Diswhipped Labour Party Chairperson could remain Chair till 2014

Sponge Bob

Labour only holds a conference every 2 years ( but can hold one every year if they wish but had no plans to) and Keaveney, now without the Parliamentary party, was elected chair in April 2012.

His term runs to 2013 (maybe) or 2014. It will be interesting to see how they get rid of him (as senior parliamentary party types deeply wish) or whether they have to go to the membership in order to unseat him.

I have a notion that this one could turn into a fine farce as the Leadership may not trust the members to do as the Leadership wishes on this issue, and Keaveney shows no signs of resigning off his own bat.

They can calls Special Conference at any time. I wonder whether they may well find themselves doing so shortly. ???

In order to call such a special conference they must convene the Executive Board to do the necessaries.

The voting membership of the Executive Board consists of –

1. the Party Leader, Party Deputy Leader, Party Chairperson and Party Treasurer;
2. 6 delegates (none of whom may be members of the Parliamentary Party) elected by the Party Conference;
3. 2 delegates (one man and one woman) elected by the Parliamentary Party;
4. 1 delegate elected by the Association of Labour Councillors.

The General Secretary is a non-voting member of the Executive Board.

I'd say the following are busy today

The results for the Labour Party Conference Elections 2012 are as follows:
Chairperson

• Colm Keaveney, Bobby Burke Branch Tuam, Galway East

National Treasurer

• Gina Doolan, Kilkenny/C Smyth Branch, Carlow-Kilkenny
• Bernard McCabe, Ballsbridge Branch, Dublin South East

Executive Board:

Panel of Men:

• Adrian Kane, Blackrock/Mahon Branch, Cork South Central (elected)
• Ray Kavanagh, Ballsbridge Branch, Dublin South East (elected)
• Seamus Ryan, Ennis Branch, Clare (elected)

Panel of Women:

• Bridget Halligan Neville, Wexford Town Branch, Wexford
• Loraine Mulligan, Sean Fitzpatrick Branch, Dublin South
• Isobel O'Connor, Mt. Merrion/Kilmacud/Foxrock Branch, Dublin South

I think Adrian Kane is a Siptu Colleague of Keaveneys......

Oh, and......

http://www.labour.ie/conference/motions/subject/executive+board/
Session 3 : Party Organisation: Motion 110 Motion passed unanimously.

Conference resolves to amend the Party Constitution replacing the single term for election to the Executive Board to the time between two Annual Conferences.

hatrickpatrick

This is fantastic. I wouldn't call it a nail in the coffin of the whip system but it's definitely a step in the right direction.
While Gilmore praises the "courage" of those who vote with the government under threat of being turfed out of the party, real courage is displayed by those who take the risk in order to defend their commitments to the Irish people. Good to see a politician with balls!

Ghandee

Says it all really.

Gilmore€ and Rabbite will now seek to remove him from his chair because he wants to honour the promises he made to his constituents, the people who voted him in.

Five labour TD's have jumped ship now in what? 18 months?

How many more before they could form some sort of technical group?

Labour are destined to follow the greens.

golfball37

Gilmore, Rabbitte et all don't care what happens to the Labour Party. They are not even original members. As long as the pension pot gets topped up they won't care a jot.

The way they see it they've sat in opposition for 15 years and an upstart like Colm Keaveney isn't gonna get in the way of us getting what we are owed....

InchicoreDude

Ghandee wrote: »

Says it all really.

Five labour TD's have jumped ship now in what? 18 months?

Who are the 5? And what were their specific reasons?

Gilmore€ and Rabbite will now seek to remove him from his chair because he wants to honour the promises he made to his constituents, the people who voted him in

I am a constituent of Keaveney and gave him a high preference vote in the last election. He repeatedly stated during the last election campaign that voting for an independent was pointless as they will never achieve anything. This may have been because there was an independent candidate who was a threat for that 4th seat in Galway East.

Now he is pretty much an independent himself. Is it right for him to continue collecting his high salary when he believes he cant achieve anything?

RobbieTheRobber

InchicoreDude wrote: »

Who are the 5? And what were their specific reasons?



I am a constituent of Keaveney and gave him a high preference vote in the last election. He repeatedly stated during the last election campaign that voting for an independent was pointless as they will never achieve anything. This may have been because there was an independent candidate who was a threat for that 4th seat in Galway East.

Now he is pretty much an independent himself. Is it right for him to continue collecting his high salary when he believes he cant achieve anything?

It could be argued that his refusal to follow the party line makes more of a political statement than say an independent voting against the government.

He is still at present a member of the Labour party.

Sponge Bob

He was on VB last night and made it perfectly clear that he had not disaffiliated from the Labour Party.....only from the Parliamentary Whip in one vote. Not every former Labour TD resigned from their ministries and the party, Penrose and Shortall did both I think, certainly Penrose.

Scioch

golfball37 wrote: »

Gilmore, Rabbitte et all don't care what happens to the Labour Party. They are not even original members. As long as the pension pot gets topped up they won't care a jot.

The way they see it they've sat in opposition for 15 years and an upstart like Colm Keaveney isn't gonna get in the way of us getting what we are owed....

Of course they dont, none of them do not even Keaveney. He's under pressure of his own which he thinks will be detrimental to his future in politics thats what he's worried about not his constituents. The ministers are set, they have their salaries/pensions and are only interested in protecting those and those who still seek to gain ministerial positions or have a future in the backbenches will pander to whoever or whatever will keep them ticking over in the Dail, if that means voting against or distancing themselves from their own party then so be it. Gotta look out for number one.

This is their careers and their livelihoods we are talking about, if the safety of those coincide with the wants of the people all well and good but dont be fooled into thinking any TD doesn't value their own interests over that of the people.

jimmycrackcorm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

This is fantastic. I wouldn't call it a nail in the coffin of the whip system but it's definitely a step in the right direction.
While Gilmore praises the "courage" of those who vote with the government under threat of being turfed out of the party, real courage is displayed by those who take the risk in order to defend their commitments to the Irish people. Good to see a politician with balls!

Why is it fantastic? Would you prefer to every td as an independent with no one making difficult decisions without getting healy - rae benefits?

Mr.Micro

Sponge Bob wrote: »

He was on VB last night and made it perfectly clear that he had not disaffiliated from the Labour Party.....only from the Parliamentary Whip in one vote. Not every former Labour TD resigned from their ministries and the party, Penrose and Shortall did both I think, certainly Penrose.

He wants his cake and eat it at the same time. When it comes to the hard decisions his ilk run away but return to the comfort of the herd and the benefits. His ploy seems to be working as the electorate in Tuam think he did a great job....... how easily the electorate are duped.

hatrickpatrick

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Why is it fantastic? Would you prefer to every td as an independent with no one making difficult decisions without getting healy - rae benefits?

I've always said I'd prefer a Dail of independents who are bound not to their party line but to the policies their constituents actually voted for.
Of course, the "parish pump" problem would not be an issue, because under such a system none of those local matters would be within the remit of the national government anyway - no chance of Healy Rae style ridiculousness. It'd be a step closer to real participatory democracy.

hyperborean

Its a prominant feature of the Labour mindset, when you feel strong enough voice an opinion, the party doesnt hold a grudge either. Loose the whip today, lead the party in 5 years....


Unlike FF light, of all the FG party not one showed backbone lately, sheep€

Boulevardier

I love that word "diswhipped". It makes the TDs sound like a type of ice cream cone!

I have written to the Labour Party to suggest that they could make less trouble for themselves on the long term by replacing the "automatic expulsion" of TDs from the parliamentary party, every time they vote the wrong way, with a sort of "sin bin" system in which first-time offenders could be suspended for say 6 months and then re-admitted.

Sponge Bob

Turning into a right circus now. I beleive only 2 people mentioned in this article have a VOTE on whether a "special conference" is called. They may have to call a full conference with voting on motions and all.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/1214/politics.html

.....in an interview on Galway Bay FM today, Mr Keaveney said he would not be stepping down.
He said the chairmanship was a gift of the members and not of the leader.
He said if Mr Gilmore believed that a conference were needed to talk about the chair, his own view was that an early conference was needed to talk about the future of the party.

Oh Dear, they hadn't planned on having one of those until April 2014.

If Keaveney has not resigned by Tuesday this one will run and run.

Mr.Micro

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Turning into a right circus now. I beleive only 2 people mentioned in this article have a VOTE on whether a "special conference" is called. They may have to call a full conference with voting on motions and all.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/1214/politics.html



Oh Dear, they hadn't planned on having one of those until April 2014.

If Keaveney has not resigned by Tuesday this one will run and run.

You have to admit he has some nerve to think that he can go against his party and expect to stay on as chairman, even on a credibility factor the Labour could not possible have such a man on board. He is either very naive or incredibly arrogant.

Good loser

Can't stand the guy. Too glib. An arrogant hypocrite. Hope he's rammed out of the chair as quickly as possible.

Love to see him in a one-to-one with Pat Rabbitte.

Mr.Micro

Good loser wrote: »

Can't stand the guy. Too glib. An arrogant hypocrite. Hope he's rammed out of the chair as quickly as possible.

Love to see him in a one-to-one with Pat Rabbitte.

Which one of him would turn up the pretendy Labour TD or the other guy?

periodictable

golfball37 wrote: »

Gilmore, Rabbitte et all don't care what happens to the Labour Party. They are not even original members. As long as the pension pot gets topped up they won't care a jot.

The way they see it they've sat in opposition for 15 years and an upstart like Colm Keaveney isn't gonna get in the way of us getting what we are owed....

Totally. Add Joe Costelloe to the mix with his wife handed de Rossa's MEP seat, a sister-in-law appointed a District Court Judge and another sister-in-law made Senator.
Gilmore's wife made a packet from selling a bit of land to a school, then she's given an "advisory" role on €117,000/yr in dept of Education.
Jan Sullivan accepts "super"junior ministry role with a top up of €15000-her defense being "the last government put this payment in place".
Orwell's pigs had nothing on this gang.

Sully

Labour are making this into a circus. As if they don't have enough problems of their own without putting another clown into the circus.

To be fair, the point that the chap was elected by the member into a position which doesn't have to be filled by a TD/Cllr/Senator or so on but can be done by an ordinary member would appear to give him some room for comfort. But, at the same time, I would wonder how much of that position is based on 'You need to be behind Labour with what we do' and if you breach that trust or confidence, than you are out.

Who decides? Well some agree and some don't. So it goes to a vote. Seems a bit daft to call a special meeting just to have the vote and makes the whole fiasco an even bigger circus.

thebman

I think he should blow this up as much as possible in the media and then form a new political party with the other unhappy Labour members and go into opposition myself.

Make them hold the special conference so he can work out if he has the support of the people he needs to make it work.

Chucky the tree

thebman wrote: »

I think he should blow this up as much as possible in the media and then form a new political party with the other unhappy Labour members and go into opposition myself.

Make them hold the special conference so he can work out if he has the support of the people he needs to make it work.

A new party wouldn't last. Once the next election happens, Labour take their beatings and start over with a new leader they'll make inroads into that. I wouldn't be surprised if Keaveney has one eye on that with this stunt.

Mr.Micro

Chucky the tree wrote: »

A new party wouldn't last. Once the next election happens, Labour take their beatings and start over with a new leader they'll make inroads into that. I wouldn't be surprised if Keaveney has one eye on that with this stunt.

I dont think he has the bottle mettle to be a political leader.

Sponge Bob

The annual conference is apparently scheduled for the 'Autumn' of 2013 owing to Gilmore being busy with the EU Presidency. No letting up in the meantime.

https://www.facebook.com/colmkeaveney

No surrender piece from his facebook page today.

Commentary from some Government Ministers and other senior party members on my recent decision to oppose aspects of the budget contained in the Social Welfare Bill is only serving to bring politics into even further disrepute. They amount to little more than a cynical attempt to distract from the problematic issues contained in the budget, particularly in relation to elements in conflict with Labour's core values and, in particular, our own core promises to the electorate going into the last general election. They also only serve to distract from the principled reasons of others who found themselves in positions similar to my own over the course of the life time of this Government.

In my own comments on the events of recent days, I have sought to be measured in my comments focusing on issues of policy and principle. I have far too much respect for my colleagues in the Parliamentary Labour Party to engage in political point scoring based on personal comments.

The decision I made was not an easy one and I struggled with it for some time. On the level of political principle I cannot consent to any budget that will result in such a regressive impact on the welfare and income of low and middle income households. In particular, I cannot consent to decisions that will, in my view, leave many families struggling to secure the welfare of their own children. I was recently reminded of the ideals contained in the Democratic Programme of the First Dáil, in many ways a document that has unfortunately been forgotten about. It stated that, "It shall be the first duty of the Government of the Republic to make provision for the physical, mental and spiritual well-being of the children, to secure that no child shall suffer hunger or cold from lack of food, clothing, or shelter, but that all shall be provided with the means and facilities requisite for their proper education and training as Citizens of a Free and Gaelic Ireland."

This is a high ideal and a principled one. I recall that our current President, Michael D. Higgins, once stated that these elements had been included in the Democratic Programme at the insistence of the Labour Party. We as a nation have, in many respects, failed in that regard. The recent referendum should be a marker of intent as a people to secure the welfare of all of the children of the nation.

On a personal level, on a level of my own honour, I made a promise to the people of Galway East that I would seek to ensure that a floor of decency would be maintained through the protection of the income needed to allow them to protect the welfare of their families. I stood on many doorsteps and made no other promise than this. A key part of that promise was that I and the Labour Party would protect Child Benefit. There was no way in which I could be faithful to that commitment and vote in favour of the Social Welfare Bill.

Some of my concerns about the budgetary process have now been echoed by a Government Minister, Simon Coveney, particular in the relationship between the Economic Management Committee and the rest of the Cabinet. These concerns ought to receive due attention by the Government, the Dáil and by public commentary. Lessons must be learnt and changes made for future budgets.

These are important matters and are deserving of serious debate by serious people. Cynicism is running rife in political commentary in Ireland and in the attitudes of our citizens to politics and politicians. This cynicism runs the danger of making any political action impossible as it will only be viewed through a lens of cynicism. Personal attacks on politicians who attempt to articulate a principled position serve only to deepen this cynicism, as does a flippant attitude to the keeping of political commitments made during budgets.

It is my duty and the duty of all politicians to seek to counteract such cynicism but this can only be achieved through honourable action and action in this respect is of far more value than words.

Dirk Gently

To be honest it's a shrewd move by Colm Keaveney. The current top tier of the Labour party are on their last innings. Rabbitte, Gilmore, Quinn, they're all on the eve of their retirement. It wont do Keaveney any harm to go against them considering they are unpopular with the electorate and also within the labour party. It's not unrealistic that Keaveney could even be voted back in again at a labour conference and I doubt the likes of Gilmore and Rabbitte would be too keen to call an early conference anyway.

It wont be long until the current Labour leadership are just a bad memory and Keaveney will be well placed to make some ground after making a stand now. Lets not kid ourselves. Soon, after heavy defeats in the next election Labour are going to find themselves looking into the mirror and asking, what is the point of the labour party at all. They will try to re-group and dis-associate themselves with the current leadership. Keaveney will be someone who will gt the backing of the youth wing and off many disgruntled (former) backbenchers.

I think he has a solid future long term in the party even if he is temporarily under fire from the likes of Gilmore and Rabbitte.

Good loser

In his 'opposition' to the cuts I see Keaveney has not proposed an alternative. What is his position on the 3% across the board cut?

Social Welfare was to be cut €530m in the budget and yet it was only cut by €390m. Surely that was protecting the vulnerable.

The major savings in the budget - in health and public service, will be very difficult to achieve. I don't expect these targets to be met. SW will have to be visited again.

Those who voted for the cuts are the ones with the moral courage.

Ghandee

Good loser wrote: »

In his 'opposition' to the cuts I see Keaveney has not proposed an alternative. What is his position on the 3% across the board cut?

Social Welfare was to be cut €530m in the budget and yet it was only cut by €390m. Surely that was protecting the vulnerable.

The major savings in the budget - in health and public service, will be very difficult to achieve. I don't expect these targets to be met. SW will have to be visited again.

Those who voted for the cuts are the ones with the moral courage.

Indeed they will with shenanigans like this continuing to happen.

€18m spent on increments alone amid claims 'poor, sick and elderly paying for Croke Park'

The Sunday Independent today publishes details of a €266m bonanza in pay increases, top ups, on-call and overtime payments including to middle and senior HSE staff, which it previously failed to disclose. Amid deep rancour within the Government over the €26m cuts to respite care allowances, we can disclose that this year the HSE will spend €17.6m alone on incremental pay increases to staff.

The figures have led a government member of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), Fine Gael TD Simon Harris, to state yesterday "the poor, the sick and the elderly are now paying for the retention of the Croke Park deal, which is clearly not fit for purpose".

Despite much government rhetoric that incremental pay increases are largely for lower-paid staff, we can reveal today:

? 621 people in the HSE who earn €70,000 or more will this year receive a pay increase of more than €1,000 each.

? Worse still, documents obtained by the Sunday Independent show that, in 2012, 221 senior managers and staff who earn more than a €100,000 will be in receipt of 'increments' or length of service pay increases.

? Junior doctors will share a pot of €97m in overtime payments.

? Senior doctors, dentists, managers and consultants are among those receiving €81m in additional on-call payments this year.

? 272 staff in HSE National Corporate, including 51 earning more than €70,000, will see their salaries increase this year.

The revelations – contained in documents demanded by the PAC from the HSE and obtained by this newspaper – are likely to cause a furore among the coalition's backbenchers, after the Government had to make savage cuts to respite care and other frontline medical services.

The matter of the respite care remains a sore point for backbench government TDs and, despite a plea from Taoiseach Enda Kenny to his troops to desist from budget discussion, the matter was raised during Fine Gael's parliamentary party meeting by Mr Harris – much to the displeasure of his leader.

Speaking to the Sunday Independent, Mr Harris said: "These galling figures dispel the myth that increments are only paid to lower-wage workers.

"Any renegotiation of Croke Park must see everything be put on the table. This is disgraceful when you think of the difficult Budget we have had to put through."

The PAC demanded the figures following a series of exchanges with HSE bosses who have repeatedly refused or claimed they were unable to provide them. "Dealing with the HSE is like trying to pull blood from a stone," Mr Harris said. The HSE said in its documentation that "increments will be paid to 21,888 staff, of which 621 – or 3 per cent – of staff are in receipt of basic salaries in excess of €70,000". The documents show that consultant doctors will receive almost €1m in overtime payments this year, while nurses will receive €31m in overtime payments. In total, €168m will be paid in overtime to HSE staff.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/revealed-266m-topups-are-paid-out-to-hse-staff-3327220.html

The HSE cant tell their employees they're broke and cant afford to keep up these increments?

nuac

Labour should have stuck to their original proposal to impose US|C on all those over €100 K

far better than mean cuts on carers.

Keaveney was right to walk

thebman

A unionised multi-national employer I'm aware of has frozen pay for the past 3 years including increments on the basis that they can't afford them and they are still making profits just less. They had support from the union in doing this.

The HSE can't maintain a balanced budget but still insists on paying increments. The whole thing makes no sense to anybody that doesn't stand to benefit from leaving them in place IMO.

InchicoreDude

His ploy seems to be working as the electorate in Tuam think he did a great job.

Why do you think the electorate in Tuam think he did a great job? I know people that agree with him and some you disagree with him. I dont see a majority either way

The biggest problem with Keaveney's stance is that he hasnt really provided an alternative.

Personally, I think a politician will sometimes have to vote for things they may not fully agree with. They must do this for the greater good. And I think Keaveney could achieve a lot if he was part of the Labour parliamentary party. He is a politician who has impressed me. I am also unconvinced that some of his motives were not personal. His relationship with Gilmore seems erratic and this move has raised his profile a lot whoch could prove useful at the next election. Labour in Galway East faces an interesting conundrum in the next election. In the last election, both Keaveney & Lorraine Higgins ran for Labour in a 4 seat constituency. Gilmore openly lauded Higgins campaign for having "brought in" Keaveney at the the time. But next time, there are only 3 seats available. So one would assume that only 1 Labour candidate will run.

Sponge Bob

InchicoreDude wrote: »

Labour in Galway East faces an interesting conundrum in the next election. In the last election, both Keaveney & Lorraine Higgins ran for Labour in a 4 seat constituency. Gilmore openly lauded Higgins campaign for having "brought in" Keaveney at the the time. But next time, there are only 3 seats available. So one would assume that only 1 Labour candidate will run.

Keaveneys base will have been affected more than Higgins', good point about 'all politics are local' and particularly if Gilmore somehow heaves him out of Labour.....although Gilmores home town is now in the Roscommon constituency.

InchicoreDude

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Keaveneys base will have been affected more than Higgins', good point about 'all politics are local' and particularly if Gilmore somehow heaves him out of Labour.....although Gilmores home town is now in the Roscommon constituency.

Keaveney is based in Tuam.

Higgins in Athenry.

Both are well within the newly defined constituency which is what makes it interesting.

But you are right, Keaveney is a bigger loser in the changes as losing the North east of the county will probably affect him.

Sponge Bob

Oh Dear. Item 1 on the Late Late show tonight is the Chairperson of the Labour Party.

jonniebgood1

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Oh Dear. Item 1 on the Late Late show tonight is the Chairperson of the Labour Party.

Very unfortunate to see this man doing this on the day thats in it. He comes across as very much trying to boost his chances of re-election.

Sponge Bob

He was accused of 'jumping' for that precise reason in the Interview. Gilmore didn't come well out of the interview....judging from the timing of some clapping and cheering at one point when his name was mentioned.

If I were Gilmore I would reshuffle the labour cabinet seats a bit and send Ruairí Quinn out Foreign and Howlin to Education with himself goinng in Public Expenditure and Joan Burton promoted to the mini cabinet instead of Howlin.

That would defuse the situation.....if executed within a month or so....and allow Gilmore to show he is in touch (or that he intends to be) and then give Keaveney the final heave ho.

The longer that Gilmore stays in Foreign Affairs the longer this farce will drag on...amusing as it is and all.

Mr.Micro

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Very unfortunate to see this man doing this on the day thats in it. He comes across as very much trying to boost his chances of re-election.

I said the same from the start, and the more I see of him, I am more convinced. He can disagree now with all the decisions that the Government makes or proposes...... it is so easy for him. The other Labour TD s did what they had to do like it or not and will have to make further tough decisions. This self important guy will just sit on the fence thinking of the next election milking as much attention as he can get.

periodictable

Yes he's a shrewd political operator with his sights set on the leadership.
He's also a diehard union man, and, unfortunately, in his eyes the workers can do no wrong.
Labour has been consistent in one thing- once in power it likes the privilege and perks, and the fulfillment of personal gain takes a distant second place to fighting its corner. Gilmore has looked after his pals and allies to the detriment of the implementation of their policies, and at I doubt he will be leader at this time next year.

nuac

Mr.Micro wrote: »

I said the same from the start, and the more I see of him, I am more convinced. He can disagree now with all the decisions that the Government makes or proposes...... it is so easy for him. The other Labour TD s did what they had to do like it or not and will have to make further tough decisions. This self important guy will just sit on the fence thinking of the next election milking as much attention as he can get.

Tough decisions?

Not extending the USC to everyone earning over €100K, but instead cutting carers' allowances?

nuac

Sponge Bob wrote: »

He was accused of 'jumping' for that precise reason in the Interview. Gilmore didn't come well out of the interview....judging from the timing of some clapping and cheering at one point when his name was mentioned.

If I were Gilmore I would reshuffle the labour cabinet seats a bit and send Ruairí Quinn out Foreign and Howlin to Education with himself goinng in Public Expenditure and Joan Burton promoted to the mini cabinet instead of Howlin.

That would defuse the situation.....if executed within a month or so....and allow Gilmore to show he is in touch (or that he intends to be) and then give Keaveney the final heave ho.

The longer that Gilmore stays in Foreign Affairs the longer this farce will drag on...amusing as it is and all.

at this stage, re-arranging deck-chairs on the Titanic

Sponge Bob

One Bye election later

http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0331/379193-keaveney-calls-for-programme-for-government-review/

Labour Party chairman Colm Keaveney has said a renegotiation of the Programme for Government is an immediate requirement for his party, in the wake of its poor performance in the Meath East by-election.


Mr Keaveney said Labour needed to demonstrate humility immediately with respect to the broken promises made prior to the last general election.
He said the buck for the party's failures stopped with the Tánaiste Eamon Gilmore and his ministers.

How soon can Gilmore call a conference to diswhip him permanently??

StillWaters

periodictable wrote: »

Yes he's a shrewd political operator with his sights set on the leadership.

he is a snake and a fool. He will never lead the party now. The time for him to act to unseat Gilmore and lead a challenge was late last year. Too late for him. The members do not trust him or actively dislike him.

Jcarroll07

Maybe he will cause a split in Labor. I for sure wont complain. But it is quit interest to see the face between the different party members

periodictable

Labour were always a bitter disappointment-wolves in sheep's clothing.

tayto lover

Jcarroll07 wrote: »

Maybe he will cause a split in Labor. I for sure wont complain. But it is quit interest to see the face between the different party members

Are they not split enough?
Labour are history just like the Greens.
They sold out for the wee bit of power. Just like drinking poison. Fatal error.