*Monaghan's Soviet handlers notify the former Prime Minister that the quote is English and not Chinese*
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Several days after the resignation of Monaghan, John Epping made the following announcement:
Today, Ladies and gentlemen , I would like to announce that I am standing for leadership of the Labour Party in the current election.
Under Mr Monaghan's leadership we have come farther as a party than any of us had imagined we would when he took up the leadership. If elected, I pledge to continue his work and further the cause of British socialism in the Labour Party. We must strengthen the ties we have with the unions, now that they have come under threat from the dogmatic forces of the Conservative government, and promote them as forces for good in British democracy and critical to industrial power of any nation. Nationalisation must be restored to Labour the heart of the Labour agenda as the truly fair alternative to the ambiguity of the Prime Minister's Free Market convictions. We must strengthen our foreign policy: stand by our NATO allies and be the bulwark against Soviet totalitarianism, but also not failing to stand by our morals and commitments abroad. There can be no more cowardice from a Labour government, like what happened in Cyprus. Britain and the Labour Party must be prepared to stand firm wherever oppression rears its head, even if it is against an ally we must stand against. As leader, I will aim to fulfil these goals and to unite the party into the force set to challenge the Conservative Party in every attempt it makes to trample on the working class.
Finally, I would like to convey my best wishes to both Roland Carpenter and George Kellaghan in the coming race. Democracy and socialism shall go onward, and Labour must now decide who it is to lead us. May the best man win.
Today, Ladies and gentlemen , I would like to announce that I am standing for leadership of the Labour Party in the current election.
Under Mr Monaghan's leadership we have come farther as a party than any of us had imagined we would when he took up the leadership. If elected, I pledge to continue his work and further the cause of British socialism in the Labour Party. We must strengthen the ties we have with the unions, now that they have come under threat from the dogmatic forces of the Conservative government, and promote them as forces for good in British democracy and critical to industrial power of any nation. Nationalisation must be restored to Labour the heart of the Labour agenda as the truly fair alternative to the ambiguity of the Prime Minister's Free Market convictions. We must strengthen our foreign policy: stand by our NATO allies and be the bulwark against Soviet totalitarianism, but also not failing to stand by our morals and commitments abroad. There can be no more cowardice from a Labour government, like what happened in Cyprus. Britain and the Labour Party must be prepared to stand firm wherever oppression rears its head, even if it is against an ally we must stand against. As leader, I will aim to fulfil these goals and to unite the party into the force set to challenge the Conservative Party in every attempt it makes to trample on the working class.
Finally, I would like to convey my best wishes to both Roland Carpenter and George Kellaghan in the coming race. Democracy and socialism shall go onward, and Labour must now decide who it is to lead us. May the best man win.
A bar, Palace of Westminster. 1969.
‘You've seen Thornbloom's latest offering, I take it?’
‘Of course I have.’
‘… And?’
‘…And it's dreadful. Not to mention the fact that his cure for “not enough democracy” is “get rid of proportional representation and emaciate the franchise”, it's nonsensical that he should be reforming the bloody place after all of six months. It's shambolic.’
‘Naturally.’
‘Well, yes. I wasn't going to say anything. … Anyway, you must have taken soundings. How's it looking?’
‘Respectable second, perhaps. We'll have to wait and see just how far people are willing to trust Roland to answer their concerns, I think. Either he wins well or the thing will go to two ballots at least.’
‘Hmm. … I didn't ask you that, of course.’
‘Your indiscretion is perfectly safe with me, Will. … Mind you, if there's anyone one could countenance running a government from the bloody place …’
‘Stop it. Stop it now. I don't like where that sentence is going.’
‘What are you going to do now, anyway? I imagine being Lords Opposition Leader isn't exactly keeping you hooked to your desk.’
‘Not yet, but we'll see. The Statesman have asked if I'd go and join the board, as have Penguin. I'm not sure I can really do either being a public citizen, but it's nice of them to ask. I am finally writing some proper books, though.’
‘Well if you ever fancy being a professional grandee – you know, Tory-style – just come and find me. The cabal meets every third Thursday and we wear red tricorns.’
‘If you're not careful I might take you up on that one day. … Anyway, you go and attend to your business. I won't keep you.’
‘See you, Will. Keep fighting the good fight.’
‘You've seen Thornbloom's latest offering, I take it?’
‘Of course I have.’
‘… And?’
‘…And it's dreadful. Not to mention the fact that his cure for “not enough democracy” is “get rid of proportional representation and emaciate the franchise”, it's nonsensical that he should be reforming the bloody place after all of six months. It's shambolic.’
‘Naturally.’
‘Well, yes. I wasn't going to say anything. … Anyway, you must have taken soundings. How's it looking?’
‘Respectable second, perhaps. We'll have to wait and see just how far people are willing to trust Roland to answer their concerns, I think. Either he wins well or the thing will go to two ballots at least.’
‘Hmm. … I didn't ask you that, of course.’
‘Your indiscretion is perfectly safe with me, Will. … Mind you, if there's anyone one could countenance running a government from the bloody place …’
‘Stop it. Stop it now. I don't like where that sentence is going.’
‘What are you going to do now, anyway? I imagine being Lords Opposition Leader isn't exactly keeping you hooked to your desk.’
‘Not yet, but we'll see. The Statesman have asked if I'd go and join the board, as have Penguin. I'm not sure I can really do either being a public citizen, but it's nice of them to ask. I am finally writing some proper books, though.’
‘Well if you ever fancy being a professional grandee – you know, Tory-style – just come and find me. The cabal meets every third Thursday and we wear red tricorns.’
‘If you're not careful I might take you up on that one day. … Anyway, you go and attend to your business. I won't keep you.’
‘See you, Will. Keep fighting the good fight.’
June 1969, House of Commons,
Debate on the Cornwall Council Unitary Authority Act of 1969
"Mister Speaker, let me reassure the esteemed colleague for North Cornwall that I certainly did not question the size of the council she proposes. I was merely mentionning her courage in tossing to the streets some 200 politicians which might surely come gunning for her seat comes election time."
*Some laughter*
"But as the honorable colleague extolls the virtue of Ulster's government, shouldn't we reduce the proposed numbers even more to fully agree with her line of argumentation?"
Debate on the Cornwall Council Unitary Authority Act of 1969
"Mister Speaker, let me reassure the esteemed colleague for North Cornwall that I certainly did not question the size of the council she proposes. I was merely mentionning her courage in tossing to the streets some 200 politicians which might surely come gunning for her seat comes election time."
*Some laughter*
"But as the honorable colleague extolls the virtue of Ulster's government, shouldn't we reduce the proposed numbers even more to fully agree with her line of argumentation?"
In cooperation with like minded MPs and party members, MP J.C. Kirk releases an internal manifesto for a vision of the future of Labour.
We wish to see Candidates for Labour Leadership endorse using this manifesto as a foundation for the future of Labour
New Socialism, New Ideas for Labour
Preamble:
As our former Prime Minister Monaghan said in his resignation speech, the Labour Party has suffered a major set back, put that we mustn't step back from being a party of new ideas and moving forward. Moving forward now, requires a new leader, and a new leader needs new ideas. some of which are outlined here.
It's important that we recognize the Labour legacy, of four years of immediate post war leadership and eventually 12 straight years of Labour government. Sound Labour policy, lead to a stronger, fairer britain, one where working class rights are increasingly respective and the middle class larger than ever before.
Therein lies the issue. Labour comfortably won the Working Class, yet lost the Middle Class. Labour Policy must therefore change to satisfy the middle class Labour help bring into being, without abandoning working class gains. That is the goal of New Socialism.
Economic Policy:
Labour made errors in it's efforts to achieve economic democratization. It handed direct control of companies of which the working class had no time, no inclination, nore information to run properly. As a result, companies went improperly managed and prone to losses. These loses, thanks to Labour's commitment to Industrial subsides led to millions of pounds being wasted. Not to mention starving out new efficient companies from resources.
New Socialism seeks to abandon structural subsides. Organizations and particular jobs are not sacred, the workers themselves are. It is better and cheaper to support and educate the unemployed for new employment, than it is to continue to waste their abilities in ill managed and unprofitable companies. Profit sharing requires profit, we should not fear it's maximization when it benefits workers. In regards to profit sharing, New Socialism endorses worker share ownership, similar to the IDA, tempered by Technical (Middle) class management.
New Socialism means the middle class Labour helped build is not left without employment to fit the education that Labour policy helped ensure. Any future efforts of Economic democratization must ensure middle class management jobs are utilizes. It is they we have the time, inclination and information to maximize our productivity and we must support they're employment in our national prosperity.
Under New Socialism Nationalization is a tool to be reserved entirely for strategic industries and those that tend towards monopolization. Outside of this, we should seek shifting ownership to the population at large, with industries rising and falling within the context of marketplace unregulated outside of safety and working conditions. The workers protected from shocks through a guaranteed income through negative income tax and a diversification of ownership. New Socialism favors Socialization over Nationalization.
Trade Policy:
Trade policy is an area in which Labour hasn't had very clear policy. Our current policy could be best summarized as reluctant status quo with the EEC. As Unions oppose the EEC, there's little attempt to move Trade policy anywhere.
New Socialism recognizes there are some products better produced outside Britan's borders and some better produced inside British borders due to our own economic advantages. British prosperity is best served by exporting what we produce best to pay for what we best import.
Trade isn't merely a reality or a necessity, but a benefit. It's a matter of putting ones self in a strong position to leverage trade deals. Therefore, we propose efforts to move towards forming a supplementary trade bloc with our commonwealth allies, particularly Canada, Australia and New Zealand. This will serve to provide us with an strong trade option to give us better leverage for favorable trade in the EEC.
New Socialism fully supports efforts to make the United Kingdom a hub of ideas, technology and trade between Europe and the world through active incentives.
Foreign Policy:
Our commitment to democratization can not afford to stop at our own borders. New Socialism means pragmatic employment of all methods at our disposable, we must seek to make the world safe for Democratization of Political, Social and Economic kinds. In most cases this will mean active lobbying through our diplomatic pressure, economic incentives and disincentives.
However inevitably this might mean last resort military deployment. Blanket pacifism is incompatible with the international brotherhood that Labour has long supported, the vulnerable ought to be protected, tempered only by restraint intended to preserve the ability to protect the vulnerable.
This isn't without rewards for the United Kingdom Itsself.. Active principled global leadership ensures our interests are directly accounted for.
Social Policy:
Social policy is an area where Labour has had most consistent over arching success, with the abolishing of the death penalty and corporal punishment, the equalization of pay for women and the illegalization of public discrimination of all people regardless of race, gender or creed. Labour would do well to continue along with it's strong the protection of civil rights for all. Yet Labour must look differently to it's education policy. It must seek to promote creative thinking and the flexibility required for an ever changing work place and a dynamic job market. Labour should ensure policy is in place to provide the unemployed for education. We must also seek to expand social services and knit law enforcement closer to our communities.
Devolution Policy:
New Socialism supports devolution based on localities rather than merely nationalities. Basing devolution solely on nationalities cause ethnic polarization that inevitable leads to separatism and violence. By supporting devolution by area, we avoid this. We must also realize that as Britain is stronger than working together, devolution should serve primarily as a method for consultation and preparation for large scale actions. To do otherwise risks wasteful management redundancies, with millions of pounds wasted on duplicating a similar projection across the country, when it's best and most effectively done at scale.
Preamble:
As our former Prime Minister Monaghan said in his resignation speech, the Labour Party has suffered a major set back, put that we mustn't step back from being a party of new ideas and moving forward. Moving forward now, requires a new leader, and a new leader needs new ideas. some of which are outlined here.
It's important that we recognize the Labour legacy, of four years of immediate post war leadership and eventually 12 straight years of Labour government. Sound Labour policy, lead to a stronger, fairer britain, one where working class rights are increasingly respective and the middle class larger than ever before.
Therein lies the issue. Labour comfortably won the Working Class, yet lost the Middle Class. Labour Policy must therefore change to satisfy the middle class Labour help bring into being, without abandoning working class gains. That is the goal of New Socialism.
Economic Policy:
Labour made errors in it's efforts to achieve economic democratization. It handed direct control of companies of which the working class had no time, no inclination, nore information to run properly. As a result, companies went improperly managed and prone to losses. These loses, thanks to Labour's commitment to Industrial subsides led to millions of pounds being wasted. Not to mention starving out new efficient companies from resources.
New Socialism seeks to abandon structural subsides. Organizations and particular jobs are not sacred, the workers themselves are. It is better and cheaper to support and educate the unemployed for new employment, than it is to continue to waste their abilities in ill managed and unprofitable companies. Profit sharing requires profit, we should not fear it's maximization when it benefits workers. In regards to profit sharing, New Socialism endorses worker share ownership, similar to the IDA, tempered by Technical (Middle) class management.
New Socialism means the middle class Labour helped build is not left without employment to fit the education that Labour policy helped ensure. Any future efforts of Economic democratization must ensure middle class management jobs are utilizes. It is they we have the time, inclination and information to maximize our productivity and we must support they're employment in our national prosperity.
Under New Socialism Nationalization is a tool to be reserved entirely for strategic industries and those that tend towards monopolization. Outside of this, we should seek shifting ownership to the population at large, with industries rising and falling within the context of marketplace unregulated outside of safety and working conditions. The workers protected from shocks through a guaranteed income through negative income tax and a diversification of ownership. New Socialism favors Socialization over Nationalization.
Trade Policy:
Trade policy is an area in which Labour hasn't had very clear policy. Our current policy could be best summarized as reluctant status quo with the EEC. As Unions oppose the EEC, there's little attempt to move Trade policy anywhere.
New Socialism recognizes there are some products better produced outside Britan's borders and some better produced inside British borders due to our own economic advantages. British prosperity is best served by exporting what we produce best to pay for what we best import.
Trade isn't merely a reality or a necessity, but a benefit. It's a matter of putting ones self in a strong position to leverage trade deals. Therefore, we propose efforts to move towards forming a supplementary trade bloc with our commonwealth allies, particularly Canada, Australia and New Zealand. This will serve to provide us with an strong trade option to give us better leverage for favorable trade in the EEC.
New Socialism fully supports efforts to make the United Kingdom a hub of ideas, technology and trade between Europe and the world through active incentives.
Foreign Policy:
Our commitment to democratization can not afford to stop at our own borders. New Socialism means pragmatic employment of all methods at our disposable, we must seek to make the world safe for Democratization of Political, Social and Economic kinds. In most cases this will mean active lobbying through our diplomatic pressure, economic incentives and disincentives.
However inevitably this might mean last resort military deployment. Blanket pacifism is incompatible with the international brotherhood that Labour has long supported, the vulnerable ought to be protected, tempered only by restraint intended to preserve the ability to protect the vulnerable.
This isn't without rewards for the United Kingdom Itsself.. Active principled global leadership ensures our interests are directly accounted for.
Social Policy:
Social policy is an area where Labour has had most consistent over arching success, with the abolishing of the death penalty and corporal punishment, the equalization of pay for women and the illegalization of public discrimination of all people regardless of race, gender or creed. Labour would do well to continue along with it's strong the protection of civil rights for all. Yet Labour must look differently to it's education policy. It must seek to promote creative thinking and the flexibility required for an ever changing work place and a dynamic job market. Labour should ensure policy is in place to provide the unemployed for education. We must also seek to expand social services and knit law enforcement closer to our communities.
Devolution Policy:
New Socialism supports devolution based on localities rather than merely nationalities. Basing devolution solely on nationalities cause ethnic polarization that inevitable leads to separatism and violence. By supporting devolution by area, we avoid this. We must also realize that as Britain is stronger than working together, devolution should serve primarily as a method for consultation and preparation for large scale actions. To do otherwise risks wasteful management redundancies, with millions of pounds wasted on duplicating a similar projection across the country, when it's best and most effectively done at scale.
Last edited:
"Mr. Speaker,
I remind the House that our councilors remain elected by the will and vote of the people. Therefore, I would contest the argument that we are "tossing" people to the curb, as if the Right Honorable Gentleman is implying that we are freely promoting and demoting our representatives at will. It is not our job as politicians to decide which men and women will govern our community, but our job as voters to do so. Therefore, rather than defending the concept of "politics before people", I ask for the Home Secretary to discuss this bill for what it is: a restructuring of local government to benefit the lives of the people of Cornwall.
[The Liberals on the opposition bench applaud]
"Moving on to answer the Right Honorable Member of South Antrim, my line of argument has not changed at all on this bill, as I stand firmly behind the proposed number of councilors in the legislation. But this not change the, dare I say, conflictive opinion that our Home Secretary has contending this bill when his own region of Northern Ireland employs a smaller number of members in local government than what is proposed in this piece of legislation. In that case, perhaps they have kicked a few members to the curb once or twice?"
~Scarlet Ethel Browne, MP of North Cornwall
I remind the House that our councilors remain elected by the will and vote of the people. Therefore, I would contest the argument that we are "tossing" people to the curb, as if the Right Honorable Gentleman is implying that we are freely promoting and demoting our representatives at will. It is not our job as politicians to decide which men and women will govern our community, but our job as voters to do so. Therefore, rather than defending the concept of "politics before people", I ask for the Home Secretary to discuss this bill for what it is: a restructuring of local government to benefit the lives of the people of Cornwall.
[The Liberals on the opposition bench applaud]
"Moving on to answer the Right Honorable Member of South Antrim, my line of argument has not changed at all on this bill, as I stand firmly behind the proposed number of councilors in the legislation. But this not change the, dare I say, conflictive opinion that our Home Secretary has contending this bill when his own region of Northern Ireland employs a smaller number of members in local government than what is proposed in this piece of legislation. In that case, perhaps they have kicked a few members to the curb once or twice?"
~Scarlet Ethel Browne, MP of North Cornwall
Mr. Speaker,
Given that Prime Minister campaigned on the current tax policy being a burden on the upper class, can the British people expect the prime minister to lower their taxes to the previous Tory Government? Following in the foot step of the Previous Tory Government, Can we expect an implementation of a so-called flat tax that hits the middle and working classes harder than the upper classes, due to their having a smaller share of disposable income? In addition, may I ask the prime minister how high will these new taxes be to make up for the windfall of tax incentives that will nearly exclusively be utilized by wealthiest among us?
The Honorable J.C. Kirk, MP for Hampstead
Given that Prime Minister campaigned on the current tax policy being a burden on the upper class, can the British people expect the prime minister to lower their taxes to the previous Tory Government? Following in the foot step of the Previous Tory Government, Can we expect an implementation of a so-called flat tax that hits the middle and working classes harder than the upper classes, due to their having a smaller share of disposable income? In addition, may I ask the prime minister how high will these new taxes be to make up for the windfall of tax incentives that will nearly exclusively be utilized by wealthiest among us?
The Honorable J.C. Kirk, MP for Hampstead
Last edited:
Late in the Evening in Edinburgh's Sheep Heid Inn, one of the most frequented and renowned pubs in the city, a greyhound, far along in its years, lays fast asleep in a warm corner, raising its head only occasionally to, with only the slightest inclination of interest, survey the curious scene before it. Ewan Willison sits atop a bar stool, a pint of St. Andrew's Ale on the counter behind him, turned towards a small gathering of working class, city Scots. Ewan has never been one for the politics of distance, in which one campaigns from afar with little more than posters and the occasional public appearance. Rather, he wants nothing more than to sit with the men and women of Scotland face to face, pint to pint, in the streets of his beloved city and impress upon them the promise and need of a revitalized Scottish National Party.
"Now, you see... I've been around Britain and the world. Served in the Navy and spent many a good year of youth in London, but nothin' beats ever beats this right here. A proper Scottish pub and a proper Scottish pint where a Scot can talk to Scots about the politics of the Scots. Man to man, Scot to Scot. But it doesn't seem like that in politics these days, does it. No! Tory or Labour, it's the same thing every election year. They put up their posters and tell us Scots why they are clearly the proper choice of the Scottish people."
His remarks elicit a wave of half-hearted, but knowingly agreeing nods among the pubs patrons.
"Well I'll tell you, there's some good in those Tory's and there's some good in those Labour folks, but when it comes to it they're just good parties for the English. No I won't tell ya they've never done a single good thing for a Scot, but it's about damned time we Scots took our politics into own hands. Maybe we might start electing some MP's from the good ol' SNP. We're still here and we're rearin' for a fight in every constituency of this district. And, perhaps you haven't heard it, but you can't say that soon, 'cause I'm tellin' ya now, I'm running for Parliament in the very near future and I'm rearin' for that fight and, let me tell ya... You better make me fight like hell to earn your vote.
"Now, you see... I've been around Britain and the world. Served in the Navy and spent many a good year of youth in London, but nothin' beats ever beats this right here. A proper Scottish pub and a proper Scottish pint where a Scot can talk to Scots about the politics of the Scots. Man to man, Scot to Scot. But it doesn't seem like that in politics these days, does it. No! Tory or Labour, it's the same thing every election year. They put up their posters and tell us Scots why they are clearly the proper choice of the Scottish people."
His remarks elicit a wave of half-hearted, but knowingly agreeing nods among the pubs patrons.
"Well I'll tell you, there's some good in those Tory's and there's some good in those Labour folks, but when it comes to it they're just good parties for the English. No I won't tell ya they've never done a single good thing for a Scot, but it's about damned time we Scots took our politics into own hands. Maybe we might start electing some MP's from the good ol' SNP. We're still here and we're rearin' for a fight in every constituency of this district. And, perhaps you haven't heard it, but you can't say that soon, 'cause I'm tellin' ya now, I'm running for Parliament in the very near future and I'm rearin' for that fight and, let me tell ya... You better make me fight like hell to earn your vote.
((Welcome to Albion and Empire. If you have the courage to post a speech where your character gets a reaction other than manic applause, I think we're gonna get along just fine.))
June 1969, House of Commons,
Debate on the Cornwall Council Unitary Authority Act of 1969
"Mister Speaker,
Unfortunately, the member for North Cornwall misconstrues what was quite simply a compliment toward her political courage and audacity. Given her reaction, I shall steer clear of ever crossing her.
This being said, she quite aptly mentionned that Northern Ireland is governed by a much lower number of elected official while having roughly thred to four times the population of Cornwall. This begs the question to which our esteemed colleague is incapable of providing an answer : Why does her bill proposes so many councillors?
Wouldn't it be better for the public purse to bring the proposed number more in line with the Northern Ireland ratio? Would the honorable member accept an amendment in that regard? "
Debate on the Cornwall Council Unitary Authority Act of 1969
"Mister Speaker,
Unfortunately, the member for North Cornwall misconstrues what was quite simply a compliment toward her political courage and audacity. Given her reaction, I shall steer clear of ever crossing her.
This being said, she quite aptly mentionned that Northern Ireland is governed by a much lower number of elected official while having roughly thred to four times the population of Cornwall. This begs the question to which our esteemed colleague is incapable of providing an answer : Why does her bill proposes so many councillors?
Wouldn't it be better for the public purse to bring the proposed number more in line with the Northern Ireland ratio? Would the honorable member accept an amendment in that regard? "
"Mr. Speaker,
I don't believe it takes courage to 'toss politicians to the streets', as the Home Secretary has implied. Otherwise it would make our Labour colleagues the most courageous group in the Commons."
[Labour MPs jeer loudly at the last remark]
Mr. Speaker: ORDER! ORDER!
"Nevertheless, I must stress that the reasonably proposed number of councilors in the bill shall not rise or lessen, but remain at the amount it stands. It is peculiar, however, that the Right Honorable Gentleman would shift his argument from 'any less is too much' to 'as low as we can make it'. Quite frankly, I am not sure how long this discussion can continue at this rate, given the Home Secretary seems to have moved his position from protecting the careers of council politicians to suggesting we shrink the council to a bare minimum. Therefore, I rest my case here, Mr. Speaker, and I do hope the Home Secretary and the Conservative Party can keep at least a coherent and steady policy on their domestic agenda for Britain."
~Scarlet Ethel Browne, MP of North Cornwall
___________________________________________________________________
Speaker: The Honorable Lady Browne!
"Mr. Speaker,
In light of the Conservative Party only winning a majority percentage of seats in the region of England out of the whole of Great Britain, coming third in Scotland and second in the Prime Minister's home region of Wales, I ask the Prime Minister if he and his party has the intention of passing bills sent forth by the Commons on recognizing minority languages in regions of our nation and protecting the customs of minority cultures?"
~Scarlet Ethel Browne, MP of North Cornwall
I don't believe it takes courage to 'toss politicians to the streets', as the Home Secretary has implied. Otherwise it would make our Labour colleagues the most courageous group in the Commons."
[Labour MPs jeer loudly at the last remark]
Mr. Speaker: ORDER! ORDER!
"Nevertheless, I must stress that the reasonably proposed number of councilors in the bill shall not rise or lessen, but remain at the amount it stands. It is peculiar, however, that the Right Honorable Gentleman would shift his argument from 'any less is too much' to 'as low as we can make it'. Quite frankly, I am not sure how long this discussion can continue at this rate, given the Home Secretary seems to have moved his position from protecting the careers of council politicians to suggesting we shrink the council to a bare minimum. Therefore, I rest my case here, Mr. Speaker, and I do hope the Home Secretary and the Conservative Party can keep at least a coherent and steady policy on their domestic agenda for Britain."
~Scarlet Ethel Browne, MP of North Cornwall
___________________________________________________________________
Speaker: The Honorable Lady Browne!
"Mr. Speaker,
In light of the Conservative Party only winning a majority percentage of seats in the region of England out of the whole of Great Britain, coming third in Scotland and second in the Prime Minister's home region of Wales, I ask the Prime Minister if he and his party has the intention of passing bills sent forth by the Commons on recognizing minority languages in regions of our nation and protecting the customs of minority cultures?"
~Scarlet Ethel Browne, MP of North Cornwall
Honorable MP J.C. Kirk, speaking at party meeting in Hampstead.
Due to those running for Labour Leadership not endorsing the New Socialism manifesto, nore attempting to provide a coherent alternative vision, I've decided to run for the Leadership of the Labour Party. I can not let this race be defined by existing stale factional divides, when we should be discussing concrete policy.
The Legacy of Monaghan is an important one for Labour and a positive one Britain. Yet, it's an imperfect one. With Labour's loss in the past election, the economically legacy of the previous government has largely being erased. While the abolition the death penalty and corporal punishment stay in place, the Bill of Labour right has been significantly repealed. While the equalization of pay for women and the illegalization of discrimination regardless of sex, race or creed has been eliminated, the only remnants of the Industrial Democracy Act are some worker owned shares.
The reason our social policies stand while our economic policies is a question of coherence. We went in knowing we wanted a Britain where punishment wasn't cruel or permanent and we wanted Britain which banned racial and gender discrimination. However for our Economic and Foreign polices, well meaning as they were, were not so clear or strongly founded. As a result we saw that they were easily attacked and easily undermined both politically and economically.
Starting in this leadership race and continuing on during our time in opposition to the next election, we shall continue building a fresh, coherent vision for a better United kingdom, in all sectors of Government. In my entering of this leadership race, I hope to ensure that this race comes down to a discussion of sound policy and not stale factional politics.
Due to those running for Labour Leadership not endorsing the New Socialism manifesto, nore attempting to provide a coherent alternative vision, I've decided to run for the Leadership of the Labour Party. I can not let this race be defined by existing stale factional divides, when we should be discussing concrete policy.
The Legacy of Monaghan is an important one for Labour and a positive one Britain. Yet, it's an imperfect one. With Labour's loss in the past election, the economically legacy of the previous government has largely being erased. While the abolition the death penalty and corporal punishment stay in place, the Bill of Labour right has been significantly repealed. While the equalization of pay for women and the illegalization of discrimination regardless of sex, race or creed has been eliminated, the only remnants of the Industrial Democracy Act are some worker owned shares.
The reason our social policies stand while our economic policies is a question of coherence. We went in knowing we wanted a Britain where punishment wasn't cruel or permanent and we wanted Britain which banned racial and gender discrimination. However for our Economic and Foreign polices, well meaning as they were, were not so clear or strongly founded. As a result we saw that they were easily attacked and easily undermined both politically and economically.
Starting in this leadership race and continuing on during our time in opposition to the next election, we shall continue building a fresh, coherent vision for a better United kingdom, in all sectors of Government. In my entering of this leadership race, I hope to ensure that this race comes down to a discussion of sound policy and not stale factional politics.
Westminster. 1969.
‘Mr. Kellaghan, can you explain your silence over Jacob Kirk's “New Socialist Manifesto”?’
‘There's little to explain. I've only just read it.’
‘And what do you make of it?’
‘It all seems sensible enough, though I think that Mr. Kirk might want to avoid Tony Crosland for the next few days.’
‘Any comment on Mr. Kirk's own bid for the leadership?’
‘I wish him luck. It's certainly a bold move, an MP with only weeks worth of experience standing to lead the Opposition – but if he feels he's up to it then more power to him.’
((Well, what fun we'll have here.))
The nomination period for the Labour Party is now closed. Vote for your preferred candidate.
If nobody gets a majority on the first ballot, as seems inevitable, the top two candidates will face off in a runoff.
Ballot:
Labour Leader: Carpenter / Kellaghan / Epping / Kirk
[Occupation]
[Bonus]
For purposes of this vote only, go ahead and include any cabinet minister bonuses you may have had from last cycle. We'll need to post a cabinet before we can use them in general votes, though.
I really want to get this show on the road, so voting will close in 24 hours. If a candidate gets a majority before then, though, I reserve the right to call it.
The nomination period for the Labour Party is now closed. Vote for your preferred candidate.
If nobody gets a majority on the first ballot, as seems inevitable, the top two candidates will face off in a runoff.
Ballot:
Labour Leader: Carpenter / Kellaghan / Epping / Kirk
[Occupation]
[Bonus]
For purposes of this vote only, go ahead and include any cabinet minister bonuses you may have had from last cycle. We'll need to post a cabinet before we can use them in general votes, though.
I really want to get this show on the road, so voting will close in 24 hours. If a candidate gets a majority before then, though, I reserve the right to call it.
Last edited:
((Private, Liberal Members))
Motion: That the electoral system used to elect the leader of the Liberal party shall operate using the Alternative Vote (Also known as Instant Run-off voting). This shall be a one-man-one-vote referendum.
Approve Or Reject.
Vote: Approve
Last edited:
June 1969, House of Commons,
Debate on the Cornwall Council Unitary Authority Act of 1969
"Mister Speaker,
It appears the Member for North Cornwall is having a rather loose interpretation of my position, which has not shifted at all. I stand firmly behind efficiency.
I saluted, and still do, her courage for reducing the number of councillors. However, she completely ignores my question.
In her desire to contradict what she construed was a position in defense of the current councillors, she has made a very compelling argument for a lower number of councillors by comparing with the Stormont Parliament.
Will she, or will she not, follow her own logic and reduce the number of councillors proposed by her bill?"
Debate on the Cornwall Council Unitary Authority Act of 1969
"Mister Speaker,
It appears the Member for North Cornwall is having a rather loose interpretation of my position, which has not shifted at all. I stand firmly behind efficiency.
I saluted, and still do, her courage for reducing the number of councillors. However, she completely ignores my question.
In her desire to contradict what she construed was a position in defense of the current councillors, she has made a very compelling argument for a lower number of councillors by comparing with the Stormont Parliament.
Will she, or will she not, follow her own logic and reduce the number of councillors proposed by her bill?"
Leader of the Labour Party: George Kellaghan
[Politician]
[(Former) Cabinet Minister: +2PP]
((Private))
Motion: That the electoral system used to elect the leader of the Liberal party shall operate using the Alternative Vote (Also known as Instant Run-off voting). This shall be a one-man-one-vote referendum.
Vote: Approve
((Yeah, while I'm going to count 1966 cabinet bonuses for purposes of this leadership election only, Kellaghan did not have one of those. :/ ))
EDIT: Wait, he did, as an NPC. Er... KingHigh, you should probably decide how this will be counted.))