Anyone a monumentem (sp) member?

[BrandNewAndImproved]

Never heard of them before Corbyn. Now they're everywhere.

[eatsleephockeyrepeat]

Ooh, didn't know that about HuffPost; although I don't read it, that just turned up on a Google search :P

Just read that article whilst trying to semi-soothe the baby to sleep Swedish; looks interesting. This potential tax-avoiding business, am I right in my reading of it that that belongs to Jon Lansman' s brother and son? Not great for him if they are tax dodging, through legal means or otherwise, although I'm not sure what the poor guy would be able to do about it if they were! I imagine they aren't Labour voters either :P

[0phelia]

As a Labour party member I am thinking of supporting Momentum. They are doing very good important work and are well organised.

[BrandNewAndImproved]

This is all really interesting thanks.

[Hassled]

I'm deeply uncomfortable about Momentum - I know the "No smoke without fire" thing is usually bollocks, but there's just been so much in the way of allusions to bullying tactics. And just within my own CLP there's a "if you're not with us you're against us" attitude from members - that it's the Corbyn way or the Wrong way. I'm not a Corbyn supporter but would be scared to admit that at a local Labour meeting.

And it makes me cross - I've been a member for years, I've never not voted Labour, I've spent hours and hours delivering leaflets and telling and all the rest of it. But somehow now I feel my opinions aren't valid - I know I'd be shouted down if I said publicly (within Labour) "actually, I'm not sure Corbyn is the right person". And I feel it is Momentum who have made things this way - there's no real debate anymore, even within my local Labour FB group.

[SwedishEdith]

I was quite excited by the economists they got on board when Corbyn was elected -

www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/12/team-mcdonnell-shadow-chancellor-to-meet-economic-advisers-stiglitz-and-piketty

But, they've all pretty much moved away from aligning themselves now.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/thomas-piketty-resigns-from-labour-party-role-a7108891.html

And some are now positively anti-Corbyn. I wonder how much of a problem McDonnell is - always having to apologise for a " joke" that went wrong?

[eatsleephockeyrepeat]

Be careful Swedish, your comment makes it sound like the economist in question left for professional reasons. I've read several interviews with him over the months and in the ones surrounding his standing-down he makes it clear it has nothing to do with politics; rather it was personal reasons before the referendum, chiefly a lack of time to commit to the job.

They do gently pick up on that in this Indy article but they have deliberately put together a story that puts his resignation and his mild criticism of the referendum campaign side by side in order that they might appear linked.

In other articles Piketty actually goes on to say how he still wants to contribute and assist Corbyn going forward as much as time will allow. Can't find the quotes but will keep looking.

[SwedishEdith]

I was thinking more about Blanchflower, Stiglitz and Mariana Mazzucato - I follow them on Twitter. (I know the Independent article is principally about Piketty but does refer to Richard Murphy and Danny Blanchflower).

Danny Blanchflower ‏@D_Blanchflower Jul 22

Corbyn 'This party is going places This party is strong This party is capable of winning a general election' LOL

Danny Blanchflower ‏@D_Blanchflower Jul 22 South Burlington, VT
Danny Blanchflower Retweeted Richard [L]Owe(n)
Go @OwenSmith_MPDanny Blanchflower added,

Richard [L]Owe(n) @RichardLoweUK
Owen Smith has announced more policies in the last week than Corbyn has in the last 10 months #TeamOwen #Owen2016
53 retweets 61 likes
Reply Retweet 53
Like 61
More

[PigletWasPoohsFriend]

Danny Blanchflower has also said he should step down.

[PigletWasPoohsFriend]

This is a very interesting read by Richard Murphy whose economic ideas fed into Corbyn's economic plan.

Not exactly a glowing report.


www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/07/17/the-rise-and-fall-of-corbyns-economics/

[eatsleephockeyrepeat]

Yeah, those guys have certainly made their positions clear; glad you didn't quote Murphy though, I sincerely dislike that man! They're only saying the same as half the PLP though, and a lot of people are clearly sceptical enough about that - about their motives primarily. They'd have to be sceptical though wouldn't they or Corbyn wouldn't have any supporters at all! I guess what I'm saying is nothing's cut and dried, but you're quite right to add them to the tally of Corbyn dissenters.

[eatsleephockeyrepeat]

Oh god Piglet, you had to go and link Murphy! He makes my skin crawl, he's hateful!

[eatsleephockeyrepeat]

I've read this article before Piglet and I have a lot of problem with it as anything other than an opinion piece, and not even a strictly professional opinion piece, moreover just a soap-box "I'm team anti-Corbyn" piece. I think its objective usefulness is extremely limited. He gives limited - but valid - reasoning for his professional opinions but zero evidence at all for his personal condemnations. Which is fine for a piece that's just his speaking his mind and trying to convince people of his point of view... for whatever reasons. But that is what he's trying to do.

[LoloKazoloh]

Ooh, I just joined Momentum. Not really sure what they're all about yet, tbh but I joined because I just joined the Labour Party and they sent me an email saying I wasn't allowed to go to any meetings (UNCLEAN) so I sort of cast about to find out why and I AM allowed to go to Momentum meetings so I joined them as well.

I shall report back!

[PigletWasPoohsFriend]

I've read this article before Piglet and I have a lot of problem with it as anything other than an opinion piece

Well as it's his opinion it would be.

It is also his opinion of how the leadership was working which also ties up to some if the other MPs reports. No direction or leadership.

Of course dismiss it but if many are saying the same thing it isn't all wrong

[PigletWasPoohsFriend]

Lolo What meetings aren't you allowed to go to?

Meetings are suspended by NEC at the moment.

[Hassled]

Why is Murphy hateful (I know nothing about him but that article was very interesting)?

[eatsleephockeyrepeat]

Hassled hateful is perhaps a bit dramatic, and really it's more of a person heeby-jeebies thing than anything professional so I wouldn't expect it to colour anyone's view! Without divulging more details about myself than I'd like to there are some local rivalries that he's on the other side of to me, but again they're nothing to do with him professionally, and absolutely hateful was a bit overboard!

Lolo you might find that, despite official meetings being cancelled, there may still be social meet-ups in your area. Report back on Momentum, I'm curious!

[LoloKazoloh]

I've had like three emails since I joined. I am not au fait with the party structure as I have not been a member since I was a teenager so forgive me if I get the terms wrong. But anyway. The first one invited me to a Branch meeting. The second one said that meeting was cancelled. The third one was about a CLP meeting and said I am not allowed to go. Here - I paste:

If you are a member of _ you are invited to the meeting but only IF YOU WERE A MEMBER ON OR BEFORE 12th JANUARY 2016 AND IF YOU ARE NOT IN ARREARS WITH YOUR MEMBERSHIP FEES.
No registered or affiliated supporters or non-eligible members will be allowed entry to the meeting.
We are required to check members eligibility at the door.

So that's that then. Not really sure what the point of joining was tbh. They don't want me - fine - I never thought they DID want me, really. I just sort of hoped a bit.

[eatsleephockeyrepeat]

Aw Lolo, don't be disheartened... But yeah, that email is STRONG!

I might be able to explain a bit though; the only meetings that are allowed to take place are ones for nominations for certain things (NEC I believe, perhaps other, I could be wrong), which following the NEC ruling members are only allowed to vote in if they were members before 12th January. Hence if there was already a CLP meeting scheduled for that purpose that is allowed to go ahead, and I suppose in practical terms it makes sense to hold that with people who are eligible to vote in it.

I'm not outright defending it though because actually I don't think that's right and I may write to my MP to draw their attention to it. Yes only older members can vote but their decisions will affect members who joined at any time, so surely new members should be part of the debate? Perhaps it's because they want time to vet new members first... I still don't think that excuses it.

We do want you, promise!

[PigletWasPoohsFriend]

CLP If it is to do with voting you can only vote if a member before the 12th January.

Branch meetings you will be able to go to meetings in the future but because of the intimidation etc that has been going on open meetings aren't currently happening.

[PigletWasPoohsFriend]

Yes only older members can vote but their decisions will affect members who joined at any time, so surely new members should be part of the debate?

I believe it is only voting meetings that are allowed to happen rather than debate then vote iyswim.

[eatsleephockeyrepeat]

God what a mess. Old members feel unwelcome and their opinions invalid, new members feel unwelcome and their opinions invalid... why on earth the PLP didn't just instigate a leadership contest right from the off if they wanted a change of leader I wish I knew! Except I do know... if you suspect the democratic solution isn't going to work you have to think up other ways to get what you want, and they surely thought it would work and we wouldn't be in this mess.

I know it wasn't intentional from the outset but it's such a shame that it's put disunity amongst good people.

[eatsleephockeyrepeat]

I believe it is only voting meetings that are allowed to happen rather than debate then vote iyswim.

That would explain it, except I've never been to a meeting where there's been a vote without there being a little speech or whatever about the different options before hand. Although saying that it's not like there were contributions from the floor so I guess what you're saying makes sense.

[LoloKazoloh]

Oh, and looking in my email for comparison, if that's useful: Momentum emailed me 5x last week, 1. inviting me to a local event, 2. telling me about a twitter hashtag I can join on, 3. inviting me to a local meeting, 4. reminding me to sign up to vote in the leadership (I did not as I have some ethical questions to sort out in my head first), and 5. linking me to some memes.

Today they emailed me asking for more specifics on my programming and editing skills, listing some things they are looking for help with and asking if there's anything they haven't thought of, with an email address of someone who will coordinate me getting involved.

I mean... I haven't got involved yet (I have just got out of hospital and am still working on staying upright!) but the difference is striking, on reflection.

[LoloKazoloh]

Sorry massive crosspost! Thanks, eatsleep