Pages

Sunday, 25 October 2015

Constitutional Crisis? 3Million800 Reasons To Have One Says Me!

The French have a saying the more things change the more they stay the same. And so it seems in politics, especially in the Labour party. Because all of a sudden the newly elected left-wing Corbyn leadership wants to play it all respectable just like the right wing fools they so recently ousted. Instead of using its strength in the House of Lords to support the Libdems rarely-used "fatal motion" which would scrap the proposed tax credit cuts  altogether, Corbyn and his pals will split the vote by backing a rival motion calling for the changes to be delayed pending an independent analysis of their impact and until transitional assistance is put in place.

Wasn’t it Corbyn and McDonnell who, just a few short weeks ago, were chastising then then party Leader Harriet Harman for not opposing the tax credit cuts?  Surely their wrecking motion in the Lords is doing Harman’s dirty work by  dividing progressive forces and allowing the Tories to drive this vindictive bill through the middle. So much for all the self-righteous  talk of a bright new socialist future,  when Corbyn and McDonnell have more or less said to the Tories let’s work together on tweaking and making more palatable these nasty vindictive cuts, instead of practising what they so recently preached and opposing the cuts  all-to-fucking-gether.
And their pathetic excuse for behaving like Harman  is that by not  backing the LibDems the Labour Party will heroically rescue the country from a major constitutional crisis with the lords pitted against the Commons. But hang on,  I thought Corbyn and his comrades want to abolish the undemocratic Lords. Surely  helping to provoke an almighty clash between the 2 houses of Parliament would be exactly what they want as it would hasten the demise of the non-elected ermine wearing fuckers who get £300 a day for doing nothing much at all.  Not to mention the fact that the living standards of 3 million of the poorest people in the country are, in my book,  somewhat more important than 800 odd unelected posh fuckers  playing at  politics in a mdieval building falling down around their ears. Surely Jeremy there are 3 million 800 good reasons for Labour to provoke a constitutional crisis?
Until today I genuinely believed Corbyn when he said new politics was on its way. Now I’m not too sure. Instead of building alliances with other progressive groups on issues of critical importance to the nations poorest, he plays the typical tribalistic party games of his predecessors dividing  the vote like an old-fashioned sectarian Labour boss.  Instead of properly opposing a nasty vindictive attack upon some of the nation's most vulnerable,  he now offers to mediate its implementation with the Tories. And these retreats and sell outs are all justified on the grounds of not breaching a constitution which no fucker understands and which makes no difference even  if they did. And the sad thing is this, that what Corbyn and McDonell are doing today is  precisely the same thing that Neil Kinnock did in the mid  80s –  insisting the Labour Party remains law abiding, constitutional and reasonable whatever the price might be – which was then of course the selling out of the miners and the stabbing in the back of  progressive councils fighting rate capping. 30 odd years later the price of parliamentary respectability is the likelihood that Labour will sell out  3 million of the country’s poorest to protect a medieval institution of 800 privileged gits. 
Sorry to say it but my confidence in Corbyn as a transformative force in the Labour Party has rapidly declined in the past few days. And I’m sure that Liz Kendall, Yvette Cooper and Andy Burnham are now pissing their pants  laughing at the shambolic farce they will soon overthrow. Thankfully there is a Green Party waiting in the wings for those soon to be disillusioned Corbynistas to join. 

Constitutional Crisis? Come on Jeremy there's  3 million 800 compelling reasons to bring it on! 

 
Won't Get Fooled Again? Or Will We Jeremy?
 
 

No comments:

Post a Comment