Yes or No -AV referendum May 2011

[Santino]

"Official liberal media".

 

[butchersapron]

YG has it today at

FPTP: 41
AV: 32
DK: 21
WV: 7

 

[butchersapron]

Angus Reid with very diff results.

 

[butchersapron]

AV referendum date may be delayed by peers, BBC learns

Labour idiocy - get it tied to may, get it tied to the lib-dems and the regional elections.

Bit more info on that - it seems to be about the new (fewer) constituencies then, which makes more sense for labour.

 

[Streathamite]

I support the Labour party in the sense that a rope supports a hanging man. My politics have never been simply Labourist. I don't consider being a highly critical member of the Labour Party to be the most imporant feature of my politics. But I've never denied it.

you're either a member of Labour - or you're not. There's no middle ground. And that must mean that, on balance, you have enough faith in enough of their policy-mix, in what you feel they stand for, to make the bits you don't like tolerable. No rope-and-hanged-man about it.

 

[butchersapron]

I like the comparison to lenin though

 

[Random]

Here's the original quote freom Lenin.

If I come out as a Communist and call upon them to vote for Henderson and against Lloyd George, they will certainly give me a hearing. And I shall be able to explain in a popular manner, not only why the Soviets are better than a parliament and why the dictatorship of the proletariat is better than the dictatorship of Churchill (disguised with the signboard of bourgeois "democracy"), but also that, with my vote, I want to support Henderson in the same way as the rope supports a hanged man—that the impending establishment of a government of the Hendersons will prove that I am right, will bring the masses over to my side, and will hasten the political death of the Hendersons and the Snowdens just as was the case with their kindred spirits in Russia and Germany.

 

[Quartz]

AV referendum date may be delayed by peers, BBC learns

Labour idiocy - get it tied to may, get it tied to the lib-dems and the regional elections.

Bit more info on that - it seems to be about the new (fewer) constituencies then, which makes more sense for labour.

Did the Tories do this deliberately? Or is it just creative incompetence?

 

[butchersapron]

Do what?

 

[Santino]

Is Labour hoping that the govt will drop the boundary review proposals to ensure that the referendum on AV will go through?

 

[Streathamite]

Is Labour hoping that the govt will drop the boundary review proposals to ensure that the referendum on AV will go through?

I think they prolly are. They certainly are more worried about the gerrymandering than AV

 

[articul8]

And that must mean
that, on balance, you have enough faith in enough of their policy-mix, in what you feel they stand for, to make the bits you don't like tolerable. No rope-and-hanged-man about it.

Faith in the "policy mix"?! No not at all, on the contrary. But it occupies a political and electoral space that will make it a pole of attraction for millions of working class voters desperate to kick out at the coalition. So linking up the more radical elements of Labour - especially at a grassroots level - with other forces against the cuts, at least threatens to pressurise the leadership to shift left.

 

[Streathamite]

I like the comparison to lenin though

ditto! 10 out of 10 for front!

 

[Streathamite]

So linking up the more radical elements of Labour - especially at a grassroots level - with other forces against the cuts, at least threatens to pressurise the leadership to shift left.

but left activists in the LP (including myself, once) have been trying to achieve that for decades, with F- all success.

 

[articul8]

Yes. And the left whose horizons begin and end with the existing structures of the Labour party are fucked. I'm not arguing for that, or even that working in Labour is a better place to start than working and campainging outside. And of course you can aim at upsurges from below, revolutionary general strikes and all the rest of it. (not that the existing ultra-left has achieved jack shit in this country either). But at a certain stage, the extra-parliamentary left has to engage with role of electoral politics in the ideological legitimation of particular ways of looking at society.

I think AV would offer a chink of light for letting the labour left and extra-labour left to work together and bring influence to bear internally and externally. But of course it's not only going to be at the electoral level that Labour will be pushed to the left - it will be in the anti-cuts movement, and trade union militancy. I don't think the old model of "our party for our class" [which was never true by the way] will work - there will be a more complex set of party alignments which emerge.

 

[William of Walworth]

BUMPED in view of current news.

Any thoughts on House of Lords shenanigans right now?

We have Labour peers aiming to be as obstructive and filibustering as possible

This seems to be aiming at getting blatantly pro-Tory seats-gerrymandering over 'boundary changes' separated from the AV aspect of the referendum bill ...

Little as I like the HoL, I'm all for what Labour are doing here, and I hope they succeed.

If the upcoming referendum contains anything other than just the electoral reform bit, I'm definitely voting NO. And not necessarily yes even then ....

 

[Santino]

That's not how it works. The bill does two things: 1) changes constituency boundaries; and 2) sets up a referendum on AV. The first would go through whatever the result of the referendum.

 

[William of Walworth]

That's not how it works. The bill does two things: 1) changes constituency boundaries; and 2) sets up a referendum on AV. The first would go through whatever the result of the referendum.

OK, I was always a bit confused about that

But if the two aspects are separated in Parliament, then surely there's at least SOME chance that he merits/demerits and details of the boundary changes part will be scrutinised much more closely in committee etc?

 

[articul8]

Difficulty is that the two elements are yoked together in order to keep coalition together - they come as a package in the coalition agreement (ie. for political expediency rather than constitutional necessity). I don't expect them to be decoupled, unfortunately.

 

[William of Walworth]

Difficulty is that the two elements are yoked together in order to keep coalition together - they come as a package in the coalition agreement (ie. for political expediency rather than constitutional necessity). I don't expect them to be decoupled, unfortunately.

You are right I fear. Neither do I expect that ...

Tories have been utterly nowhere at offering any kind of justification of their boundary change plans ....

 

[Lakina]

In the name of Jesus, no.

 

[butchersapron]

The Labour Representation Committee's NC have just voted to support the NO campaign.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

Only the rightwing in Labour support the Yes Campaign.

 

[articul8]

bollocks - since when have Livingstone, Tony Benn, Diane Abbott, etc represented "the right"?

 

[articul8]

[re LRC] Really? Not surprising but disappointing. McDonnell has previously supported (not sure whether this will change his position) - and I gather PCS will too.

 

[butchersapron]

Well it's your claim that it's only the disgusting old tories supporting the no vote out of the window isn't it? Not that it ever stood up to a seconds critical scrutiny anyway. The GMB's support for the No vote undermines the same sort of case you're still obv trying to make as regards unions.

 

[articul8]

It shows the British left retains an uncanny ability to shoot itself in the foot. supporters of PR who link arms with people who don't want the system to change one iota are being stupid beyond belief.

People who are adopting that position have a duty to offer an alternative plausible strategy for getting PR quicker. If they can I'd be delighted. But sadly, they are just helping to reinforce Tory/conservative Labourist hegemony for the forseeable future.

Sadly union leaderships are mostly happy to defend their present power-base rather than see anything change too. You happy supporting them?

 

[butchersapron]

It shows we're all thick but you - clearly. As i said before, please please continue to run the yes campaign in this manner -and get yourself out on the knocker as well. You'd do a world of damage.

 

[frogwoman]

Socialism Today had an article opposing AV this month. Not that the SP or anyone else has a monoploy on being "the true voice of the left" but if all of these left wing organistions (and i mean real left wing organisations, and not green party shite etc) are coming out with oppoising views to it, do you not think it is time to at least listen to their concerns rather than dismissing any opposition to it as being supportive of tories?

i mean if the Labour representation committee etc have even come out against it as well ??

 

[frogwoman]

you're either a member of Labour - or you're not. There's no middle ground. And that must mean that, on balance, you have enough faith in enough of their policy-mix, in what you feel they stand for, to make the bits you don't like tolerable. No rope-and-hanged-man about it.

If youre in the labour party and are an active member of it, you must support it on some level surely, you must think that even if its policies are shit at the moment they "could" get better?