[ALB]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

I know i should be ashamed of myself for not following the EU referendum debate bits , but am i correct in understanding that it will now be the Party's next big campaign?What is the likely time-table for it ? Does anybody know? 

The next elections are those to regional assemblies in London, Scotland and Wales next year. I would think we'd do London and Wales. Don't know about Scotland. In/Out EU referendum is supposed to be (Tory election "pledge" for what it's worth) before the end of 2017. Can't see much of interest for our intervention in it, except a few leaflets.

[ALB]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Steve Colborn, 146 votes, 0.4% of a 56% turnout Robert Cox, 165 votes, 0.3% of a 64% turnoutMike Foster, 66 votes, 0.1% of a 72% turnout         Brian Johnson, 49 voters, 0.1% of a 60% turnout Danny Lambert, 82 votes, 0.2% of a 59% turnout Bill Martin, 112 votes, 0.2% of a 67% turnoutKevin Parkin, 50 votes, 0.1% of a 64% turnoutHoward Pilott, 88 votes, 0.2% of a 71% turnoutJacqueline Shodeke, 73 votes, 0.2% of 67% turnout Andy Thomas, 68 votes, 0.1% of a 66% turnout      So we have a total of 826 votes from 10 candidates.

I make that 899 votes in total (not 826), not too far off the average of 100 per constituency I predicted. As I guessed too, we did best in Easington (Steve Colborn), at least in percentage terms but it was Canterbury (Rob Cox) in vote terms.Actually it wasn't entirely a guess as past experiences indicates that we do best in safe Labour seats and worst in seats with a largre number of candidates especially if one also claims to be socialist .We also contested a local by-election in Lamberth (Prince's ward) where Danny Lambert got 42 votes (0.5%) and a council seat in Shepway District Council (Harbour ward) not yet announced. Since we presumably got more than 40 votes in total in the other seven wards that make up the Vauxhall constituency this means that some people there voted for us in the local election but not in the general election.

[ALB]

Just remembered that I got a Labour Party leaflet through my door headed "Conservatives and Lib Dems — Two sides of the same coin". Why, I ask our Labour supporter here, can they say that while we can't say "Labour, Tory, Same Old Story" (because it's capitalism not which party is in power is the root cause of the problems parties promise to deal with).  Or does he think that a LibDem government would be the same as a Tory one? If so, why? And why would (yet another) Labour government be any different?

[ALB]

I'm not quite sure what Stuart is trying to say. Vote Labour everywhere or just Vote Labour tactically in certain constituencies. Or whether he wants a Labour government or just not a Tory one. Where I live a Labour vote is as much a gesture (or expression of what you want) as writing "SOCIALISM" across the ballot paper. Anyway, I'm off to Oxford for the count. Be interesting to see what happens in Oxford West & Abingdon, another LibDem/Tory marginal, to see if Voting Labour will let the Tory in.

[ALB]

The Labour representative at the last hustings we went to in Oxford East on Monday took the same indignant view as Stuart when our candidate, Kevin Parkin, said that the choice between Labour and Tory was a choice between Tweedledee and Tweedledum.He claimed that people would be thousands of pounds a year better off under Labour. The Tories claim the same for their policies. But why should we believe either of them when their claims/promises are based on the false assumption that governments can manipulate capitalism to bring about this when experience has shown that they have to govern capitalism on its terms?Actually, I've come to the conclusion that when people vote they don't consider themselves as electing a government but as expressing a personal preference. Why else would people vote for the Greens, UKIP or even the Liberals, let alone for us, in most constituencies?

[ALB]

Thanks, NL, but the vote is not going to be the real measure of the campaign(my guess is that we will average a 100 or so and do best in Easington if anybody wants to start a sweepstake). It's the work to widely and successfully publicise the case for socialism that has been put in over the past three months: leaflets distributed, hustings addressed,  tv and video interviews, email replies sent to enquirers from 38 Degrees (over a 1000) and literature still being sent to enquirers from our leaflets and adverts. Also enthusing members and sympathisers.Just off to cast a write-in vote for socialism using our sticker.

[ALB]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Mike Foster e-mail interview with The Oxford Student newspaperhttp://oxfordstudent.com/2015/05/04/oxford-west-and-abingdon-mike-foster-the-socialist-party-of-great-britain/

And here's the one with Kevin Parkin. Only it's not a photo of him, but as we say it's the case not the face (so any old photo will do):http://oxfordstudent.com/2015/05/05/oxford-east-kevin-parkin-the-socialist-party-of-great-britain/Both interviews are published in the print issue that came out last Thursday and is distributed free to all the colleges' junior common rooms, etc. The circulation is claimed to be 15,000.

[ALB]

Mike Foster (Oxford West & Abingdon) interviwed by the student newspaper Cherwell here:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYNsb0ZNIOk&feature=youtu.beFor the article published in the print edition, see here:http://www.cherwell.org/comment/features/2015/05/01/oxford-west-and-abingdon-a-key-marginal

[ALB]

Actually, NL, all branches contesting the election were informed by email in February that they could spend up to £500 per constituency on local press advertising

[ALB]

ALB wrote:

While in Oxford Kevin was interviewed for an article by one student newspaper and did a video interview

Mike Foster is in Oxford this evening for an interview with the student magazine Isis. I hope he keeps his head.

[ALB]

gnome wrote:

He's a transparent charlatan and unremitting egotist who craves only self-publicity and he'll use anyone who's naïve and gullible enough to assist him in the process.

A bit over the top. This doesn't follow from the fact that, after saying "don't vote" as it changes nothing, he has ended up saying Vote Labour. It just means that he is naive.

[ALB]

Pity that the last hustings in Oxford turned out to be the least well attended. It was organised in Oriel College by a group of students who support the Green Party (and was chaired by a Green Party City councillor for the area) to allow the parties to set out and discuss amongst themselves their various economic policies. Present were the LibDems, Labour, the Greens, TUSC and us.All the same it was revealing. The LibDems and Labour (representesd by another City councillor) droned out the usual boring stuff about what they plan to do to reduce the deficit, balance the budget, etc but they were able to put one over on the Green Party candidate when she tried (and failed) to explain her party's currency crank view that the banks presently create money out of thin air and should not be allowed to.TUSC is pathetic. Their basic position is just "NO CUTS" but they feel compelled to act as the other political parties and present a "fully costed" programme. Apparently the money is there, if you tax the rich and nationalise the banks , to invest in building a million new council houses, restore the cuts, and implement immediately a £10 an hour minumum wage. This, their candidate claimed, would "kickstart" the economy. They're basically Old Labour reformists. In fact he said that up until the 60s and 70s the Labour Party was the party of the workers.Naturally, our candidate Kevin explained that we don't have an economic policy as we don't want to manage the capitalist economy nor think that it can be managed and that the only way out was a socialist society based on common ownership, democratic control, production for use, and free access. The contrast with TUSC's reformism couldn't have been greater.For those who like such anecdotes, at one point the TUSC candidate said "We the Socialist Party will …" and immediately corrected himself.While in Oxford Kevin was interviewed for an article by one student newspaper and did a video interview with another. Meanwhile, the Oxford Communist Corresponding Society and other sympathisers are continuing to leaflet in the centre of Oxford today and tomorrow.

[ALB]

I think he's been got at by Owen Jones who's always interviewing him:http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/04/russell-brand-endorsed-labour-tories-should-be-worriedHe's not in fact saying much different from the assorted Leftist groups, eg the SWP and "Elect Labour and Keep Kicking".That the Tories would be worse is based on the assumption that Labour can do what they promise in terms of making things better (or less worse) for people, but we know they can't because governments are not really in charge of how the economy works.A disapppointment and a blow to his credibility. Maybe he'll be able to restore it when in a few years time he admits that he made a mistake…

[ALB]

They look pretty breakable by capitalism to me.

[ALB]

Carving election promises is stone still won't make them realisable if they go against the economic logic of capitalism nor enforceable by the courts. As Gary Slapper reminded us in an article in The Times Law section (30 April)

Quote:

After an election when all is said and done, it is usually clear that much more has been said than will be done. But there is no legal remedy against politicians who fail to keep their promises. In a House of Lords decision in 1983, Lord Diplock declared that elected representatives should not "treat themselves as irrevocably bound to carry out pre-announced policies contained in election manifestos". So someone selling a used car is under tighter control than someone selling the future.

[Author]

Posts