Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf
what are these views??? any links to them
|
Jackie Walker of Momentum:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37547873
Quote:
She was suspended by the Labour Party in May over comments made on social media in which she claimed that "many Jews (my ancestors too) were the chief financiers of the sugar and slave trade" but was re-admitted following an investigation.
She was suspended again from the party last week after a leaked video emerged.
It showed her saying at an anti-Semitism training event: "I came here... with an open mind and I was seeking information and I still haven't heard a definition of anti-Semitism that I can work with". She also questioned why Holocaust Memorial Day was not more wide ranging.
|
Vicky Kirby
http://order-order.com/2016/03/14/vicki-kirby-on-jews/
And I won't bother supplying a link, but rather simply say "Ken Livingstone"
These are Members (hopefully former members) of Labour or groups closely linked to Labour. is that good enough?
---------- Post added at 11:57 ---------- Previous post was at 11:48 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf
i get the feeling he thinks its the memberships party and not the [mp's] who should serve the membership not ignore them .
|
The problem with that is that the MPs derive their mandate from their constituencies, and from a voter base that's much wider than just party members.
While there are a lot of folk who will vote only by party and pretty much ignore the local candidate's pluses/minuses, others (like me) are sometimes prepared to look beyond a candidate's party banner and vote for them on their record in work locally.
Look at it like this: Say the Labour membership vote to change the party policy to make petrol driven cars illegal in 10 years. Should the Labour MPs in Ellesmere Port (Vauxhall Factory), Halewood (Jaguar Land Rover factory), Sunderland (Nissan), Derby (Toyota) simply roll over and agree to that?