We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Updated 12.00pm
THE PAST FEW months has seen the British press gripped by the Labour party’s leadership race.
The four-way contest has been fought by MPs Andy Burnham, Yvette Cooper, Liz Kendall and Jeremy Corbyn.
The 66-year-old back bencher has come from being a 200/1 outside shot who only managed to enter the race at the last minute to being the outright favourite.
Yesterday evening he was announced as the new leader of the Labour party after taking 59% of members’ first preference votes.
So what exactly is this all about?
Who did he beat to win?
The race for the leadership started after the British General Election on 7 May this year.
Ed Miliband stood aside as the leader of the party after the Conservatives secured an overall majority in the House of Commons and Labour was decimated in Scotland, losing all but one of its seats to the SNP.
Leadership hopefuls were required to receive 35 nominations from their fellow MPs to stand in the race.
Andy Burnham emerged as the early favourite with polls in June putting him on a third of the vote.
Over the course of his campaign he saw a decline in popularity, and in recent days has found himself caught up in a scandal by being secretly filmed by a reporter for The Sun saying a win for Corbyn would be a “disaster for the Labour party” and would indicate “Labour has given up on ever being a government again”.
Liz Kendell, a 44-year-old former policy researcher, struggled for support with an approach that she has described herself as possibly being “too blunt”.
She was however roundly praised for telling a Mail on Sunday journalist to “fuck off” when he asked about her weight.
Yvette Cooper, a MP since 1997, previously served in a Labour government under Gordon Brown between 2008 and 2010. Since 2010 she has been Britain’s shadow home secretary, a position which has boosted her profile in recent weeks due to the refugee crisis.
And that brings us to Jeremy Corbyn…
What’s all the fuss about Corbyn?
Corbyn made his way onto the Labour leadership ballot with a last minute rush of nine MPs in the final hour that nominations were open.
The London-based MP, who has been a member of the House of Commons since 1983, has drawn intense media scrutiny for his left-wing views and credibility as leader of the opposition.
In his programme for government, he has said that he will bring about a “fundemental shift” in what the Labour party has been offering in recent years.
This would include reversing spending cuts introduced by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition since 2010; seeking political and not military solutions to foreign policy issues; scrapping university tuition fees and the introduction of rent controls.
His anti-austerity policies were given some credibility when last month they received the backing of 40 leading economists, including a former adviser to the Bank of England.
There has been a feeling that an some of the coverage of Corbyn has shown an unfair bias against him, with a number of examples of selective quoting being published by British satire magazine Private Eye and circulating on social media.
Joe Public / TwitterHow Jeremy Corbyn is being misquoted by the Tory press #PrivateEye pic.twitter.com/NVfG4HF4lc
— JP (@jpublik) September 1, 2015
What has been most remarkable about Jeremy Corbyn has been his huge growth in popularity among members of the public.
This has seemed to seem to stem from his straight-talking nature and alternative to the slick Blairite front that has been prevalent in the British Labour party since the late-1990s.
In an article last month in The Guardian, journalist Bridget Christie referred to herself as having her “Jeremy Corbyn moment” after watching a clip of him from 1984 in which he defends a decision to wear a jumper made by his mother despite derision from Tory MPs.
This seeming enthusiasm with those disaffected by politics has led to a swell of people joining the Labour party, with any of these new members allowed to vote in the contest as long as they pay £3 and sign a form saying that they share Labour’s values.
Despite his popularity, he has faced opposition both from within his party and from external detractors.
Throughout the campaign a major criticism from the Labour hierarchy is that his leadership would be regressive, and would not present a credible opposition to the Conservative party.
Writing last month, Tony Blair stated that, “If Jeremy Corbyn becomes leader, the party won’t just face defeat but annihilation. Stop him before it’s too late.”
He has been criticised for a soft stance on foreign policy, with David Cameron describing him as unfit to lead the Labour party following his criticism of a British drone strike in Syria.
He faced further criticism from elements of the British press after Gerry Adams tweeted a picture of senior Sinn Féin members sitting with him at Portcullis House in Westminster.
Gerry Adams / TwitterWith Jeremy Corbyn & the comrades @ Portcullis House, Westminster. pic.twitter.com/A6Vgmaglsa
— Gerry Adams (@GerryAdamsSF) July 21, 2015
So what now that he is leader?
With Corbyn now in place as leader of the opposition, his next challenge will be to unite his party colleagues who have targeted him with much derision in the run-in to the leadership contest.
In the immediate aftermath of yesterday’s win a number of senior Labour party figures stood down from their positions, including shadow chancellor Chris Leslie and shadow education secretary Tristram Hunt.
And if he manages to get all his troops in line, his long-term challenge will be contending the 2020 General Election, something that two-thirds of people in a poll conducted by The Independent said he was likely to lose.
While criticism of Corbyn as an outdated leftists is likely to contiue from the Conservative party, his credibility and popularity has grown as the leadership race has gone on.
One thing is for sure, his victory marks a new chapter in British politics.
- First published 13/09/2015
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
The vote on Friday will merely determine whether or not womdn CHOOSING an abortion will continue to be restricted to unsafe, unsupervised abortions or will have a path to safe, supervised abortions.
Vote Yes to trust women and not needlessly endanger their lives
Very Sad , People have become so selfish
@Elvis Polkasalad: Yeah, dem selfish women having notions about their bodily autonomy…
* wimmin
@The Risen: Bodily autonomy is a joke. Nobody has bodily autonomy, someone gets cancer try saying i am exercising my bodily autonomy cancer please go! We are at war and men mainly have to defend the country. Try saying no my bodily autonomy means I dont have to defend the country, you would probably be shot. If a woman has sex she is partly giving up bodily autonomy i.e. if she gets pregnant, sorry then there are two bodies and two lives not one. While the woman’s life will be given priority in a life or death situation there are still two lives and it is plain wrong for a mother to snuff out the life of her child in any circumstances. Vote no to this vile law which Harris is proposing to replace the 8th. The 8th is our law and we should not give up our rights to set law in life or death situations.
@Jeremy DeChad: if someone had cancer, they can choose to have chemotherapy to get rid of it. Silly argument
@Jenni Harrison: yes but it may or may not cure you. Your “bodily autonomy” cannot be used to force the cancer to leave your body. Hope thay is helpful for you.
@Jeremy DeChad: I don’t think you comprehend the meaning!
Bodily autonomy means a person has control or choice over whom or what uses their body, for what, and for how long. It’s why you can’t be forced to donate blood, tissue, or organs. Even if you are dead.
The risen is using the phrase correctly. You are not
@Jenni Harrison: that is your opinion about what bodily autonomy means but of course you are wrong. Think of this when a woman is pregnant it is no longer just her and her body that actually exists. There is a second body occupying the same space and one which she has played a part in creating. The question that we need to consider is whether she has a right to destroy the other life / body. The 8th aims to say no. Keep the 8th vote no.
@Jeremy DeChad: Fair play to ya mansplaining bodily autonomy to the wimmins.
Cheer for the extra votes you just sent to the Yes side.
@Jeremy DeChad: There are many situations where a woman has not played a part. A fetus is not a body so there is no second body involved. Bodily autonomy means having control over what your body is used for, who or what uses it and what you decide or decide not to do with it. Even though I’m a yes voter I have tried to see this from the no perspective but still haven’t seen a single argument to change my mind. I am a man and I don’t feel like I have any right to tell a woman dealing with a crisis pregnancy what to do. If you vote no, and I respect your choice to do that, I can’t get my head around how aggressive you’re being. If this was a simple issue there’d be no argument. It’s not black or white and you can make an argument without being aggressive or disrespectful.
@Costello Brendan: haven’t a clue what you mean by “aggressive” I am not the one who referred to anyone as silly. Fetus means offspring another word for child and is a separate developing body that is dependant on its mother but should not be subject to being killed by her.
Questions ?
When does a life begin biologically ?
Who has the right to determine a cut off point for protection under the constitution?
Why did we swap one (catholic) orthodoxy for another (left wing) orthodoxy which is less tolerant of diverse opinions and constantly pursuing agenda ?
Why do we send people afflicted with trauma (sympathy expressed) to Dublin to run things like heath care (Brid Smith) foreign affairs (Colm OGorman) and housing( Boyd Barrett) ?
In the event of a ‘yes’ vote, the electorate will wake up on Sunday to a different society where the protection of the law in ending life is no longer an absolute. The Oireachtas report is exclusively biased towards those who see only one life in a pregnancy but also do not see the law is diminished in such a way that it now becomes something more than an entitlement vehicle but those who engage in criminal activity discovers the law no longer acts as a protector of life on this island. Other countries can only live uncomfortably with the dilution of law and order as a protector of life and the medical community that tries their best to save lives so advocacy groups can influence politicians to their section of the electorate.
The vote is a swindle in that the Government has done everything to avoid asking the electorate the 12 week/no reason question because it doesn’t trust the electorate to give them the answer they and the advocacy groups desperately seek.
M”"RDER, plain and simple, VOTE NO.
@Brian Rutledge: mqrder? Mzrder? I give up, what is it?
Is it just me or is Isobel a nailed on yes voter?
Obviously it’s not the final say, there is no final say. The constitution serves the people, not the other way around. It can and should be amended to reflect the will of the majority. As the set of people, “majority”, changes on every issue over time there may be a need to revisit any issue at a given point. Just common sense, isn’t it?
At the risk of looking silly, what was the law before 1983? I’m assuming it was the same except it was done through legislation rather than the constitution?
Same advice as every referendum.
Either way it’s not the final say on the matter as in 35 years time people who were ineligible to vote in this referendum will be given their chance to vote on the 8th Amendment.
2053
2088
Next 2 referenda on the 8th.
Be sure to remain on the register.
have your say