Today I was deeply concerned to here about the shock expulsion of Pete Radcliff, CLP Chair for Broxtowe. In an email sent to him today he learnt he was to be expelled for 'being an active supporter of the AWL'. Now I may not know him personally, I am aware of how much of a fantastic CLP Chair is and a keen Labour activist. I'm saddened by this news.
Today, we think about all the families affected by suicide, and recognise the role of those professionals and volunteers who provide care, counselling and support. We should also give some attention to people who the Courts have determined should be deprived of their freedom, because time spent in prison should not mean losing your life to suicide.
Theresa May wants to return to an outdated system where children are placed in segregated schools depending on their exam results. And the devil take the rest. She tries to hide her divisive approach by cloaking it in warm words, but however she dresses it up, this is still selection. Still winners and many more losers. Still a minority of schools classed as 'good' and the vast majority publicly branded as 'bad'.
The thing is, I don't want to vote against Jeremy Corbyn. He could be the path to generating the change our society so desperately needs... However, there are clearly problems with his tenure: there would not have been another leadership election this summer if that were not the case.
There has been a wealth of research and commentary into disengagement with the political process and a so-called "Westminster Bubble" effect and whilst there are undoubtedly many factors which have contributed towards this, one which is at last catching the eye of MPs is the composition of Parliament itself.
Overall, it was a hugely insightful debate and I welcome your views in the comments section and on my twitter. I believe Jeremy handled himself incredibly well, and came across in the way any potential Labour Leader should. This is the man I believe will lead us to victory, and Owen Smith has angered me with his offensive remarks tonight.
Have you heard the one about the government that teamed up with a major corporation to prevent itself from being paid billions in lost taxes, equal in value to its annual health care budget?
Analysis of the referendum results by Chris Hanretty of the University of East Anglia suggests that 70% of Labour-held constituencies either probably or definitely voted Leave. Seeing as Labour's official position in the referendum was for Remain, this shows a huge disconnect with the views of the people the party claims to represent.
How will Labour ever succeed if it rejects the support of people like me? I was desperate to vote Labour at the last election, but at that time to do so would support all the policies - austerity, welfare cuts - that were currently hurting disabled people.
2016 has, so far, been a year of political turbulence. David Cameron has quit as Prime Minister following a disastrous result for him in the EU Referendum, Nigel Farage has (once again) quit as UKIP Leader, this time for good, and the USA has to elect one of two rather unpopular people as President. But right now, dominating the headlines in the UK, is the Labour Leadership race.
I'm voting for Corbyn because his commitment to women's equality has been consistent from his days as a trade union worker supporting women in the fight for equal pay, to the far-reaching and comprehensive set of policies on women's equality he announced this week.
Jeremy Corbyn is a politician in England who I believe in, which is why I then paid the extortionate and exclusive fee of £25 to vote in the second leadership election. This time I received a letter from Iain McNicol, General Secretary of The Labour Party, explaining, 'A panel of the National Executive Committee (NEC) has considered your application, and has decided to reject it on the grounds that you tweeted in support of the Green Party on 8th May 2015'.
Each year Labour's governing body, the National Executive Committee, can propose changes to the party's rules to be voted on at Labour Party Conference. Recently there has been increased interest in what any potential rule changes might be. People have speculated about whether these changes will be used to pursue various factional agendas or "settle scores". In reality, the rule changes we have spent the past year working on are designed to improve campaigning, communications and engagement through digital technology and Party Reform.
Disagreements within any political party are inevitable and should be welcomed as a healthy sign of debate. But that debate must be conducted with mutual respect, in which everyone is able to participate and express their opinion, free from harassment or intimidation.
Most Corbyn supporters are driven by a desire to help the less fortunate. Nobody's suggesting that the left automatically hold the moral high ground, but it increasingly feels like holding a world view based on compassion is seen as 'hard' and 'extremist' in 21st century Britain. Whatever your politics, that should be recognised as a sad thing.
Instead of playing this tax avoidance game, we have to call tax avoidance what it is: tax dodging. It is wrong. At a time of deep economic insecurity after years of austerity economics, ensuring that enough tax is raised is a matter of national security. A Corbyn-led Labour government will make the changes that are necessary to make a difference.