The Labour Party. All discussion here please

[unbeliever]

I see Shami Chakrabarti was in the news over the weekend, squirming out of answering why her own children go to an £18k pa private school when she's campaigning against segregated schooling.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/shami-chakrabarti-defends-sending-son-to-18000-private-school-a7352626.html

 

Apparently it's fine to put your kids in private school as long as you are part of the Labour party and are seen as trying to do something for the less monied than yourself. If that attitude came from a Tory, the knives would be out.

 

Saw her on the Sunday politics shows.

To an extend she's struggling because she's not experienced in this kind of politics and lacks the skills to defend herself well. That'll come in time I expect, but Corbyn doesn't have a long list of fully qualified supporters to choose from.

 

The problem is real though. Diane Abbott is in the same position and who knows how many other champagne socialists.

If you made a conscious choice to send your own kids to a selective school, or a non-state school, or worse still a selective non-state school; then you look pretty ridiculous trying to make a passionate case that state schools shouldn't be selective because selective schools are somehow immoral. You look sillier still complaining about "segregation" or "elitism" within the school system as the needle immediately snaps off everybody' hypocrisy-meters.

[Robin-H]

Saw her on the Sunday politics shows.

To an extend she's struggling because she's not experienced in this kind of politics and lacks the skills to defend herself well. That'll come in time I expect, but Corbyn doesn't have a long list of fully qualified supporters to choose from.

 

The problem is real though. Diane Abbott is in the same position and who knows how many other champagne socialists.

If you made a conscious choice to send your own kids to a selective school, or a non-state school, or worse still a selective non-state school; then you look pretty ridiculous trying to make a passionate case that state schools shouldn't be selective because selective schools are somehow immoral. You look sillier still complaining about "segregation" or "elitism" within the school system as the needle immediately snaps off everybody' hypocrisy-meters.

 

Abbott's defence was laughable. She just kept digging herself deeper and deeper. It is OK for her to send her children to private school because apparently 'West Indian mums will go to the wall for their children'.

[unbeliever]

Abbott's defence was laughable. She just kept digging herself deeper and deeper. It is OK for her to send her children to private school because apparently 'West Indian mums will go to the wall for their children'.

 

 

When you see socialist politicians arguing that their kids should have access to selective schools, but poor kids should not; then the only reasonable conclusion is that they want to keep the poor kids away from their kids. The fact that they make this case whilst attacking their political opponents for being elitist, not wanting to help the poor, disliking the poor and all that rubbish is the most blatant example of projection I've ever seen.

 

---------- Post added 10-10-2016 at 12:03 ----------

 

We've known about Diane Abbot's hypocrisy on this for years. A light bulb just went off over my head that given the rise on Abbott within Labour, a clever Conservative strategist might have thought to put grammar school expansion front and centre with the idea of putting Abbott and other champagne socialists in a jam. I'm not suggesting that they'd invent the policy for this purpose, but they might draw attention to it.

[Santo]

When you see socialist politicians arguing that their kids should have access to selective schools, but poor kids should not; then the only reasonable conclusion is that they want to keep the poor kids away from their kids. The fact that they make this case whilst attacking their political opponents for being elitist, not wanting to help the poor, disliking the poor and all that rubbish is the most blatant example of projection I've ever seen.

 

---------- Post added 10-10-2016 at 12:03 ----------

 

We've known about Diane Abbot's hypocrisy on this for years. A light bulb just went off over my head that given the rise on Abbott within Labour, a clever Conservative strategist might have thought to put grammar school expansion front and centre with the idea of putting Abbott and other champagne socialists in a jam. I'm not suggesting that they'd invent the policy for this purpose, but they might draw attention to it.

 

Doesn't Chakrabati send her child to a public school?

 

Edit: just seen The Bloke's post.

[Jeffrey Shaw]

Not convinced it was their minds that met.

Yes. Weren't Mr Corbyn and Ms Abbott rather closely linked at one time?

[Robin-H]

Yes. Weren't Mr Corbyn and Ms Abbott rather closely linked at one time?

 

Indeed they were. He allegedly showed her off to boost his left wing credentials.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/03/22/revealed-jeremy-corbyn-showed-off-naked-diane-abbott-to-impress/

[hackey lad]

don't worry about Shami Chakrabati . she got a life peerage as a reward for joining Corbyns cronies

[NigelFargate]

don't worry about Shami Chakrabati . she got a life peerage as a reward for joining Corbyns cronies

 

 

 

The cult of Chakrabarti has never had any attraction for me.

 

She owns a house in South London with six bedrooms and four bathrooms. It must be worth several millions. She can of course do what she likes with her own money. However, the fact that she sends her son to a public school for £18,000 a year., whilst opposing segregated schooling (cf. grammar schools) is an example of breathtaking hypocrisy. At least Corbyn is morally consistent on this point, unlike another one of his acolytes, Emily Thornberry, who has not only sent all of her children to public schools but also has a 'rent to buy', portfolio, which at the very least must be incompatible with Labour's policy to increase the affordable housing stock in London.

[El Cid]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37724756

 

The Conservatives have won the Witney by-election, holding David Cameron's former seat - albeit with a greatly reduced majority.

 

The Labour party has dropped from second to third place in the constituency, polling 15% of the vote, not very good at all, as they are meant to be hyped up for a general election.

[alchresearch]

It would be interesting to know the reason for the reduced majority. Not liking Cameron's replacement perhaps? Or "punishment" to the Tories for Cameron quitting so soon. Or maybe just a rise in the LibDems?