racism to suspend someone for saying something a bit daft but not in any way racist or anti-semitic?

I'm still going through the thread killer b linked to and I can see there's a lot of stuff I haven't paid attention to gone on, so I'm not saying that CW hasn't done more than that. But the grounds of the suspension is what he said at the meeting on Monday night. Which (based on the clip only, I didn't go) doesn't look like it violates anti-racist principles.

 

[SpackleFrog]

I'd add as a general point that although I don't have a lot of sympathy with Momentum and especially Sheffield Momentum, I know a lot of people who are members and they definitely don't deserve to be accused of being riddled with vile anti semites by Andrew Neil on telly as they were today.

 

[killer b]

But the grounds of the suspension is what he said at the meeting on Monday night. Which (based on the clip only, I didn't go) doesn't look like it violates anti-racist principles.

they aren't ffs. The grounds for suspension are 'a pattern of behaviour' - the pattern of behaviour detailed - only in part - in the thread I linked to.

 

[Argonia]

Can't read it Lynn, it's not working on my ipad for some reason....

 

[SpineyNorman]

Is it adhering to a principle of anti-racism to suspend someone for saying something a bit daft but not in any way racist or anti-semitic?

I'm still going through the thread killer b linked to and I can see there's a lot of stuff I haven't paid attention to gone on, so I'm not saying that CW hasn't done more than that. But the grounds of the suspension is what he said at the meeting on Monday night. Which (based on the clip only, I didn't go) doesn't look like it violates anti-racist principles.

He said labour have been too apologetic when it comes to antisemitism. That's a labour MP saying that. He's at best an enabler and apologist.

 

[SpackleFrog]

they aren't ffs. The grounds for suspension are 'a pattern of behaviour' - the pattern of behaviour detailed - only in part - in the thread I linked to.

What's being reported is that the grounds for suspension are what was said at the meeting. It might be that a pattern of behaviour is detailed in his suspension letter, I don't know, but in the papers and on the telly it's portrayed as his comments at that meeting.

 

[LDC]

Maybe some of you fuckers on this thread should have a good read of what Williamson has been up to and said the last bit of time before you started bleating on about how his suspension is a bit much?

 

[killer b]

What's being reported is that the grounds for suspension are what was said at the meeting. It might be that a pattern of behaviour is detailed in his suspension letter, I don't know, but in the papers and on the telly it's portrayed as his comments at that meeting.

It's been reported plenty that it's a pattern of behaviour he's been suspended for.

Why are we arguing about this if you haven't even read the news?

 

[cupid_stunt]

What's being reported is that the grounds for suspension are what was said at the meeting. It might be that a pattern of behaviour is detailed in his suspension letter, I don't know, but in the papers and on the telly it's portrayed as his comments at that meeting.

Every report I've read or seen has referred to a 'pattern of behaviour'.

 

[SpackleFrog]

He said labour have been too apologetic when it comes to antisemitism. That's a labour MP saying that. He's at best an enabler and apologist.

I think I'd say he's at best an idiot, although he may well be an enabler and an apologist as well, I'm not sure yet - killer b 's thread suggests so.

I think part of the problem about the "apologetic" comment, is that there are lots of instances of allegations of anti-semitism that haven't been taken seriously enough or acted on quickly enough, but there's also a series of bizarre allegations that Labour has apologised for and probably shouldn't have.

For example, the Naz Shah thing was definitely well out of order and I'm amazed she's back in the Shadow Cabinet to be honest. I don't agree with that decision, and I don't think it was taken seriously enough.

On the other hand, I don't see why Corbyn apologised for attending a dinner where a Holocaust survivor said things about Israel. The implication seemed to be that Corbyn was at fault for not disagreeing with an elderly Holocaust survivor, and I don't think he should have apologised for that.

When you consider that anti-semitic attitudes are more prevalent among Lib Dem and Tory members, that the Tiggers are describing Labour as instituionally racist and anti-semitic, I'm not surprised that some Labour members feel the leadership is being "too apologetic", although it's definitely not how I would have phrased it.

In any case, what will stand out to most people here is that lots of others have shown far less regard to party discipline and not been suspended.

 

[SpackleFrog]

It's been reported plenty that it's a pattern of behaviour he's been suspended for.

Why are we arguing about this if you haven't even read the news?

I've just re-read the couple of articles and you're absolutely right, apologies - a 'pattern of behaviour' is referred to.

 

[SpineyNorman]

The right wingers should be booted out too of course. Doesn't mean they're wrong in this instance.

 

[agricola]

Perhaps there aren't more MPs lined up to defect, then:

He added that when he briefly stood for the party leadership in 2015, before withdrawing, he was warned that being of BAME background could count against him.

“The team who were helping me organise, were told by quite a few MPs that they weren’t going to support me, because they didn’t think their working-class constituents would ever vote for a black man – and I was quite taken aback by it,” he says, adding that his new TIG colleagues are more representative of modern Britain.

Umunna only joined Labour in the 1990s, after the reforms initiated by Tony Blair, and said perhaps the period up to 2010, when Ed Miliband took over, was a historic aberration, and his old party had now reverted to type.

“Maybe what we’ve seen happen in the Labour party since the late 1990s and through to 2010, was actually exceptional, and wasn’t what the Labour party really is?”

Chuka Umunna: I never felt totally comfortable in the Labour party

 

[Sue]

“The team who were helping me organise, were told by quite a few MPs that they weren’t going to support me, because they didn’t think their working-class constituents would ever vote for a black man – and I was quite taken aback by it,” he says, adding that his new TIG colleagues are more representative of modern Britain.'

So working class people are racist or are perceived to be so by Labour politicians. I wonder what they (allegedly) thought their non-white working class constituents would do? FFS.

ETA 'Allegedly' as sounds like a bollocks story to me.

 

[redsquirrel]

Umunna brushes off the idea that he and his new Conservative allies will struggle to unite around a set of policies, insisting that the old left-right divide is rapidly being supplanted by others.

“Your age, your academic qualifications, where you live in the country, whether you have a nationalistic or an internationalist view of the world. Whether you’re socially liberal or conservative. These factors are driving people’s voting behaviour more than ever,” he says. He describes what unites them as a “radical centrist” agenda.

He's going to found out otherwise come the next GE. Though some on here would probably agree with the above.

 

[YouSir]

“The team who were helping me organise, were told by quite a few MPs that they weren’t going to support me, because they didn’t think their working-class constituents would ever vote for a black man – and I was quite taken aback by it,” he says, adding that his new TIG colleagues are more representative of modern Britain.'

So working class people are racist or are perceived to be so by Labour politicians. I wonder what they (allegedly) thought their non-white working class constituents would do? FFS.

ETA 'Allegedly' as sounds like a bollocks story to me.

Willing to guarantee that it's a bollocks story. Chukka needs an excuse for not having run for leader, attacking Labour members does the job. Nothing more than that.

 

[Argonia]

I don't believe a single syllable that comes out of Chuka's mouth.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

He’s right that they won’t struggle to unite.

 

[SpineyNorman]

He's going to found out otherwise come the next GE. Though some on here would probably agree with the above.

A party of the radical centre. A party of action.

 

[two sheds]

Perhaps they just didn't like him: "Oooooooh I wouldn't bother to stand if I were you mate, voters round here '

 

[agricola]

Does anyone know what his beef with Ed Miliband is about?

Umunna only joined Labour in the 1990s, after the reforms initiated by Tony Blair, and said perhaps the period up to 2010, when Ed Miliband took over, was a historic aberration, and his old party had now reverted to type.

“Maybe what we’ve seen happen in the Labour party since the late 1990s and through to 2010, was actually exceptional, and wasn’t what the Labour party really is?”

Given that he nominated Ed for leader, was his PPS and recieved every shadow ministerial role that he ever had from him, this bit of his article seems somewhat ungrateful.

 

[tim]

“The team who were helping me organise, were told by quite a few MPs that they weren’t going to support me, because they didn’t think their working-class constituents would ever vote for a black man – and I was quite taken aback by it,” he says, adding that his new TIG colleagues are more representative of modern Britain.'

So working class people are racist or are perceived to be so by Labour politicians. I wonder what they (allegedly) thought their non-white working class constituents would do? FFS.

ETA 'Allegedly' as sounds like a bollocks story to me.

He should name names

 

[Dom Traynor]

A party of the radical centre. A party of action.

A New Party

 

[andysays]

Looks like they might actually be following through with the party thing.

Independent Group 'in talks about becoming a political party'

And they've given themselves roles like in a real party and everything...

Not sure how busy Sarah Wollaston is likely to be in the near future though...

 

[rekil]

'Group convener' is a little bit 'biscuit sourcer' isn't it?

 

[Sue]

'Group convener' is a little bit 'biscuit sourcer' isn't it?

Obvs an important role which is in very capable hands...

 

[agricola]

'Group convener' is a little bit 'biscuit sourcer' isn't it?

I think they probably translate it as "party chairman", though of course they are not a party so much as a group of people who advertise and encourage the public to donate to Shuker's company.

Wollaston not having the Health brief is a bit odd, though.

 

[belboid]

Wollaston not having the Health brief is a bit odd, though.

Maybe underfunding and privatising the NHS was a bit too much, even for the tiggers.