Tag Archives: unrepresentative

Starmer wins vote to make Labour ‘paler, maler and staler’

Pale, male and stale: this is the future of the Labour Party – a white man in a suit with absolutely no ideas at all.

Keir Starmer has succeeded in changing the rules on Labour Party leadership elections that makes them racist and sexist.

A vote on his proposed rule changes means that at least 20 per cent of Labour MPs will have to endorse a colleague’s candidacy to lead the party – a threshold that has previously been reached by just one female candidate, and by nobody who is not white.

If they had been applied before the 2020 leadership election, the only candidate on the ballot paper would have been Keir Starmer. You can see why he likes them.

Grassroots party members will not be allowed to vote on their preference until MPs have decided who they will be allowed to vote for. And there are too few socialist (left-wing) MPs left in the Parliamentary party, so if members want to vote for a left-wing candidate, they will not be offered the chance.

The sexism and racism of the new rules was pointed out before the vote was taken by James McAsh, a delegate from Camberwell and Peckham whose party membership is likey to be revoked in the very near future.

He said the change meant Labour’s future debate would be “paler, maler and staler”:

The vote was very tight indeed – 53 per cent for to 46 per cent against. This Writer understands that Starmer only won because Unison was persuaded to support him with its block vote.

I would urge Unison members to ask their leaders why they support racism and sexism, and why they chose to undermine democracy.

It is also possible that Starmer gerrymandered the result with his mass expulsions. This Writer would like to know how many actual votes were cast, and how this figure compares with those for votes in previous years.

Also included in the rule changes:

It will be harder for grassroots members to deselect unwanted MPs, with more than half required to demand a reselection procedure before it can take place.

And registered supporters, who pay a one-off fee to vote in party elections, are abolished.

Boris Johnson is probably laughing so hard he may bust his enormous gut.

It is bitterly sad that Labour is now more sexist, more racist, and less democratic because a right-wing trade union supported a leader who is more right-wing than the Conservatives. The members most affected by this – constituency parties – overwhelmingly voted against the change.

Of course, Starmer lied in order to fool party members into voting for him – and that should be enough reason to demand his resignation and a new election under the rules that existed until today, on the grounds that the change would not have been brought in under an honest leader.

Sadly, Labour doesn’t have an honest leader.

And he certainly isn’t going to allow anything like decency to take power away from him.

Of course, it doesn’t make any real difference. The only votes he can win are rigged.

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Undemocratic, unrepresentative: but the Board of Deputies is gaslighting Labour into thinking it stands up for British Jews

Marie Van Der Zyl: What is the president of the Board of Deputies trying to achieve? And why is she trying to gaslight us all into thinking she represents all British Jews? She doesn’t.

This Writer came in for some flack a couple of days ago after I characterised the Board of Deputies of British Jews as undemocratic and unrepresentative.

A person on Twitter claimed that the BoD, that has managed to get eight of the Labour leadership and deputy leadership candidates to sign up to its 10 pledges intended to seal its anti-Semitism witch-hunt into party policies (see my recent articles), is democratic because it has elections.

Well, I did a bit of research, going to Jewish sources.

According to Jewish Voice for Labour – which I certainly trust more than the Board of Deputies itself or that organisation’s Wikipedia page – this is the situation:

The Board’s claim to be democratic is, however, distinctly tenuous. There are no British Jewish elections, no direct way for all British Jews to directly elect the board’s 300 Deputies. To be involved in electing Deputies, one must be a member of one or more of approximately 138 synagogues, or be connected to one of 34 ‘communal organisations’ (such as the UJIA or Reform Judaism) that are affiliated with the Board, all of which elect one to five Deputies—anyone not involved with these institutions does not have a vote, despite the Board still claiming to speak on their behalf. Inevitably, some individuals may be represented multiple times, through being members of more than one organisation.

The biggest problem, however, is with the elections held by affiliate organisations to select their deputies—it is these that justify the Board’s claim to be a representative democracy. Transparency is a fundamental requirement of democracy—there needs to be openness as to who the electorate is and how many of them turn out in order for any election to be considered legitimate. Despite its own constitution obliging it to receive the data (Appendix A, Clause 3: “the election shall not be validated unless the form incorporates… the total number of members of the congregation… and the number who attended the election meeting”), the Board does not release a list of the membership size or the numbers voting in each affiliate organisation, and claims to have no idea what the numbers might be. The Board’s spokesman explained to me that, “While we do need to be more thorough in collecting statistics, these figures wouldn’t add anything—they don’t speak to the democratic legitimacy of the organisation or to anything else.” This seems extraordinarily complacent—can we imagine a British election in which the size of the electorate, the list of candidates standing, and the turnout remained secret? It would be regarded as an affront to democracy.

So there you have it.

There are indeed elections for the Board of Deputies…

But they are an “affront to democracy”.

And this is the organisation that dares to lecture Labour on its policies, practices and procedures?

Pathetic.

The members of Labour cannot allow anyone who supports this group’s bigoted demands to have a senior role in the party.

I tweeted Jennie Formby, the party’s general secretary, to ask if there was a system by which the membership could hold a “no confidence” vote in the current election process.

But she hasn’t even had the courtesy to respond.

Source: Who exactly does the Board of Deputies represent? | Jewish Voice for Labour

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Cameron’s Palestine abstention is just as well. What is his word worth?

The BBC is reporting that David Cameron will abstain on today’s (Monday) symbolic vote on whether the UK should acknowledge Palestine as a state in its own right. If that’s true, it’s just as well.

Let’s be honest – with his record for gross dishonesty Cameron wouldn’t convince anybody, no matter which way he votes. Only today, Dr Kailash Chand tweeted the following:

141013chandtweet

You could also check out today’s Vox Political article on the National Health Service.

The BBC article states that current UK government policy is that it “reserves the right to recognise a Palestinian state bilaterally at the moment of our choosing and when it can best help bring about peace”.

Cameron’s official spokesman is quoted as saying: “The government’s position is very clear and hasn’t changed, so I think that is a very clear indication of the British government’s approach.”

It’s also clearly at odds with the British people, if Vox Political‘s own poll is any indication.

Readers of this site made it perfectly clear that they overwhelmingly support recognising Palestine’s statehood now, with no conditions attached. This option gained no less than 86.5 per cent of the vote.

Cameron’s choice – to recognise Palestine later – garnered just three votes.

He’s not representing the British people at all.

Follow me on Twitter: @MidWalesMike

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
asking the searching questions!
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook