Tuesday 24 November 2015


As the campaign page for Jeremy Corbyn's leadership of the Labour Party, we have accepted the responsibility to adhere to Jeremy's call for a new kind of politics, that engages in serious debate rather than personal attacks. We intend to stick to that, not simply out of loyalty to Jeremy, but because over the summer, it became patently obvious that this is what the overwhelming majority of the party members and supporters want. Debate is good, as is opinion, however strongly held. But it must be respectful, comradely - and never descend into abuse.

So we didn't really want to engage in this. At all. But here's the thing. For too long, the voice of party members has been silenced. That stopped the day Jeremy Corbyn was elected. As he said throughout the campaign, this was not about a man, it was about a movement. So we say this to express what we believe is the view of the vast majority of Labour Party members. We say this to give them a voice.

What we have seen from a small section of the Parliamentary Party and some New Labour "grandees" recently isn't opinion and it's not about debate. It is a constant sniping, undermining and, at times, bitter attack. It's designed to create an atmosphere of chaos. We are here to tell you that we're sick of it. Not only is it now boring, but it is entirely destructive instead of constructive.

Of course, it's just a tiny minority of the Parliamentary party who have chosen to indulge in such attacks, but they are a loud minority. The reason that they are so loud is because they have the ear of the right wing and tabloid press: those journalists and commentators who have no interest in the future of the Labour Party or the views of the membership. It's easy to get a column inch or two in those rags. You are doing them a service. However, you are doing the membership of this party a massive disservice - the membership who voted not just for Jeremy himself, but the policies he stood for. It's time to acknowledge that, and work for the common good. That means targeting the Tories, not our leader. That means targeting poverty and injustice, not the members of the party.

That's why we respectfully ask you to stop the off-the-record briefing, the on-the-record attacks and the machinations behind the scenes. 

Do your job and represent us.

Thank you,

This article was lifted directly from the Jeremy4PM Facebook page via this article and without permission.


  1. In my personal view, Corbyn is not leadership material, but he was elected as such. So the fault lies squarely with party members. If they voted for him, then perhaps the rebel MPs should be asking themselves why they failed to produce a solid argument for their preferred choice.


    1. I think there were a lot of people who wanted Labour back. Not smarmy self satisfied Burnham or Cooper and definitely not Blair's pet dummy, Liz, Kendal.

      Corbyn isn't a leader. He's a decent bloke though and a HUGE proportion of the membership that bothered to vote, voted for him.

      So they have to live with it...or get rid of him.

      If they live with it, they will be a more left wing party than before, but that seems to be what the membership wants.

      If they get rid of him then they will get rid of most of the membership... at least I'd have thought 59.5%.

      And all that will remain is the fat cat MPs who thought they were settled being Tory Lite.

      Few folk to deliver leaflets and even fewer to canvas...

      What was it Burnham got...19% and 17 for Cooper and the pathetic 4,5% for Blair's representative on earth.

      Ditching him might please the PLP fat cats, but it will upset the membership big time.

      End of Labour maybe?

      Still, if all they ever do is vote Tory and abstain, what use are they anyway?

    2. Tris

      What is a leader? Sturgeon I think is pretty good, Salmond was ok but Thatcher, Major, Blair, Brown, Cameron, Osbourne, Johnson et al. Corbyn, while I don't agree with some of what he says, is better than most of the above. Maybe it's time this country had a decent man or woman in charge now instead of the privileged wankers that have ruled since I was a kid.


  2. The members need to have a wee talk to the Scottish branch, in relation to the "new kind of politics". As they don't seem to be following his lead.

    1. The "purpose" of the Labour party in Scotland was to represent the British state which was fine as long as the electorate agreed with that position.
      Now it is just seen as jobs for the boys and girls who fancy a career in politics.

    2. True, and a lot of those "girls and boys" were Tories, that couldn't get a seat for the real Tories, so went with the red variety.

    3. Jimnarlene, I so agree with that statement.
      Bringiton, ditto.

    4. Yes, seriously Harris and Murphy, and many more, were never really Labour. They were Tories wearing Labour colours becasue even in the leafy suburbs you couldn't get a Tory in.

  3. Should a leader not lead, should Jeremy not have turned up to the Trident Debate today rather than ask his membership not to attend. This has to be beyond contempt Jeremy, bad enough that your Party remains the party of Abstention, but to be so much of a coward, well how can I put this, I think you have let down the thousands who expected better of you. You say you are against Trident that you would not use it if and I would say that it is a big if that you will ever be in that position. You would rather allow the Tories to win the debate, to spend billions on a piece of useless kit, money which could be used to give people in Britain a better life.

    1. Yes. Bang on. In important issues the opposition party should be there to fight their corner.

      In their current state they are allowing this bunch of evil toffs to rip our country apart in the name of being big nobs in the world.

  4. As he abstained in the vote not renew Trident shouldn't he now resign as vice-president of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament?
    if trust is the issue.

    1. Yes Brian, I think he should.

      How can you be CND VP... and not take the opportunity to vote down trident?

      Does not compute.

    2. I don't think Corbyn has a fkn clue what he is doing now. His party is ripping itself apart and even allies - ie Ken LIvingston - aren't paying much attention to his direction. Non entities such as Burnham (Mr PFI himself) are simply Tory-lite.

      It is possible for Labour to have a modern socialist leaning, but they've gone from Blairite to bloody Communist overnight. There is no single message, all we get is a mishmash of information.

      I liken it to the SNP before Salmond returned as leader. Although not as messed up as Labour is now, there were definitely cracks appearing, and had Alex not joined the contest, I doubt very much if the party would be where it is today.


    3. Yes agreed.

      It's a ragbag of policies.

      He has to put his foot down.

      Because the alternative is that they over throw him... and that's the end of Labour.

      Good comparison with Salmond.

    4. Good. Its necessary for Scotland to be free of labour for a few years. Thats the road to independence. And once we are free from them they can have any kind of politics they want in the country next door. Far be it for us to dictate to them. Or Iraq. Or Syria. Or Zimbabwe. Or any where.

      It may be Mr Corbyn is a great guy, but the press have it in for him. He has no chance.

      Saor Alba

  5. Perhaps the article should be sent to people like Jackie Baillie and John McTernan.

    1. Yes Alasdair... but would they read it.

      Or would they understand what they read.

      They seem to live in cloud batshit land...

      Despite May!