I don’t know how you come to that conclusion. Unless you are suggesting Labour legitimise reform by working with them?
History teaches us that if you appease fascists then bad things happen.
Not stated in this article is that the Tories originally agreed to work with Labour but their party leader threatened to sack the local leader so they withdrew from that agreement.
I’m not local to Birmingham but where I live we have a desperate need for affordable housing and the Greens ran on a “no new housing, no exceptions” platform. They also opposed rollout of green energy solutions, probably to appease the NIMBY crowd.
My point is that at a local level the green party runs on platforms that will cause a lot of social problems that local authorities have to deal with and maybe in Birmingham they have some completely mental attachment to a local cause that is a red-line for Labour.
Lib Dems will do what they are told but arguably closer aligned to Tories.
In any case Labours best strategy is to sit back for a few months and watch reform and the independents self-destruct and see if Green and Lib Dem become more willing to compromise.
OP’s title aside, the article states that Labour have ruled out a coalition or power sharing agreement with anyone. If Labour actually gave a shit about not appeasing fascists then a) they wouldn’t consider working with the Tories either, and b) they’d gird their loins and bring the greens and the lib dems on board.
Instead, both Labour and the Tories are continuing to act as if they between them are entitled govern, and voters are just being petulant children by voting for anyone else.
OTOH Labour have been running Brum for years, it seems right that after getting booted into third place some one else should run it for a while. Given reform have the most seats they should get first try at forming a majority, if not them then the Greens.
I’m not local to Birmingham but where I live we have a desperate need for affordable housing and the Greens ran on a “no new housing, no exceptions” platform. They also opposed rollout of green energy solutions, probably to appease the NIMBY crowd.
My point is that at a local level the green party runs on platforms that will cause a lot of social problems that local authorities have to deal with and maybe in Birmingham they have some completely mental attachment to a local cause that is a red-line for Labour.
Lib Dems will do what they are told but arguably closer aligned to Tories.
In any case Labours best strategy is to sit back for a few months and watch reform and the independents self-destruct and see if Green and Lib Dem become more willing to compromise.
I don’t know how you come to that conclusion. Unless you are suggesting Labour legitimise reform by working with them?
History teaches us that if you appease fascists then bad things happen.
Not stated in this article is that the Tories originally agreed to work with Labour but their party leader threatened to sack the local leader so they withdrew from that agreement.
I’m suggesting labour should work with the greens and libdems since they are supposedly politically aligned.
Greens and LDs should work together like the only adults in the room and then invite labour into the fold. Maybe then they can get over themselves.
I’m not local to Birmingham but where I live we have a desperate need for affordable housing and the Greens ran on a “no new housing, no exceptions” platform. They also opposed rollout of green energy solutions, probably to appease the NIMBY crowd.
My point is that at a local level the green party runs on platforms that will cause a lot of social problems that local authorities have to deal with and maybe in Birmingham they have some completely mental attachment to a local cause that is a red-line for Labour.
Lib Dems will do what they are told but arguably closer aligned to Tories.
In any case Labours best strategy is to sit back for a few months and watch reform and the independents self-destruct and see if Green and Lib Dem become more willing to compromise.
OP’s title aside, the article states that Labour have ruled out a coalition or power sharing agreement with anyone. If Labour actually gave a shit about not appeasing fascists then a) they wouldn’t consider working with the Tories either, and b) they’d gird their loins and bring the greens and the lib dems on board.
Instead, both Labour and the Tories are continuing to act as if they between them are entitled govern, and voters are just being petulant children by voting for anyone else.
OTOH Labour have been running Brum for years, it seems right that after getting booted into third place some one else should run it for a while. Given reform have the most seats they should get first try at forming a majority, if not them then the Greens.
I’m not local to Birmingham but where I live we have a desperate need for affordable housing and the Greens ran on a “no new housing, no exceptions” platform. They also opposed rollout of green energy solutions, probably to appease the NIMBY crowd.
My point is that at a local level the green party runs on platforms that will cause a lot of social problems that local authorities have to deal with and maybe in Birmingham they have some completely mental attachment to a local cause that is a red-line for Labour.
Lib Dems will do what they are told but arguably closer aligned to Tories.
In any case Labours best strategy is to sit back for a few months and watch reform and the independents self-destruct and see if Green and Lib Dem become more willing to compromise.