Next UK Labour Leader

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Andy Burnham has insisted that Labour "simply cannot abstain" on the Welfare Bill soon after he abstained in the Commons vote.

Not quite what he said.

"Whilst we may have lost the vote tonight (the amendment), that doesn’t mean the battle has to be over. Tonight I am firing the starting gun on Labour's opposition to this Bill. If I am elected leader in September, I am determined that Labour will fight this regressive Bill word by word, line by line. I am clear that if the Government do not make major changes to protect working families, children and the disabled, then, under my Leadership, Labour will oppose this Bill with everything we’ve got when it comes back before MPs later this year."

Earlier Burnham wrote to MPs vowing to vote against the bill at third reading unless "major changes" were made at committee stage.

I think the implication is that Labour cannot (and should not imho) abstain on the third reading.

Burnham seems to be trying to put some red water between him and the Kendall supporters - it may be interesting to see how Cooper reacts.

[Fide]

Labour are now trolling surely?

http://labourhame.com/labour-is-standing-up-for-social-security/#more-5324

Labour is standing up for social security

Published July 21, 2015 | By Ian Murray

Shadow Scottish Secretary Ian Murray MP explains Labour’s approach to the Welfare Reform and Work Bill, and explodes some myths about what has been going on in Parliament over the last 24 hours.

When I was elected in 2010 I always said, and I have continued to repeat, that I will be open and honest with people about the decisions I take in Parliament. On issue after issue after issue, that hundreds of people contact me about on a daily basis, I respond with as full and open an answer as I can.

Politics requires people to make difficult decisions. You have to weigh up all the arguments, come to a judgement and then justify that judgement. All of this within an environment where your opponents are trying to trip you up at every stage.

You will never get every decision right. If you were to then you wouldn’t be human. But equally, it is not always possible to get everyone to agree. The Labour party is a broad church and so it should be. A party where everyone agrees all the time is, in my view, not a healthy party.

The social security system (we have all fallen into the trap of calling it “welfare”) is in trouble. Attacked by the Tories, pilloried in the press and under strain from an ageing population, it is sometimes hard to see the course we should take to make sure that it will survive, as everyone in the Labour Party wants it to.

We must be proud of our social security system. It supports the elderly, the unemployed, the disabled and the poor. We should be proud of the fact that the last Labour government took 800,000 children and 2,000,000 pensioners out of poverty and we continue that mission.

Debates around social security are fierce precisely because the stakes are so high, and so they should be. And it’s no surprise that the Tories’ latest round of welfare reform has provoked a rightful outcry.

I want to set this straight. Last night I and Labour voted for our amendment “not to give the Bill a second reading”. It says that in the amendment itself. Unfortunately it didn’t pass because the Tories have a majority in the House of Commons. We then abstained on the bill as a whole. Why? Because while there is much in the bill that we disagree with, there are policies which we support. Many of which the Tories have taken from us.

This bill contains provisions for three million apprenticeships, cuts in council rents, and support for troubled families that we would not oppose. However, as our amendment set out, the Tories’ attacks on child poverty targets and cuts to support for the sick and disabled are measures we fiercely oppose.

The measures which we support include:

• Three million apprenticeships
• Cuts in council and social housing rents
• Support for troubled families
• Loans for mortgage interest

The measures which we oppose include:

• Abolition of child poverty targets and the removal of these from the Social Mobility Commission
• Cuts to support for the sick and disabled who are not fit for work – this includes people who have cancer or Parkinson’s disease.
• Freeze on benefit levels

That’s why immediately after the vote last night, we tabled a raft of significant amendments for the next stage which would remove the worst parts and keep in place the provisions we agree with, such as those on apprenticeships. We will keep working through the next stage of the bill to get the improvements we want and will look at it again when it returns for its final stage in the House of Commons. Some have been designed in conjunction with third sector and charitable organisations.

It might be helpful to set out that the Welfare Reform and Work Bill does not contain the changes which the government are proposing to tax credits – they will be introduced in separate legislation. I can assure you we will oppose them vociferously. The Chancellor’s changes to tax credits are regressive and will cut tax credits for millions of working families making them poorer whilst they are doing the right thing in work.

Some people are claiming that the bill would have been defeated last night if everyone voted against. This is not only wrong to claim, but those who are claiming it know it to be wrong. You can’t defeat a Government with an absolute majority on a major piece of their legislative programme. To suggest otherwise is wrong. Those who should know better taking to social media to perpetuate this myth are either peddling untruths or they simply do not understand the parliamentary process.

These issues are not easy, but the truth is that we need to have a big debate about how we preserve the social security system for future generations. At the election in May, Labour put forward the ideas we thought would best achieve that. It was honest about the challenges we faced, but also about our responsibility to support our society’s most vulnerable people.

The SNP and Liberal Democrats had their own amendments last night too but these were not selected for debate. The problem is that they have been trying to look both ways on social security for years. So last night we had SNP MPs attacking the benefit cap, but less than two weeks ago John Swinney told the BBC that “there is a role for a benefits cap.” During the referendum, Nicola Sturgeon promised a social security system that went beyond what was on offer inside the UK, but was never once able to explain how she would pay for it.

The debate about something as important as the survival of the social security system shouldn’t be reduced to arguments about parliamentary tactics. It demeans the importance of the decisions we need to make and dilutes the serious debate.

[Todders]

I'm starting to think that these antics are to try and force the left wing out of the party so there is nobody left to vote for Corbyn.

It's about a reasonable explanation as that drivel from the above dreg of the Labour party in Scotland.

[Kyle]

So Bliar is apparently making a speech today, backing anyone but Corbyn and Tristram Hunt has gone onto a BBC talk show this morning and described Corbyn as labour's answer to Syriza.

He's got them utterly rattled. Unbelievable levels of backstabbing within what is supposed to be one party.

Labour are going to end up being a complete irrelevance.

[Fide]

So Bliar is apparently making a speech today, backing anyone but Corbyn and Tristram Hunt has gone onto a BBC talk show this morning and described Corbyn as labour's answer to Syriza.

He's got them utterly rattled. Unbelievable levels of backstabbing within what is supposed to be one party.

Labour are going to end up being a complete irrelevance.

What do you mean "end up"?

After #labstain, they're already there.

[doulikefish]

So Bliar is apparently making a speech today, backing anyone but Corbyn and Tristram Hunt has gone onto a BBC talk show this morning and described Corbyn as labour's answer to Syriza.

He's got them utterly rattled. Unbelievable levels of backstabbing within what is supposed to be one party.

Labour are going to end up being a complete irrelevance.

But it gets diet tories like jmo back onside though when the blessed tony speaks

[Kyle]

What do you mean "end up"?

After #labstain, they're already there.

I think they probably are in Scotland because the SNP have basically stolen their clothes and pinched their voters.

The way this leadership campaign is going is actually quite Tory-like. The complete lack of respect they're showing to their leading candidate (which they can hardly deny after the nominations and the poll results so far) is disgraceful.

Must admit - I'm surprised that Kendall hasn't received more support from within the party. She seems the kind of moderate Tory the labour drones seem to absolutely love.

[Kyle]

If anyone wants a laugh, Michael Deacon on twitter is posting Bliar's speech. It's basically an attack on the left. He apparently 'came to quite like Ed Miliband as a political character'.

He's apparently just said the following;

'People who say their heart is with Corbyn, get a transplant'.

Bliar is a thundercunt. I might join labour just to vote for Corbyn.

[Mr Rational]

Yeah Blair is giving a speech just now on the future of Labour at the institute of chartered accountants.

Make of that what you will. I genuinely wonder what would happen if he gave the same speech at the Durham Miners Gala.....

[Elixir]

[Crùbag]

Even the Daily Rectum is putting the boot in. DR backs a Yes vote in #indyref2?

[Crùbag]

Labour are now trolling surely?

http://labourhame.com/labour-is-standing-up-for-social-security/#more-5324

Labour is standing up for social security

Published July 21, 2015 | By Ian Murray

Shadow Scottish Secretary Ian Murray MP explains Labour’s approach to the Welfare Reform and Work Bill, and explodes some myths about what has been going on in Parliament over the last 24 hours.

When I was elected in 2010 I always said, and I have continued to repeat, that I will be open and honest with people about the decisions I take in Parliament. On issue after issue after issue, that hundreds of people contact me about on a daily basis, I respond with as full and open an answer as I can.

Politics requires people to make difficult decisions. You have to weigh up all the arguments, come to a judgement and then justify that judgement. All of this within an environment where your opponents are trying to trip you up at every stage.

You will never get every decision right. If you were to then you wouldn’t be human. But equally, it is not always possible to get everyone to agree. The Labour party is a broad church and so it should be. A party where everyone agrees all the time is, in my view, not a healthy party.

The social security system (we have all fallen into the trap of calling it “welfare”) is in trouble. Attacked by the Tories, pilloried in the press and under strain from an ageing population, it is sometimes hard to see the course we should take to make sure that it will survive, as everyone in the Labour Party wants it to.

We must be proud of our social security system. It supports the elderly, the unemployed, the disabled and the poor. We should be proud of the fact that the last Labour government took 800,000 children and 2,000,000 pensioners out of poverty and we continue that mission.

Debates around social security are fierce precisely because the stakes are so high, and so they should be. And it’s no surprise that the Tories’ latest round of welfare reform has provoked a rightful outcry.

I want to set this straight. Last night I and Labour voted for our amendment “not to give the Bill a second reading”. It says that in the amendment itself. Unfortunately it didn’t pass because the Tories have a majority in the House of Commons. We then abstained on the bill as a whole. Why? Because while there is much in the bill that we disagree with, there are policies which we support. Many of which the Tories have taken from us.

This bill contains provisions for three million apprenticeships, cuts in council rents, and support for troubled families that we would not oppose. However, as our amendment set out, the Tories’ attacks on child poverty targets and cuts to support for the sick and disabled are measures we fiercely oppose.

The measures which we support include:

• Three million apprenticeships
• Cuts in council and social housing rents
• Support for troubled families
• Loans for mortgage interest

The measures which we oppose include:

• Abolition of child poverty targets and the removal of these from the Social Mobility Commission
• Cuts to support for the sick and disabled who are not fit for work – this includes people who have cancer or Parkinson’s disease.
• Freeze on benefit levels

That’s why immediately after the vote last night, we tabled a raft of significant amendments for the next stage which would remove the worst parts and keep in place the provisions we agree with, such as those on apprenticeships. We will keep working through the next stage of the bill to get the improvements we want and will look at it again when it returns for its final stage in the House of Commons. Some have been designed in conjunction with third sector and charitable organisations.

It might be helpful to set out that the Welfare Reform and Work Bill does not contain the changes which the government are proposing to tax credits – they will be introduced in separate legislation. I can assure you we will oppose them vociferously. The Chancellor’s changes to tax credits are regressive and will cut tax credits for millions of working families making them poorer whilst they are doing the right thing in work.

Some people are claiming that the bill would have been defeated last night if everyone voted against. This is not only wrong to claim, but those who are claiming it know it to be wrong. You can’t defeat a Government with an absolute majority on a major piece of their legislative programme. To suggest otherwise is wrong. Those who should know better taking to social media to perpetuate this myth are either peddling untruths or they simply do not understand the parliamentary process.

These issues are not easy, but the truth is that we need to have a big debate about how we preserve the social security system for future generations. At the election in May, Labour put forward the ideas we thought would best achieve that. It was honest about the challenges we faced, but also about our responsibility to support our society’s most vulnerable people.

The SNP and Liberal Democrats had their own amendments last night too but these were not selected for debate. The problem is that they have been trying to look both ways on social security for years. So last night we had SNP MPs attacking the benefit cap, but less than two weeks ago John Swinney told the BBC that “there is a role for a benefits cap.” During the referendum, Nicola Sturgeon promised a social security system that went beyond what was on offer inside the UK, but was never once able to explain how she would pay for it.

The debate about something as important as the survival of the social security system shouldn’t be reduced to arguments about parliamentary tactics. It demeans the importance of the decisions we need to make and dilutes the serious debate.

Good reply to that!

So you put forward an amendment opposing a second reading of the bill because there are parts of the bill you oppose. But you didn’t vote against a second reading of the bill because there are parts of the bill you support.

Thanks for clearing that up.

[Kyle]

Even the Daily Rectum is putting the boot in. DR backs a Yes vote in #indyref2?

That's as close as an endorsement for the SNP that the Record will ever give. Incredible times.

[Kyle]

@xtophercook: Just had a chat with Labour MP about whether Jeremy Corbyn, as leader, would be deposed within a week or 6 weeks. (He thought a week.)

[~~~]

I'm not sure what is the biggest comedy show right now, London Labour or Scottish Labour

[jmothecat]

He's apparently just said the following;

'People who say their heart is with Corbyn, get a transplant'.

Quote of the campaign. Blair absolutely nailing it. Must be really frustrating for him after the amount he did for the party to watch them fall back into the leftist comfort zone that many in the party apparently still want to return to.

[AUFC90]

Tony Blair and Gordon Brown are the root cause of their current clusterfuck. Long may it continue.

[Fide]

Quote of the campaign. Blair absolutely nailing it. Must be really frustrating for him after the amount he did for the party to watch them fall back into the leftist comfort zone that many in the party apparently still want to return to.

Are you having an actual giraffe?

Like Blair, would you rather lose than win on a left platform?

[MarkoRaj]

Quote of the campaign. Blair absolutely nailing it. Must be really frustrating for him after the amount he did for the party to watch them fall back into the leftist comfort zone that many in the party apparently still want to return to.

:lol::lol:

[xbl.]

Quote of the campaign. Blair absolutely nailing it. Must be really frustrating for him after the amount he did for the party to watch them fall back into the leftist comfort zone that many in the party apparently still want to return to.

Aye, Saint Tony. Queen of our hearts.

Did you join the wrong party by accident? Was there not a moment when everyone gathered round to sing the Red Flag when you went "hold on a minute..."?