Starmer's rule changes, already watered down, pass by just 53/47... can't see the breakdown but I assume that means constituency vote was even closer or went the other way... huge bonfire of political capital that will only benefit a right-wing challenger ...
2/ ... and given the branch shutdowns, union backroom deals needed to achieve even this, I can see this being reversed fairly easily if the left advances in Unison...
3/ Added to this the Green New Deal motion ruled out of order a week ago just passed. The left needs to create a single Labour entity that new people can join up to and participate in...
4/ ... and TWT shows young people are still drawn to a left-Labour politics (as well as increasingly the Greens)... so the leadership increasingly out of step with their mass base (albeit in step with union leaders who want to let the planet burn) ... a lot to fight for.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
#Lab21 balance sheet. 1/ 80% of the members voted for PR after a long left+right campaign, substantially led by @labourlewis. A few union delegates had power to squash it - but when the time comes to form a Labour-led coalition, if consulted, the members will back it...
2/ So this is a major change in British politics, and driven from below. Defying the bureaucracy the members signalled to other parties they understand: we cannot govern alone, and need urgent constitutional change...
3/ @RachelReevesMP commitment to a £224bn climate investment spend also strategic win - a direct response to the consistent Green polling around 6%. This too is the building block for a governing coalition with Greens/PC/SNP...
Starmer #Marr interview leaves a random selection of Labour faces here in Brighton pretty dour... energy nationalisation is the only possible solution: you can't run the National Grid as a co-op... 1/
2/ Rayner's "scum" comment reflects exactly how working class people talk - and how many voters want to see the super-rich crooks characterised ... yet Keir couldn't bring himself to endorse it...
3/ There's already quite a bit of disquiet over the rule change SNAFU - even among the Labour right... who are rightly obsessed with speaking outside the bubble ...
Labour's NEC is proposing that future leadership candidates need 1/5 of all existing MPs... here's why that should be stopped: 1/ it's designed to stifle the left only... the membership is way to the left of the PLP...
2/ It entrenches machine politics. The PLP is already substantially bereft of people who could feasibly govern, or make a convincing speech - but now all you have to do is network at Westminster...
3/ ... it stifles original voices and ideas: most truly competitive fields - business, the arts, sport - are led by talented misfits with the flair and passion to excel... the list of great potential Labour PMs we never had will grow ...
Labour's attempt to ditch one-member-one-vote is, of course, a massive diversion from the important debates: Green New Deal and constitutional reform... but defeating it is vital... 1/ We're not in the 1970s anymore...
2/ I fought against OMOV in the 90s, because CLPs were sparse, inactive while unions were still (just) activist organisations, whose members could pressure bureaucrats through mass action...
3/ Today, I see OMOV as vital to Labour's transition from a Labourist party to a radical social democracy ... in a networked society, with multiple forms of exploitation, the individual activist should be sovereign...
What's the social-democratic answer to the care crisis? That's the question that should guide Labour today. The answer is 1/ As a universal social need, care should be free at the point of use and funded from general taxation... that's been a Labour value since the year dot...
2/ Nobody is asking Labour to design this on the back of an envelope but to state the principle. It may need a decade to get there, like zero net carbon, but the principle has to be clear... and here's why...
3/ Since health and social care need to integrate, and one is user pays and the other free at the point of use, over time the user pays principle will erode the NHS... so will hypothecation...
First reaction to Johnson's NI rise 1/ It's a clear reversal for the Tory right - Sunak promised before the last election to cut NI... but as a move it's regressive, and attacks the incomes of working age families...
2/ The cap and floors for the wealth grab don't solve the problem: a semi in Newbury sells for 400k, the average house sale in Leigh is a terrace for 112k - so all caps that are not proportional are regressive...
3/ There's nothing in this that improves care quality, availability, or even the fragility of the private care industry...