politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Today could be the day that Corbyn’s Labour Party finally spli

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Today could be the day that Corbyn’s Labour Party finally splits

Solidarity ?? pic.twitter.com/lggiXOFRhX

Read the full story here

PClipp

First.....

Endillion

I bet nothing happens. The splitters now have perfect cover for inaction, in that no one wants to trigger a big fight the day after one of their colleagues passes away.

RobD

Another Douglas!

RobD

RIP Flynn.

Matrix15

Endillion said:

I bet nothing happens. The splitters now have perfect cover for inaction, in that no one wants to trigger a big fight the day after one of their colleagues passes away.

I imagine you're correct, not much point artificially inflating lib Dems ranks for no obvious gain.

Sandpit

I’ll believe all the talk of a new party when it actually happens, and they put up a candidate in the Newport by-election.

Recidivist

Well I hope it doesn't happen. We need a strong Labour Party.

But I have just heard Stephen Kinnock on the radio saying that he is sticking with Labour. That has to encourage people to leave it.

Pulpstar

Damn, RIP Paul Flynn.

Pulpstar

Endillion said:

I bet nothing happens. The splitters now have perfect cover for inaction, in that no one wants to trigger a big fight the day after one of their colleagues passes away.

Yep, there would have been inactivity regardless though

Sandpit

Occasionally funny, occasionally wrong and occasionally sweary. Comedian John Oliver on Brexit, to a mainly American audience.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hs1s7mK-yH8

Black_Rook

Endillion said:

I bet nothing happens. The splitters now have perfect cover for inaction, in that no one wants to trigger a big fight the day after one of their colleagues passes away.

One can easily see there always being an excuse for putting off action to a tomorrow that never quite comes. I know there are already six ex-Labour independents in the Commons, but I'm pretty sure they are all suspended, deselected and jumped-before-they-were-pushed cases. Dugher has gone of his own volition but he, of course, is already an ex-MP.

In other words, like most people (I would imagine,) I'll believe a split if and when I see it. And, unless the defectors are going to set up a new party and try to take Labour down, how would it be anything other than a completely futile gesture anyway?

Of course, if the split does actually occur then it would have one upside for the Labour leadership. There'd be no shortage of vacant Parliamentary candidate slots for them to parachute Shameless Shamima into when she gets back from Syria.

ydoethur

Sorry to hear the news about Paul Flynn. Didn't agree with him, didn't much like him, but he was a devoted servant of Newport and it badly needs every friend it can get.

But I think we all knew this was imminent when he was too ill to be even carried to the Withdrawal Agreement Vote.

MarqueeMark

After 32 years as an MP, you'd imagine that Paul Flynn must have had a chunk of his 5k majority as a personal vote.

Sandpit

ydoethur said:

Sorry to hear the news about Paul Flynn. Didn't agree with him, didn't much like him, but he was a devoted servant of Newport and it badly needs every friend it can get.

But I think we all knew this was imminent when he was too ill to be even carried to the Withdrawal Agreement Vote.

Well said. RIP, condolences to his family.

ydoethur

On topic, if there is a 'schism' and Leslie and Ummuna walk, can we call them the Wee Frees?

SouthamObserver

If there is a split it’s not enough for the new party to be anti-stuff. It has to be for things as well. The UK needs radical change in just about every way you can imagine. That has to be the focus. Beyond that, a new party is up against FPTP, so is likely to fail. I suspect that will end up dictating how most Labour MPs respond to its launch. Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

ydoethur

MarqueeMark said:

After 32 years as an MP, you'd imagine that Paul Flynn must have had a chunk of his 5k majority as a personal vote.

I would have thought that would have been more than balanced by those dubious about voting for a man in his 80s in case he suffered a serious illness (as unfortunately happened).

I cannot see Newport West going blue in a by-election. A general election it wouldn't be out of the question but it would still be unlikely.

ydoethur

SouthamObserver said:

Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.

SouthamObserver

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.

Then they will drive more and more MPs and voters to the new party. Either way it’s a win for the sane, non-racist, internationalist left.

MarqueeMark

SouthamObserver said:

Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

No - it will be easier to paint them as grotesques. They are prepared to remain and be complicit in anti-semitism, because they thought overturning the Brexit referendum result was more important.

What strength.

SouthamObserver

This sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

https://twitter.com/shashj/status/1097243529955426309?s=21

ydoethur

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.

Then they will drive more and more MPs and voters to the new party. Either way it’s a win for the sane, non-racist, internationalist left.

The crucial figure is 130, because at that moment the party would become the Opposition. If they get to that figure, then the Left will indeed have won a crucial victory.

And Percy the Pig will be on his second loop the loop.

SouthamObserver

MarqueeMark said:

SouthamObserver said:

Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

No - it will be easier to paint them as grotesques. They are prepared to remain and be complicit in anti-semitism, because they thought overturning the Brexit referendum result was more important.

What strength.

I suspect a lot of those who stay will do so specifically because they do not want to overturn the referendum result.

IanB2

Dugher isn't an MP

DavidL

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.

Then they will drive more and more MPs and voters to the new party. Either way it’s a win for the sane, non-racist, internationalist left.

The crucial figure is 130, because at that moment the party would become the Opposition. If they get to that figure, then the Left will indeed have won a crucial victory.

And Percy the Pig will be on his second loop the loop.

40 (including the odd Conservative and there are plenty odd Conservatives to choose from) would not be an insignificant number because they would replace the SNP as the third party gaining profile, positions on committees, Qs at PMQs etc. . Any less than that and this would be such an obviously futile gesture as to make one question the sanity of those willing to support it.

AndyJS

Today could be 26th March 1981 again. Wasn't Making Your Mind Up number one at the time?

Casino_Royale

SouthamObserver said:

If there is a split it’s not enough for the new party to be anti-stuff. It has to be for things as well. The UK needs radical change in just about every way you can imagine. That has to be the focus. Beyond that, a new party is up against FPTP, so is likely to fail. I suspect that will end up dictating how most Labour MPs respond to its launch. Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

The UK doesn’t need radical change. I think everyone is a bit fed up with radical change, the hobby horse of the political obsessives.

They want a few things fixed and some sensible steady reforms put in place. Otherwise, leave people alone.

edmundintokyo

SouthamObserver said:

This sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

https://twitter.com/shashj/status/1097243529955426309?s=21

This is why I don't think they'll let No Deal happen. The resulting clusterfuck will be maybe 90% the inevitable result of what you're doing, 10% bad implementation. But it's not in anybody's interests to say that. Everybody not in the cabinet, regardless of party or faction, will be blaming everything that goes wrong on the incompetence of the people in the cabinet.

And there will be stuff going wrong, and getting blamed on the current ministers in charge, across every single government department. It doesn't matter what you're responsible for, if you're responsible for something when No Deal Brexit happens, it's going to be chaotic, and the chaos is going to somehow be your fault.

GIN1138

Chukka will bottle it...

philiph

Next election will be fun!

Con, Lab, Libdems, SNP, PC, DUP, SF, Green all fighting with existing elected MPs.
New Labour split Party, new Farage party, UKIP all taking part too.

Could be more difficult to predict the outcome.

Casino_Royale

Sandpit said:

ydoethur said:

Sorry to hear the news about Paul Flynn. Didn't agree with him, didn't much like him, but he was a devoted servant of Newport and it badly needs every friend it can get.

But I think we all knew this was imminent when he was too ill to be even carried to the Withdrawal Agreement Vote.

Well said. RIP, condolences to his family.

RIP.

Paul was a consummate politician so I’m sure he wouldn’t have minded me asking this so early: Newport West changeable?

I’d have thought the Tories would miss it but there’s a chance of anything on a low-ish turnout and split Labour vote. Then again, Farage could come along and muddy the waters with his new Brexit party too.

Close-ish Labour hold with reduced majority.

Pulpstar

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.

Then they will drive more and more MPs and voters to the new party. Either way it’s a win for the sane, non-racist, internationalist left.

The crucial figure is 130, because at that moment the party would become the Opposition. If they get to that figure, then the Left will indeed have won a crucial victory.

And Percy the Pig will be on his second loop the loop.

4 max today,

DecrepitJohnL

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.

Labour's manifesto was a damn sight more costed than the Conservatives', where, as John McDonnell said, the only numbers were the page numbers. It did not even include costs for the Conservatives' flagship policy, Brexit. Your main beef, iirc, was that Labour had unrealistically accounted for your own fantasy version of its proposed National Care Service.

SouthamObserver

DavidL said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.

Then they will drive more and more MPs and voters to the new party. Either way it’s a win for the sane, non-racist, internationalist left.

The crucial figure is 130, because at that moment the party would become the Opposition. If they get to that figure, then the Left will indeed have won a crucial victory.

And Percy the Pig will be on his second loop the loop.

40 (including the odd Conservative and there are plenty odd Conservatives to choose from) would not be an insignificant number because they would replace the SNP as the third party gaining profile, positions on committees, Qs at PMQs etc. . Any less than that and this would be such an obviously futile gesture as to make one question the sanity of those willing to support it.

Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

SquareRoot

Who would be the leader of this new party, anything equivalent to the two David's would be disastrous. Who in the Labour Party has enough respect?

Pulpstar

Amy's running ! Great visuals announcing in the Eau Clair snow.

MikeSmithson

IanB2 said:

Dugher isn't an MP

Thanks. I have deleted that

DecrepitJohnL

Are we at war with Spain yet? Has Gavin Williamson recalled the Royal Navy's gunboats from the Yangtze?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/02/17/spanish-warship-orders-gibraltar-boats-leave-british-waters/

SouthamObserver

Casino_Royale said:

SouthamObserver said:

If there is a split it’s not enough for the new party to be anti-stuff. It has to be for things as well. The UK needs radical change in just about every way you can imagine. That has to be the focus. Beyond that, a new party is up against FPTP, so is likely to fail. I suspect that will end up dictating how most Labour MPs respond to its launch. Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

The UK doesn’t need radical change. I think everyone is a bit fed up with radical change, the hobby horse of the political obsessives.

They want a few things fixed and some sensible steady reforms put in place. Otherwise, leave people alone.

Yep, this is the split in British politics we should be focused on: the one between those who believe everything’s basically OK and those who believe it’s not. Sadly, too much other stuff is getting in the way - and will do so for years to come. That will create ever-greater discontent, of course.

DavidL

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.

Then they will drive more and more MPs and voters to the new party. Either way it’s a win for the sane, non-racist, internationalist left.

The crucial figure is 130, because at that moment the party would become the Opposition. If they get to that figure, then the Left will indeed have won a crucial victory.

And Percy the Pig will be on his second loop the loop.

40 (including the odd Conservative and there are plenty odd Conservatives to choose from) would not be an insignificant number because they would replace the SNP as the third party gaining profile, positions on committees, Qs at PMQs etc. . Any less than that and this would be such an obviously futile gesture as to make one question the sanity of those willing to support it.

Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

Corbyn had no future inside Labour for the best part of 20 years. And Labour is bereft enough of talent for any future government without losing what they have. This is crazy and I don't think it will happen on anything other than a trivial scale.

Sandpit

AndyJS said:

Today could be 26th March 1981 again. Wasn't Making Your Mind Up number one at the time?

Ahhh, Cheryl Baker losing her skirt...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pACePi441ds

ydoethur

DecrepitJohnL said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.

Labour's manifesto was a damn sight more costed than the Conservatives', where, as John McDonnell said, the only numbers were the page numbers. It did not even include costs for the Conservatives' flagship policy, Brexit. Your main beef, iirc, was that Labour had unrealistically accounted for your own fantasy version of its proposed National Care Service.

Huh? I never even mentioned Labour's plans for social care! My main beef was its numbers on education, which were clearly a pack of lies that would if implemented have bankrupted first the private and then the state education system (although in fairness reforms to the TPS from next year that Corbyn has nothing to do with are likely to have much the same effect).

It didn't help the numbers on borrowing, water nationalisation and pensions were clearly plucked out of thin air (or smoke-filled air, the smoke being cannabis smoke) but that was the main concern.

Moreover, since I have never denied that the Tory manifesto was uncosted too and have repeatedly criticised them for it, I'm not sure why you're getting at me over that. It doesn't alter the fact that Labour's manifesto was uncosted and every time that bunch of third rate smug posh drunken Nazis (and that's not by any means the worst I could say of one of them, but out of respect for OGH I never have) claimed it was they were lying.

Take the blinkers off, please. You are clearly intelligent and an interesting poster but defending Labour's manifesto is like saying Trump's Wall plan had its merits and was well thought through.

Casino_Royale

SouthamObserver said:

This sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

https://twitter.com/shashj/status/1097243529955426309?s=21

Abe and May agreed in principle to carry over the Japan-EU trade deal to the UK last year. Japan has since decided to play it by the book and the UK have their specialists elsewhere as the expectation was that this would be largely carbon-copied over, keeping it quick and simple.

So I imagine there’s now frustrations on both sides.

Casino_Royale

SouthamObserver said:

Casino_Royale said:

SouthamObserver said:

If there is a split it’s not enough for the new party to be anti-stuff. It has to be for things as well. The UK needs radical change in just about every way you can imagine. That has to be the focus. Beyond that, a new party is up against FPTP, so is likely to fail. I suspect that will end up dictating how most Labour MPs respond to its launch. Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

The UK doesn’t need radical change. I think everyone is a bit fed up with radical change, the hobby horse of the political obsessives.

They want a few things fixed and some sensible steady reforms put in place. Otherwise, leave people alone.

Yep, this is the split in British politics we should be focused on: the one between those who believe everything’s basically OK and those who believe it’s not. Sadly, too much other stuff is getting in the way - and will do so for years to come. That will create ever-greater discontent, of course.

I’m not complacent, there’s a lot that does need fixing, but I’d prefer to go for gradual reform rather than radical change. The latter can often end up being ideological, very disruptive and take on a momentum of its own that actually ends up negatively impacting more than it helps. Do lots of it at once in a number of areas and it really stresses people out and can damage the economy.

I guess that’s why I’m a Conservative.

DecrepitJohnL

Can we bet on whether the number of Labour MPs defecting is more or less than Conservative MPs deselected?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/02/17/two-senior-tory-mps-facing-deselection-votes-annual-meetings/

ydoethur

DecrepitJohnL said:

Are we at war with Spain yet? Has Gavin Williamson recalled the Royal Navy's gunboats from the Yangtze?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/02/17/spanish-warship-orders-gibraltar-boats-leave-british-waters/

Anyone would think there was an election in Spain or something. I do hope that they don't have a nasty accident by firing a gun by mistake in Gibraltar's waters. That would cause endless trouble.

SouthamObserver

DavidL said:

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.

Then they will drive more and more MPs and voters to the new party. Either way it’s a win for the sane, non-racist, internationalist left.

The crucial figure is 130, because at that moment the party would become the Opposition. If they get to that figure, then the Left will indeed have won a crucial victory.

And Percy the Pig will be on his second loop the loop.

40 (including the odd Conservative and there are plenty odd Conservatives to choose from) would not be an insignificant number because they would replace the SNP as the third party gaining profile, positions on committees, Qs at PMQs etc. . Any less than that and this would be such an obviously futile gesture as to make one question the sanity of those willing to support it.

Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

Corbyn had no future inside Labour for the best part of 20 years. And Labour is bereft enough of talent for any future government without losing what they have. This is crazy and I don't think it will happen on anything other than a trivial scale.

The talent problem is universal, as the current government is demonstrating. I expect the split to be very small.

rkrkrk

SouthamObserver said:

Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

The two favourites to take over from Corbyn are Thornberry and Starmer. I don't think any of the rumoured breakaway lot would have a problem serving under either. Indeed probably not the other frontrunners except McDonnell and RLB (who shouldnt be a front runner anyway).

DecrepitJohnL

ydoethur said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.

Labour's manifesto was a damn sight more costed than the Conservatives', where, as John McDonnell said, the only numbers were the page numbers. It did not even include costs for the Conservatives' flagship policy, Brexit. Your main beef, iirc, was that Labour had unrealistically accounted for your own fantasy version of its proposed National Care Service.

Huh? I never even mentioned Labour's plans for social care! My main beef was its numbers on education, which were clearly a pack of lies that would if implemented have bankrupted first the private and then the state education system (although in fairness reforms to the TPS from next year that Corbyn has nothing to do with are likely to have much the same effect).

It didn't help the numbers on borrowing, water nationalisation and pensions were clearly plucked out of thin air (or smoke-filled air, the smoke being cannabis smoke) but that was the main concern.

Moreover, since I have never denied that the Tory manifesto was uncosted too and have repeatedly criticised them for it, I'm not sure why you're getting at me over that. It doesn't alter the fact that Labour's manifesto was uncosted and every time that bunch of third rate smug posh drunken Nazis (and that's not by any means the worst I could say of one of them, but out of respect for OGH I never have) claimed it was they were lying.

Take the blinkers off, please. You are clearly intelligent and an interesting poster but defending Labour's manifesto is like saying Trump's Wall plan had its merits and was well thought through.

Yes, I did wonder if the TPS changes might lose the Conservatives the next election if they are not careful. If public schools are forced to jack up their fees by 25 per cent or even a fraction of that, it might be the last straw for the JAMs.

Casino_Royale

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.

Then they will drive more and more MPs and voters to the new party. Either way it’s a win for the sane, non-racist, internationalist left.

The crucial figure is 130, because at that moment the party would become the Opposition. If they get to that figure, then the Left will indeed have won a crucial victory.

And Percy the Pig will be on his second loop the loop.

40 (including the odd Conservative and there are plenty odd Conservatives to choose from) would not be an insignificant number because they would replace the SNP as the third party gaining profile, positions on committees, Qs at PMQs etc. . Any less than that and this would be such an obviously futile gesture as to make one question the sanity of those willing to support it.

Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

Corbyn had no future inside Labour for the best part of 20 years. And Labour is bereft enough of talent for any future government without losing what they have. This is crazy and I don't think it will happen on anything other than a trivial scale.

The talent problem is universal, as the current government is demonstrating. I expect the split to be very small.

Fancy it yourself??

daodao

Casino_Royale said:

Sandpit said:

ydoethur said:

Sorry to hear the news about Paul Flynn. Didn't agree with him, didn't much like him, but he was a devoted servant of Newport and it badly needs every friend it can get.

But I think we all knew this was imminent when he was too ill to be even carried to the Withdrawal Agreement Vote.

Well said. RIP, condolences to his family.

RIP.

Paul was a consummate politician so I’m sure he wouldn’t have minded me asking this so early: Newport West changeable?

I’d have thought the Tories would miss it but there’s a chance of anything on a low-ish turnout and split Labour vote. Then again, Farage could come along and muddy the waters with his new Brexit party too.

Close-ish Labour hold with reduced majority.

Newport West was Tory-held 1983-7. When working at the Royal Gwent Hospital, I recall almost literally bumping into Michael Heseltine on Corporation Street one spring morning in 1987, when he was campaigning (unsuccessfully - Paul Flynn won) to retain the seat for Mark Robinson. So although unlikely, this seat could change hands again.

OldKingCole

DecrepitJohnL said:

Can we bet on whether the number of Labour MPs defecting is more or less than Conservative MPs deselected?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/02/17/two-senior-tory-mps-facing-deselection-votes-annual-meetings/

Good morning, everyone. I wonder, could Sarah Wollaston hold her seat as an Independent if deselected. Or would she switch to the LD's? Historically they've been strong in that area.

Foxy

Casino_Royale said:

SouthamObserver said:

Casino_Royale said:

SouthamObserver said:

If there is a split it’s not enough for the new party to be anti-stuff. It has to be for things as well. The UK needs radical change in just about every way you can imagine. That has to be the focus. Beyond that, a new party is up against FPTP, so is likely to fail. I suspect that will end up dictating how most Labour MPs respond to its launch. Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

The UK doesn’t need radical change. I think everyone is a bit fed up with radical change, the hobby horse of the political obsessives.

They want a few things fixed and some sensible steady reforms put in place. Otherwise, leave people alone.

Yep, this is the split in British politics we should be focused on: the one between those who believe everything’s basically OK and those who believe it’s not. Sadly, too much other stuff is getting in the way - and will do so for years to come. That will create ever-greater discontent, of course.

I’m not complacent, there’s a lot that does need fixing, but I’d prefer to go for gradual reform rather than radical change. The latter can often end up being ideological, very disruptive and take on a momentum of its own that actually ends up negatively impacting more than it helps. Do lots of it at once in a number of areas and it really stresses people out and can damage the economy.

Sounds a pretty accurate description of Brexit!

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

RIP Paul Flynn.

I'll believe this new party when I see it.

King Cole, if there is a new party, Wollaston might like it.

Edited extra bit: and F1 testing starts today. Williams won't be there for the first day.

SouthamObserver

Casino_Royale said:

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.

Then they will drive more and more MPs and voters to the new party. Either way it’s a win for the sane, non-racist, internationalist left.

The crucial figure is 130, because at that moment the party would become the Opposition. If they get to that figure, then the Left will indeed have won a crucial victory.

And Percy the Pig will be on his second loop the loop.

40 (including the odd Conservative and there are plenty odd Conservatives to choose from) would not be an insignificant number because they would replace the SNP as the third party gaining profile, positions on committees, Qs at PMQs etc. . Any less than that and this would be such an obviously futile gesture as to make one question the sanity of those willing to support it.

Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

Corbyn had no future inside Labour for the best part of 20 years. And Labour is bereft enough of talent for any future government without losing what they have. This is crazy and I don't think it will happen on anything other than a trivial scale.

The talent problem is universal, as the current government is demonstrating. I expect the split to be very small.

Fancy it yourself??

I have got to the point where I need to be for stuff, not just against. I will wait and see.

JonWC

OldKingCole said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Can we bet on whether the number of Labour MPs defecting is more or less than Conservative MPs deselected?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/02/17/two-senior-tory-mps-facing-deselection-votes-annual-meetings/

Good morning, everyone. I wonder, could Sarah Wollaston hold her seat as an Independent if deselected. Or would she switch to the LD's? Historically they've been strong in that area.

Very unlikely I'd say. Her vote would split in all directions but the real Tories would get most of it. Brixham in particular is not going to vote for a fanatical remainer any time soon.

ydoethur

DecrepitJohnL said:

Yes, I did wonder if the TPS changes might lose the Conservatives the next election if they are not careful. If public schools are forced to jack up their fees by 25 per cent or even a fraction of that, it might be the last straw for the JAMs.

That won't happen. What will happen is that private schools will pull out of the TPS - this has already started. And while they account for 7% of workers, it accounts for 10% of contributions. On top of that, while funding is provided for state schools, there is no additional funding for FE colleges or universities. As FE colleges and many universities are already under huge financial pressure as well, they will pull out.

There is a non-trivial possibility that this time next year the TPS will be declared insolvent and the government have to find a way to rescue it. While that need not be politically fatal it would undoubtedly be highly embarrassing and cause a great deal of trouble for them.

More here: https://www.tes.com/news/exclusive-private-school-pension-pull-out-would-leave-ps800m-hole

(Edit - incidentally it would be about a 5% increase in costs, for this. Corbyn was the one proposing a 20% hike in fees.)

SouthamObserver

rkrkrk said:

SouthamObserver said:

Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

The two favourites to take over from Corbyn are Thornberry and Starmer. I don't think any of the rumoured breakaway lot would have a problem serving under either. Indeed probably not the other frontrunners except McDonnell and RLB (who shouldnt be a front runner anyway).

Yep, what’s keeping a lot of people inside Labour is a belief that much of Corbyn’s support is personal, not ideological.

DavidL

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.

Then they will drive more and more MPs and voters to the new party. Either way it’s a win for the sane, non-racist, internationalist left.

The crucial figure is 130, because at that moment the party would become the Opposition. If they get to that figure, then the Left will indeed have won a crucial victory.

And Percy the Pig will be on his second loop the loop.

40 (including the odd Conservative and there are plenty odd Conservatives to choose from) would not be an insignificant number because they would replace the SNP as the third party gaining profile, positions on committees, Qs at PMQs etc. . Any less than that and this would be such an obviously futile gesture as to make one question the sanity of those willing to support it.

Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

Corbyn had no future inside Labour for the best part of 20 years. And Labour is bereft enough of talent for any future government without losing what they have. This is crazy and I don't think it will happen on anything other than a trivial scale.

The talent problem is universal, as the current government is demonstrating. I expect the split to be very small.

Don't dispute that. Even Portillo has called Grayling the most incompetent minister of all time: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-47254136/ex-transport-minister-michael-portillo-on-chris-grayling

In a government with talent he would have reached PPS level for a few months and then been encouraged to take his undoubted abilities elsewhere.

On the split would you be tempted to give them your support?

MarqueeMark

Assuming the split does happen at some point in the next few days, all the public are going to hear for days in the media is:

- Labour is an anti-semitic party, that refuses to get treatment for this cancer

- Labour is allowing Brexit to happen

- Labour is split

Be interesting to see what impact that has on the polling.

IanB2

Sandpit said:

Occasionally funny, occasionally wrong and occasionally sweary. Comedian John Oliver on Brexit, to a mainly American audience.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hs1s7mK-yH8

But on this occasion, close to the money

IanB2

JonWC said:

OldKingCole said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Can we bet on whether the number of Labour MPs defecting is more or less than Conservative MPs deselected?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/02/17/two-senior-tory-mps-facing-deselection-votes-annual-meetings/

Good morning, everyone. I wonder, could Sarah Wollaston hold her seat as an Independent if deselected. Or would she switch to the LD's? Historically they've been strong in that area.

Very unlikely I'd say. Her vote would split in all directions but the real Tories would get most of it. Brixham in particular is not going to vote for a fanatical remainer any time soon.

Unless the fact that the fishing industry is going be shafted rather than saved by Brexit has started to dawn on people.

SouthamObserver

DavidL said:

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.

Then they will drive more and more MPs and voters to the new party. Either way it’s a win for the sane, non-racist, internationalist left.

The crucial figure is 130, because at that moment the party would become the Opposition. If they get to that figure, then the Left will indeed have won a crucial victory.

And Percy the Pig will be on his second loop the loop.

40 (including the odd Conservative and there are plenty odd Conservatives to choose from) would not be an insignificant number because they would replace the SNP as the third party gaining profile, positions on committees, Qs at PMQs etc. . Any less than that and this would be such an obviously futile gesture as to make one question the sanity of those willing to support it.

Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

Corbyn had no future inside Labour for the best part of 20 years. And Labour is bereft enough of talent for any future government without losing what they have. This is crazy and I don't think it will happen on anything other than a trivial scale.

The talent problem is universal, as the current government is demonstrating. I expect the split to be very small.

Don't dispute that. Even Portillo has called Grayling the most incompetent minister of all time: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-47254136/ex-transport-minister-michael-portillo-on-chris-grayling

In a government with talent he would have reached PPS level for a few months and then been encouraged to take his undoubted abilities elsewhere.

On the split would you be tempted to give them your support?

If I could do it for positive reasons, for sure. Why not? Labour is impossible to support currently. But I won’t waste time on a gesture.

SouthamObserver

https://twitter.com/polhomeeditor/status/1097400852590051329?s=21

DavidL

SouthamObserver said:

https://twitter.com/polhomeeditor/status/1097400852590051329?s=21

The inability to spell is indeed depressing. Extream?

felix

Am I the only one appalled by the RLB tweet above. I know she is not the sharpest pencil in the box but that degree of blind loyalty is so dangerous as well as being mind numbingly stupid. Yet she has been touted as a potential future leader.

rkrkrk

SouthamObserver said:

rkrkrk said:

SouthamObserver said:

Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

The two favourites to take over from Corbyn are Thornberry and Starmer. I don't think any of the rumoured breakaway lot would have a problem serving under either. Indeed probably not the other frontrunners except McDonnell and RLB (who shouldnt be a front runner anyway).

Yep, what’s keeping a lot of people inside Labour is a belief that much of Corbyn’s support is personal, not ideological.

IMO its a mixture. We are not going back to a world where Labour leaders are trying to outdo the Tories on welfare cuts. But some of the more radical ideas like compulsory employee ownership could easily fall by the wayside under a new leader.

And I think those who want to lead Labour would probably do well to learn from Corbyn's previous leadership campaigns.

AndyJS

O/T

Letter published in the Guardian on 1st Dec 2007 on the subject of Venezuela:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/dec/01/venezuela.leadersandreply

Casino_Royale

SouthamObserver said:

https://twitter.com/polhomeeditor/status/1097400852590051329?s=21

Not that I’m excusing it but isn’t it unsurprising that several terrorist attacks done in the name of Islam in 2017 have made people very worried about aspects of Islam and its values?

People are scared. That’s natural. They need reassurance.

DavidL

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

40 (including the odd Conservative and there are plenty odd Conservatives to choose from) would not be an insignificant number because they would replace the SNP as the third party gaining profile, positions on committees, Qs at PMQs etc. . Any less than that and this would be such an obviously futile gesture as to make one question the sanity of those willing to support it.

Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

Corbyn had no future inside Labour for the best part of 20 years. And Labour is bereft enough of talent for any future government without losing what they have. This is crazy and I don't think it will happen on anything other than a trivial scale.

The talent problem is universal, as the current government is demonstrating. I expect the split to be very small.

Don't dispute that. Even Portillo has called Grayling the most incompetent minister of all time: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-47254136/ex-transport-minister-michael-portillo-on-chris-grayling

In a government with talent he would have reached PPS level for a few months and then been encouraged to take his undoubted abilities elsewhere.

On the split would you be tempted to give them your support?

If I could do it for positive reasons, for sure. Why not? Labour is impossible to support currently. But I won’t waste time on a gesture.

The problem I see is that if you fast forward two or three years to a Thornberry led Labour party what are the critical differences that would justify splitting the vote and losing the opportunity to implement policy? Even if you could find one on Brexit will that not be even more of a minority interest by then?

Corbyn really needs to go but I don't see splits being the answer.

Casino_Royale

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

SouthamObserver said:

Casino_Royale said:

SouthamObserver said:

If there is a split it’s not enough for the new party to be anti-stuff. It has to be for things as well. The UK needs radical change in just about every way you can imagine. That has to be the focus. Beyond that, a new party is up against FPTP, so is likely to fail. I suspect that will end up dictating how most Labour MPs respond to its launch. Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

The UK doesn’t need radical change. I think everyone is a bit fed up with radical change, the hobby horse of the political obsessives.

They want a few things fixed and some sensible steady reforms put in place. Otherwise, leave people alone.

Yep, this is the split in British politics we should be focused on: the one between those who believe everything’s basically OK and those who believe it’s not. Sadly, too much other stuff is getting in the way - and will do so for years to come. That will create ever-greater discontent, of course.

I’m not complacent, there’s a lot that does need fixing, but I’d prefer to go for gradual reform rather than radical change. The latter can often end up being ideological, very disruptive and take on a momentum of its own that actually ends up negatively impacting more than it helps. Do lots of it at once in a number of areas and it really stresses people out and can damage the economy.

Sounds a pretty accurate description of Brexit!

Yes, I thought I’d get that as soon as I pressed “post comment”.

That’s why I’ve always favoured a practical Brexit and the WA with a slow transition. Alas, I might not get it, and recent weeks have given me cause to doubt the EU’s sincerity on the backstop.

I think it also works the other way: the EU is proposing and advocating pretty radical change with further federalisation, eurozone chancellors/ministers, tax-raising powers and military integration. And mass immigration is another former of rapid change.

Sometimes these things can be heads you win, tails I lose.

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1097405369582866434

Casino_Royale

SouthamObserver said:

rkrkrk said:

SouthamObserver said:

Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

The two favourites to take over from Corbyn are Thornberry and Starmer. I don't think any of the rumoured breakaway lot would have a problem serving under either. Indeed probably not the other frontrunners except McDonnell and RLB (who shouldnt be a front runner anyway).

Yep, what’s keeping a lot of people inside Labour is a belief that much of Corbyn’s support is personal, not ideological.

Younger people under 35 do need to be given more of a stake and capital in our economy.

Or they’ll blow it up.

SquareRoot

DavidL said:

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

40 (including the odd Conservative and there are plenty odd Conservatives to choose from) would not be an insignificant number because they would replace the SNP as the third party gaining profile, positions on committees, Qs at PMQs etc. . Any less than that and this would be such an obviously futile gesture as to make one question the sanity of those willing to support it.

Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

Corbyn had no future inside Labour for the best part of 20 years. And Labour is bereft enough of talent for any future government without losing what they have. This is crazy and I don't think it will happen on anything other than a trivial scale.

The talent problem is universal, as the current government is demonstrating. I expect the split to be very small.

Don't dispute that. Even Portillo has called Grayling the most incompetent minister of all time: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-47254136/ex-transport-minister-michael-portillo-on-chris-grayling

In a government with talent he would have reached PPS level for a few months and then been encouraged to take his undoubted abilities elsewhere.

On the split would you be tempted to give them your support?

If I could do it for positive reasons, for sure. Why not? Labour is impossible to support currently. But I won’t waste time on a gesture.

The problem I see is that if you fast forward two or three years to a Thornberry led Labour party what are the critical differences that would justify splitting the vote and losing the opportunity to implement policy? Even if you could find one on Brexit will that not be even more of a minority interest by then?

Corbyn really needs to go but I don't see splits being the answer.

If 50 or so leave Labour, Corbyn is automatically castrated, politically speaking.

MarqueeMark

SouthamObserver said:

https://twitter.com/polhomeeditor/status/1097400852590051329?s=21

Terror attacks undertaken in the name of their religion by British Muslims on the wider British public of the UK are hardly going to engender a positive attitude towards people of that religion. Too right there is a lasting negative impact. Who are these incredulous people? It's like being surprised at a finding that "The Blitz has had a lasting negative impact on attiudes towards Nazis".

It is a shit blatantly party-political point by Hope Not Hate. Otherwise we would have polling on the % impact of other parties' voters. What % of Labour voters had a lasting negative impact, eh?

They clearly have an agenda, to equate Tory = anti-Islam to mitigate Labour = anti-semitic. "Oh well, all parties have their problems." Bullshit in the general, bullshit in the specifics.

AndyJS

https://twitter.com/iainjwatson/status/1097275935668269057

Slackbladder

AndyJS said:

https://twitter.com/iainjwatson/status/1097275935668269057

the new 'gang of four'....

Slackbladder

Happy Labour meltdown day today!

TOPPING

edmundintokyo said:

SouthamObserver said:

This sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

https://twitter.com/shashj/status/1097243529955426309?s=21

This is why I don't think they'll let No Deal happen. The resulting clusterfuck will be maybe 90% the inevitable result of what you're doing, 10% bad implementation. But it's not in anybody's interests to say that. Everybody not in the cabinet, regardless of party or faction, will be blaming everything that goes wrong on the incompetence of the people in the cabinet.

And there will be stuff going wrong, and getting blamed on the current ministers in charge, across every single government department. It doesn't matter what you're responsible for, if you're responsible for something when No Deal Brexit happens, it's going to be chaotic, and the chaos is going to somehow be your fault.

What’s the local take on it?

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/1097406795444903936

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1097406852390944768

DonTsInferno_

MarqueeMark said:

SouthamObserver said:

https://twitter.com/polhomeeditor/status/1097400852590051329?s=21

Terror attacks undertaken in the name of their religion by British Muslims on the wider British public of the UK are hardly going to engender a positive attitude towards people of that religion. Too right there is a lasting negative impact. Who are these incredulous people? It's like being surprised at a finding that "The Blitz has had a lasting negative impact on attiudes towards Nazis".

It is a shit blatantly party-political point by Hope Not Hate. Otherwise we would have polling on the % impact of other parties' voters. What % of Labour voters had a lasting negative impact, eh?

They clearly have an agenda, to equate Tory = anti-Islam to mitigate Labour = anti-semitic. "Oh well, all parties have their problems." Bullshit in the general, bullshit in the specifics.

Yes. Wouldn’t surprise me if the spelling mistake was a deliberate distraction.

Chris

MarqueeMark said:

SouthamObserver said:

https://twitter.com/polhomeeditor/status/1097400852590051329?s=21

Terror attacks undertaken in the name of their religion by British Muslims on the wider British public of the UK are hardly going to engender a positive attitude towards people of that religion. Too right there is a lasting negative impact. Who are these incredulous people? It's like being surprised at a finding that "The Blitz has had a lasting negative impact on attiudes towards Nazis".

What you're implying, presumably, is that if there had been terrorist attacks by Jewish extremists, anti-semitism would be fine, just like prejudice against Muslims.

kyf_100

MarqueeMark said:

SouthamObserver said:

https://twitter.com/polhomeeditor/status/1097400852590051329?s=21

Terror attacks undertaken in the name of their religion by British Muslims on the wider British public of the UK are hardly going to engender a positive attitude towards people of that religion. Too right there is a lasting negative impact. Who are these incredulous people? It's like being surprised at a finding that "The Blitz has had a lasting negative impact on attiudes towards Nazis".
...

Just spat my morning cuppa all over my monitor at that one.

Absolutely brill.

+1

Gallowgate

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/1097406795444903936

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1097406852390944768

Finally! My credit card is ready.

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/iainjwatson/status/1097407602420600832

https://twitter.com/iainjwatson/status/1097407604404482048

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1097407794179960834

DonTsInferno_

SouthamObserver said:

If there is a split it’s not enough for the new party to be anti-stuff. It has to be for things as well. The UK needs radical change in just about every way you can imagine. That has to be the focus. Beyond that, a new party is up against FPTP, so is likely to fail. I suspect that will end up dictating how most Labour MPs respond to its launch. Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

A majority of voters sought radical change by voting Leave in 2016, but it seems the politicians think that’s too much like hard work and prefer to gerrymander us into the status quo forever.

Chris

AndyJS said:

https://twitter.com/iainjwatson/status/1097275935668269057

Just about enough for a gang.

Slackbladder

Gallowgate said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/1097406795444903936

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1097406852390944768

Finally! My credit card is ready.

I'd be tempted to sign up. I'm TBH more interested on what they say about things other than Brexit.

HYUFD

5 or so MPs is not really a split, more an inconvenience for Labour.

What will be interesting is whether they form a new SDP style party or become independents

Big_G_NorthWales

Sky saying an event is to take place with 4 or 5 labour mps today

Dura_Ace

Casino_Royale said:

The latter can often end up being ideological, very disruptive and take on a momentum of its own that actually ends up negatively impacting more than it helps. Do lots of it at once in a number of areas and it really stresses people out and can damage the economy.

This is a very accurate description of something.

AndyJS

In 1981 one Tory joined 26 Labour MPs when the SDP was launched, Christopher Brocklebank-Fowler. Could the same thing happen today? Anna Soubry would be the obvious candidate.

Sandpit

So, it actually looks like the new party might be on.

First question for the defectors, will they be following the Carswell precident and allowing the people to reconfirm their positions as Parliamentarians?

Tissue_Price

felix said:

Am I the only one appalled by the RLB tweet above. I know she is not the sharpest pencil in the box but that degree of blind loyalty is so dangerous as well as being mind numbingly stupid. Yet she has been touted as a potential future leader.

Au contraire, it’s very smart of her. If she’s going to be leader, she’s going to need blind loyalty.

kle4

Endillion said:

I bet nothing happens. The splitters now have perfect cover for inaction, in that no one wants to trigger a big fight the day after one of their colleagues passes away.

The timing would be odd too, since as frustrated as they are at various matters nothing has changed yet.

Slackbladder

HYUFD said:

5 or so MPs is not really a split, more an inconvenience for Labour.

What will be interesting is whether they form a new SDP style party or become independents

The more telling thing is who other the coming days and months flock to them, Ex-MPs, Ex PMs? etc...

edit; and also if they start making a dent in opinion polls.

Scott_P

DonTsInferno_ said:

A majority of voters sought radical change by voting Leave in 2016

The Leave campaign did not offer radical change. It went out of its way to claim all the stuff people liked would remain, and only "bad" things would change

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/nickeardleybbc/status/1097408945801580544

edmundintokyo

TOPPING said:

edmundintokyo said:

SouthamObserver said:

This sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

https://twitter.com/shashj/status/1097243529955426309?s=21

This is why I don't think they'll let No Deal happen. The resulting clusterfuck will be maybe 90% the inevitable result of what you're doing, 10% bad implementation. But it's not in anybody's interests to say that. Everybody not in the cabinet, regardless of party or faction, will be blaming everything that goes wrong on the incompetence of the people in the cabinet.

And there will be stuff going wrong, and getting blamed on the current ministers in charge, across every single government department. It doesn't matter what you're responsible for, if you're responsible for something when No Deal Brexit happens, it's going to be chaotic, and the chaos is going to somehow be your fault.

What’s the local take on it?

Haven't heard any opinions on the trade deal specifically but the general vibe is
https://twitter.com/Matt_Alt/status/1097065583873482753