I've just had a second email from a source with an intimate knowledge of the ins and out of Tower Hamlets politics, containing further information about talks between the SWP-sponsored Continuity Respect group on Tower Hamlets council and the local Liberal Democrats. Like all journos, I like nothing more than a good tip-off, so many thanks to my informant.
Anyway, I'm told that the Lib Dems are disappointed that the Gang of Four seem so determined to hang on to the Respect name. Deep Throat adds that everybody's favourite centre party are more than up for a deal:
I can only think of a couple of occasions were the LD's and Respect voted differently on an issue ... A coalition for them would be pragmatic politics for both sides, and the Lib Dems are - it has to be said - masters of coalition deal-making.
Yeah, sounds like what we know about 'em, especially at local level. But I wonder if either Clegg or Huhne would approve of their East End co-thinkers jumping into bed with the Cliffites?
Posted at 22:14, 2 November 2007
Comments (10)
Well, Huhne likes to boast about the gap year he spent at the Sorbonne in 1968, or thereabouts, before graduating to the European Parliament along with Cohn Bendit and other luminaries among the soixante huitards.
Sous le pave, l'opportunisme!
Dave,
Are you sure you're not overdoing the "politics" here.
Galloway has had Abjol Miah bringing in tranches of people from the East London Mosque.
I doubt whether George subscribes to much Jamaat politics.
Yet he will support Abjols bid to become Bethnal MP.
Its a carve up everywhere you look.
Official Opposition has some benefits, but I dont think the "four" have any internal political agreement besides dislike of Miah that would lead the Lib Dems to be stained with anything other than opportunism.Again.
Are you in a position to reveal any non-identifying details of your source? Such as, e.g., say, for example, whether they're connected to the TH Labour Party, whose position with regard to this one might not be considered entirely disinterested?
I have to say, I love the idea of the LDs thinking that the 'Independents' are bound to be more tractable than 'official' RESPECT, since after all they're not aligned with that pinko Commie hothead Galloway. But by the same token, I do wonder why John Rees didn't disabuse them sharpish. If all this is true, that is.
I think the Liberal Democrats are a mixed bunch locally, and more homogeneous at a national level.
However, I don't think Huhne or Clegg would bat an eyelid if local Liberal Democrats subsumed some Respect councilors.
The Lib Dems everywhere are a very mixed bag, from local to national.
Anyway familiar with their antics would know that.
My town's liberal candidates in recent local elections included: son of former Labour MP pursuing a vendetta against the Party (of which he was a member) - he is their probable Parliamentary candidate, former CPGB, latter for a while a LP councillor (disciplined for saying of a Liberal who is handicapped that 'they used to put people like you down' - that didn't stop the Liberals putting him as a candidate), former Bennite mate of mine, racist cretin (recently deceased) who had a bee in his bonnet about a Sikh Temple in his area, a string of very 'nice' middle class people, and a raft of free-marketeers, clearly on the Right.
And so it goes.
They are at present in coalition with the Tories, crushing the downtrodden (such as film buffs - ie, me). Indeed in this town even the hot chestnuts groan under the oppression of the ruling Liberal-Tory Junta.
Anyone wanting lessons in opportunism would find no better teachers.
Sorry, but this is laughable nonsense, one of the more ridiculous stories floating around the blogosophere. There is going to be no coalition with the Liberal Democrats. There are no talks for the purposes of such a coalition. No SWP member or SWP supporter would be seen dead in a coalition with Tower Hamlets liberals. Deep Throat is full of deep shit, and you're all swallowing it.
"There is going to be no coalition with the Liberal Democrats."
Good. But the story appeared in print in the local newspaper, not the "blogosphere".
So it needs a public rebuttal from a representative of the SWP's leadership, not a.....blogger.
Sadly Lenin,since you posted Georges "defence" against corruption,three minutes after the 200 page Parliamentary Report was released, as your own work, you have no credibility.
For those with a memory: when Liz Davis resigned as Chair of the Socialist Alliance the principal reasons, such as the famous cheque book, were given by someone not too far from this keyboard. The Web was full of the wailings and the splutterings of the SWP and its allies denying all.
Since their reaction then to lie through their teeth, why should we trust them now?
It seems to me that the Lib Dems advantage from being seem to talk to Oli's 4 is to win back voters elsewhere. Nothing formal in the Tower Hamlets Council chamber has to result for them to gain some advantage from that.
Opportunism with a purpose! I bet Chris Renard knows all about it.