The Labour leader at Sheffield Council has already rebelled and committed to continuing its coalition with the Greens. Looks like an own goal to me.
“Pass my purity test or you can sort your own bins”
Pathetic
Kier Starmer steps down for seemingly no reason in particular, then Burnham gets nominated by a handful of MP’s, stands unopposed and thus unelected by the party membership, and magically becomes PM with hardly anyone really having a say in it all.
The large majority of PMs have come to office by this route.
The large majority of PMs have been appointed by the party mid-term, through the democratic process the party established for that. However, nearly all of them were actually voted on by the party MP’s or the party members, against other potential party leaders. Burnham is unique in that he stood unopposed, so there was never really any vote on him.
Labour’s process for selecting the party leader is, overall, a democratic process, but the path that Burnham took through it isn’t really all that democratic. This is especially true because it would be party members - the public - who would’ve voted. The same party members who chose Corbyn in the past, they were denied any say over Burnham because the party’s “democratic process” bypasses them in this circumstance.
The only people who voted for Burnham to be PM were the handful of MP’s who nominated him. And yet, he harps on about having a “mandate” to enact policy, as if he took the party through a general election and the public had thereby told him what we want.
The interests he represents, who gave him a mandate, are apparently not those of the general public.
Burnham is unique in that he stood unopposed
Not unique. Theresa May and Gordon Brown are two similar cases in recent history.
Burnham’s mandate is the same as all other PMs: the confidence of a majority of MPs. That no-one chose to run against him illustrates the will of the PLP.
Sorry goys, but supporting the apartheid ethnostate is more important that making sure your bins are collected on time.
Given that labour’s policy is for a two state solution, and the greens now classify that as Zionism, and that Zionism is racism, why would the greens want to be in coalition with a party they view as racist?
To advance on non-Zionism related issues and not the Zionist ones.
And as its a local council, they deal with bin collections. Not foreign policy.
So why is the Labour national government giving ultimatums to local councils based on foreign policy
They aren’t the one who passed the motion.
“Look what you made me do”
So collaboration with racists is ok as long as it advances non-race-related issues?
How is that intersectional, exactly?
If there’s a possibility to not work with racists I’m sure they’d take it but this says more about the state of the UK than the Green party.
so people get their bins picked
Is bin collection more important than antiracism?
Yes.
Remove anti-racism and you eventually trend more racist which eventually causes great physical harm.
Remove bin collections and you immediately trend more stinky and rapidly enter a public health crisis.
I know you’re trying to make a point, but their job is to make services work, if they cannot do that (regardless of who’s fault it is), they’ll be out next election.
it’s local government, not the parliament.
And yes, the greens are not at fault for that ratfuckery.
What you’re asking is for them to basically take theor county and become a sovereign state that doesn’t need the rest of the UK to function.
Which I’d love, but never going to happen.
I absolutely agree that it isn’t a local council’s place to dictate foreign policy. I’d also argue it isn’t the place of any UK party to declare exclusive support for a single state solution, that decision is for the people born on the land themselves.
The point I’m getting at is that if a party’s position is antiracism, and also that thing X is racist, I don’t understand why they would want to work with a party who supports thing X.
For example, I cannot see Labour or Greens making formal power sharing agreements with Reform, even if just to get the bins collected.
Why is this different?
maybe local services shouldn’t be a party based elected position.
the state is coercing them to fall in line. the blame isn’t in the greens.
