Meeting held on Monday 15th May 2023
Eight people were present. Six gave their apologies.
We noted that Peter O’Brien (erstwhile Lab candidate for the Hathersage ward, recently dismissed from the Party) had easily got in, together with the official Labour candidate. In Bakewell, the LP candidate only just failed by 50 votes. In general, results were good for Labour. We discussed Peter O’Brien’s case and the complicated LP rules which aims to prevent collaboration across parties. These rules are often broken (for example, when LP members leafletted for Peter).
While the results of the local election generally were good for Labour, there was nevertheless a likelihood that at the next general election Labour would not secure an outright majority. While the Party denies that it will collaborate or go into coalition with Liberals, in the event of a hung parliament following the election, there will inevitably be a degree of negotiation and collaboration.
Discussing Starmer’s reticence to articulate details of policy, we recognised that anything he were to say would be subject to opposition by Tory press. Nevertheless there was some irritation that, despite the abysmal failure of Brexit, Labour would not speak against Brexit.
In the light of Suella Braverman’s recent speech in which she opposed immigration, we considered whether this would lead to higher wages in order to attract British workers to jobs (especially agricultural) that would otherwise be taken by overseas workers. It was thought that her claim that this would happen was no more than rhetoric and suggested that increases in immigration are inevitable due to climate change and other stresses. We should therefor prepare for more immigration and welcome it as an opportunity to expand the labour market, especially for public services.
The recent coronation of Charles III led to us voicing opposition to a monarchy which legitimises inequality of wealth and represents the abhorrent British Class System. We wondered whether a slimmed down monarchy (eg. like the Dutch) would be an improvement. This led to a discussion of inequality more generally and how so many aspects of our society – its culture and its economy – encourage and celebrate inequality. We wondered if this was because British people did not actually value equality, preferring competition, a celebrity culture and the phantasy that one might become wealthy. But it seemed extraordinary that the current extremes of inequality – with homelessness, food banks and widespread poverty alongside extreme wealth – were still tolerated. Are we not reaching a point where the public will, in the interests of humanity, want to change this?
Next meeting, 19th June.