Labour leadership

[Geri]

Geri : You blatant entryist!

I am so angry. I have voted Labour all my life, and now they spit in my face.

 

[two sheds]

Worth contacting them letting them know that and asking for an explanation? I can imagine they're going to be getting quite a few FoI requests if they refuse to say.

 

[killer b]

Worth contacting them letting them know that and asking for an explanation? I can imagine they're going to be getting quite a few FoI requests if they refuse to say.

For info: You should not submit a FOI request if you want to find out the reason behind a refusal. The labour party isn't a public body, so isn't covered by the freedom of information act. A FOI request will be either ignored or refused.

You need to instead submit a data protection subject access request. They can charge up to £10 'admin' costs, but have to respond. Theres almost certainly some sample letters floating around on the internet for anyone who wants to take this route.

 

[Sprocket.]

A short time ago on Radio 4 Today.
Derek Hatton hasn't got a ballot paper either and he is a full member.
I can't see any reason for this!

 

[killer b]

More info here: https://ico.org.uk/for-the-public/personal-information/

 

[Sprocket.]

I am so angry. I have voted Labour all my life, and now they spit in my face.

Sadly I have observed them spitting in the faces of their most loyal supporters for years.

 

[two sheds]

For info: You should not submit a FOI request if you want to find out the reason behind a refusal. The labour party isn't a public body, so isn't covered by the freedom of information act. A FOI request will be either ignored or refused.

You need to instead submit a data protection subject access request. They can charge up to £10 'admin' costs, but have to respond. Theres almost certainly some sample letters floating around on the internet for anyone who wants to take this route.

Oops, I saw your previous post where you said that, sorry

 

[hash tag]

I too have not received my ballot papers yet but was told they have up until 1st Sept to send them.

 

[Mr Moose]

The fucking cunts have rejected me. Wankers.

Liz Kendall from Watford had her spies out.

 

[andysays]

Without wanting to appear too cynical or dismissive, I wonder if it's really worth anyone asking why they have been refused a vote.

The conditions are drawn in such away that they are vague and ultimately subjective, so the existing leadership can decide whether or not a person's activities demonstrates that they don't support the LP, at least to their own satisfaction.

Even if it could be demonstrated that an electorally significant number of people have been "wrongly" denied a vote, what then? I really can't see that there's any practical possibility of individuals being reinstated, or the result of the election being overturned.

Obviously it's up to people to make their own minds up, but to me the primary issue is that the party hierarchy are determine to lock out large numbers of the people who want to be involved, and all that follows from that, rather than the specific justification they may find for it in particular cases.

(this is all based on the fact that I haven't yet heard if I've got a vote, BTW. I reserve the right to completely change my position if I'm rejected )

 

[killer b]

It's worth it just to demonstrate their mendacity IMO.

 

[two sheds]

Yes along with the annoyance factor.

 

[andysays]

It's worth it just to demonstrate their mendacity IMO.

For me, their mendacity was never in doubt, and if it were the simple fact that they're denying people like Geri the vote demonstrates it quite clearly without knowing what spurious justification they can come up with.

But others are welcome to view it differently, obvs

 

[cesare]

A few million subject access requests should have them trying to retrieve the situation quick smart.

 

[killer b]

Also, I'm quite interested in seeing what criteria they're using.

I'm sure it isn't the case for Geri, but I reckon plenty of the people crying foul have a record of campaigning against the Labour Party that they're conveniently forgetting - the mendacity of trots is also something we need to bear in mind.

 

[andysays]

A few million subject access requests should have them trying to retrieve the situation quick smart.

From memory, about 600,000 people have tried to register, members, union affiliates and £3 payers. How many do we think are actually being denied? And what makes people think these requests are going to be taken seriously/given genuine answers?

I'm not for one moment justifying what the LP is doing but it's neither a surprise nor (IMO) worth bothering with asking for the individual justifications when the bigger issue is the reason why they're doing it at all. Just my £3 worth...

 

[cesare]

From memory, about 600,000 people have tried to register, members, union affiliates and £3 payers. How many do we think are actually being denied? And what makes people think these requests are going to be taken seriously/given genuine answers?

I'm not for one moment justifying what the LP is doing but it's neither a surprise nor (IMO) worth bothering with asking for the individual justifications when the bigger issue is the reason why they're doing it at all. Just my £3 worth...

Don't bother submitting a subject access request then

 

[killer b]

Do you know how data protection works Andy? They cant just brush you off.

 

[andysays]

Do you know how data protection works Andy? They cant just brush you off.

Possibly I don't know how it works as well as you do. Maybe you could outline specifically how you think it will work in this case.

Obviously if they say to Geri they think she's a member of the SWP, she can challenge that on the basis of fact, but I'm not convinced they need to do that.

 

[Pickman's model]

From memory, about 600,000 people have tried to register, members, union affiliates and £3 payers. How many do we think are actually being denied? And what makes people think these requests are going to be taken seriously/given genuine answers?

because i don't suppose the labour party wants to be dragged through the courts over this

 

[cesare]

because i don't suppose the labour party wants to be dragged through the courts over this

Plus potentially big investigation from the ICO, potential fines, bad PR etc

 

[killer b]

Possibly I don't know how it works as well as you do. Maybe you could outline specifically how you think it will work in this case.

Obviously if they say to Geri they think she's a member of the SWP, she can challenge that on the basis of fact, but I'm not convinced they need to do that.

It's fine that you don't know how something works, but maybe read about it first before postulating at length about it - as there's a risk of both spreading bad information and looking a bit silly.

 

[Pickman's model]

It's fine that you don't know how something works, but maybe read about it first before farting at length about it - as there's a risk of both spreading bad information and looking a bit silly.

c4u

 

[andysays]

It's fine that you don't know how something works, but maybe read about it first before postulating at length about it - as there's a risk of both spreading bad information and looking a bit silly.

I didn't say I didn't know how it works, I said that possibly I don't know how it works as well as you do, and invited you to outline how you think it will work in this case.

You're still welcome to do that, or you could just carry on distorting what I'm saying and asserting with no real substance that you know better. Up to you...

 

[Wilf]

He addressed Corbyn’s pledge to apologise on behalf of Labour for the Iraq war, suggesting that he could be open to this after the Chilcot report was published if “apologies need to be made”.

So, some time around 2028 there'll be a mumbled "soz" from Burham.

 

[killer b]

I didn't say I didn't know how it works, I said that possibly I don't know how it works as well as you do, and invited you to outline how you think it will work in this case.

You're still welcome to do that, or you could just carry on distorting what I'm saying and asserting with no real substance that you know better. Up to you...

OK. I think they'll send a copy of all the personal data they hold on anyone who does a subject access request, as they're legally obliged to. Contained within this data will be the evidence they used when deciding to refuse a sign-up.

 

[andysays]

OK. I think they'll send a copy of all the personal data they hold on anyone who does a subject access request, as they're legally obliged to. Contained within this data will be the evidence they used when deciding to refuse a sign-up.

That's more or less what I thought too.

But within that there are potentially simple issues of fact ("you think I'm a member of a rival party but I'm not"), but also issues of opinion/interpretation ("you think that something I've said/done demonstrates that I don't fully/adequetely support the LP and although I agree that I said/did it, I don't agree with your interpretation").

This will doubtless indicate that they are excluding some people on dubious grounds of interpretation (and probably a few on mistaken fact as well) but I don't really think it's going to lead to a practical difference in the result of the election, or be instrumental in convoncing more than a handful of people who weren't otherwise convinced that the LP is mendacious and otherwise unworthy of their support.

That's all I'm trying to say, though perhaps I didn't make it clear enough to begin with

 

[Pickman's model]

That's all I'm trying to say, though perhaps I didn't make it clear enough to begin with

now can we move on and leave this unedifying spat behind us?

 

[Wilf]

From memory, about 600,000 people have tried to register, members, union affiliates and £3 payers. How many do we think are actually being denied? And what makes people think these requests are going to be taken seriously/given genuine answers?

I'm not for one moment justifying what the LP is doing but it's neither a surprise nor (IMO) worth bothering with asking for the individual justifications when the bigger issue is the reason why they're doing it at all. Just my £3 worth...

The Scotsman piece said:

Although the vetting process is not yet complete, Scotland on Sunday understands the early indications are that almost 10 per cent of the 310,000 or so registered and affiliated “supporters” can be shown to be “entryists”.

Almost by definition the '25,000' claim will be predominantly 3 quidders and union members. A figure approaching 10% of that electorate rejected is pretty high. The obvious issues are that this is being done without the remotest consistency, happens more in some constituencies than others - and is affecting Corbyn supporters more than others. An example is that the Scotsman piece says they are taking canvass returns into account as one bit of the jigsaw. Can't actually imagine they have universal canvass returns nowadays, but that's by the by. The point is canvassing returns work along the lines of 'and will you be voting Labour.... err, yes.... and do you think everybody in the house will be..... erm, err, yes....'. An absurd basis to make a legally challengeable decision to exclude someone from an election. Ditto the idea of using 'bliar is a cunt' on somebody's facebook. The other bit, which is more fuck up than conspiracy, is that they are still excluding people well into the period when the voting has started. It's gerrymandering that is at once both blatant and incompetent.

At one level, I'm not a Westminster politics fan and I think all this left of centre (ish) energy going into the corbyn campaign is a massive diversion, a waste of energy. However it really is worth exposing the mendacity - that's an end in it'self. Admittedly, the Labour machine will be just as mendacious if Corbyn wins, just as it would have been all those years ago if Lord Stansgate had won.

 

[nino_savatte]

The latest anti-Corbyn piece from Pollee

The idea of Corbyn winning Tory votes stretches credulity. I remain convinced that Yvette Cooper has the best chance of holding the party together, appealing widely – especially to women – as a tough anti-austerity economist holding the Tories’ feet to the fire. If Labour can’t elect a winner, nothing will stop the Tory evisceration of public services and the welfare state.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/25/labour-race-corbyn-wins-britain-out-of-europe

Cooper is seriously shite and she offers nothing different to the other right-wing candidates or the Tories for that matter. Worse, perhaps, her policies (what little I've heard of them) are superficial/cosmetic and don't address the structural issues.