Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » An authoritarian Tory government will undo Cameron’s early

1356

Comments

  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400
    edited September 2015
    Roger said:

    Our policy towards the refugee crisis is really shameful and turning us into the pariahs of Europe. If anyone bothers to watch french TV or indeed any news outlet less parochial than the UK's they might get some idea of the human catastrophe happening out there and our inglorious part in it


    Sad how ready you are to believe the worst about your own country. I suppose at some point in the last few months you thought Jeremy Corbyn was a good idea.

    Country £ GBP value of aid sent
    1. United States £2,800,986,584
    2. United Kingdom £920,646,584
    ...
    16. France £70,017,598

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugees_of_the_Syrian_Civil_War#Aid_given
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Ooh, unlucky...
    THE former SNP government aide at the centre of a row over cronyism and T in the Park has abandoned her bid to come an MSP next year.

    Public relations consultant Jennifer Dempsie, 33, confirmed she had withdrawn her nomination to become an SNP list candidate in the Highlands & Islands region.
    http://m.heraldscotland.com/news/13717555.Aide_at_centre_of_T_in_the_Park_row_abandons_MSP_bid/
  • In Henry's defence, this piece was sent to me yesterday afternoon minutes after Corporeal's piece went up. So long before anything to do with the reshuffle happened and in his email he does say he'll come onto Corbyn shortly.

    The original plan was for this was to go up last night, but well the reshuffle happened and I moved it to this morning.

    So Henry isn't ignoring the reshuffle.
  • wow Suddenly NNXMPX2 has woken up now he doesn't care for the system that worked so well for his buddies Tone and Gordy ... who,d a thunk it

    I've always supported PR, since I think that FPTP delivering governments on 35-40% of the vote is a recipe for permanent trouble. But my point was that it's hypocritical for a government elected on less than 40% of the vote, allowing them to send us to war or do pretty much anything else it likes, to play the "unrepresentative" card against people who want to take industrial action for a couple of days on the same basis.
    Jonathan said:



    Hi Nick, are you happy with Corbyn so far?

    Early days, but mostly, yes. There are two decisions I'd have taken differently, but then I'm not LOTO.

    I commented on it on my blog, which still reaches 10% of the voters in my former constituency - the arguments are ones I've put here too:

    http://www.nickpalmer.org.uk/

    Response has been heavy and interesting. Labour and Green supporters generally over the moon ("I was on the point of giving up on British politics but now I'm filled with hope"), but two defections (both on the defence issue) and a few "well, I see what you mean, I'm not keen but maybe". Tory supporters downright hostile and a couple of unsubscriptions - "I've enjoyed reading your columns in the past but I can't believe what I'm reading here". Unaligned people cautiously interested - "he does sound different but talk is one thing, let's see what he's like in practice".

    Nick, what do you make of the disgusting racist attack in Brick Lane last week?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959

    Lucy Powell, who’s only claim to fame was the catalogue of PR disasters during Ed’s failed campaign, has now been elevated to the opposition front bench as Shadow Education Secretary. - Frightening, what paucity of talent must there be if reaching that far down the barrel is required?

    I look forward to her first policy announcement. Every child must have their own Edstone.....
  • RobD said:
    Yes, it's the Sun, which is as you say a joke. The job is IIRC for shadow minister of diversity and minority faiths.
    It's 'a joke' because it turned against Labour just months away from the 2010GE.

    Presumably, had it continued to back Brown, and then Miliband, it would have been 'the genuine voice of the aspirational British working class'.
  • Lucy Powell, who’s only claim to fame was the catalogue of PR disasters during Ed’s failed campaign, has now been elevated to the opposition front bench as Shadow Education Secretary. - Frightening, what paucity of talent must there be if reaching that far down the barrel is required?

    Compared to McDonnell everything else is small potatoes. But the good news is that it will hasten Jezza's departure.

  • Yes, they broke the law. And they were not pickets.

    So you agree that Unite is willing to use intimidation and illegal tactics against ordinary people and their families.

    Good. Now tell me why I should have sympathy with such a union? They're meant to be helping people, not being sick thugs.

    And who was up to his eyeballs in that mess? The new deputy leader of the Labour party! He even resigned over Falkirk!
  • wow Suddenly NNXMPX2 has woken up now he doesn't care for the system that worked so well for his buddies Tone and Gordy ... who,d a thunk it

    Plus any number of people can stand for parliament unlike the binary choice for going on strike. And of course unlike the direct effect a strike has on business and employment prospects and directly affecting people's livelihoods.
    When the miners were a power in the land they needed by their own rules to get 55% agreement for a strike. Scargill soon changed that and gave up ballots altogether eventually. We saw how that worked out.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959

    Roger said:

    OT Just heard David Milliband on Radio 5 talking about the refugee crisis.

    He is excellent. Really excellent

    What have Labour done?

    Exactly my thought when I saw him on Breakfast News.

    Once Labour MPs pass a vote of no confidence in Corbyn, possibly this week, I expect the clamour to force DMili back will become defeaning, I imagine various Lab MPs will be offering him their safe seat to end the nightmare that has befallen them.

    That Sky News video is staggering. Does this joker really think he can become PM?

    He's not going to last a month, possibly not even this week, I'm increasingly thinking that.
    I'm puzzled by the fuss over Milliband, he lost to this useless little brother and flounced of to NY in a sulk to earn his fortune. He won't unite Labour, the unions would savage him, quite rightly.
    Brand Miliband is buggered. Labour has to look to a Jarvis or a Starmer. Somebody they have not put before the public yet.

    And they have to come up with some policies. Preferably, ones the public wants, not what they think the public SHOULD want for their own progressive good.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    edited September 2015
    @TheScreamingEagles

    If Dave engages in so much as a smidge of bonhomie or smiles at all at any time unless it is laughing at, not with Jezza on Wednesday at midday I might resign from the Conservative Party.
  • wow Suddenly NNXMPX2 has woken up now he doesn't care for the system that worked so well for his buddies Tone and Gordy ... who,d a thunk it

    I've always supported PR, since I think that FPTP delivering governments on 35-40% of the vote is a recipe for permanent trouble. But my point was that it's hypocritical for a government elected on less than 40% of the vote, allowing them to send us to war or do pretty much anything else it likes, to play the "unrepresentative" card against people who want to take industrial action for a couple of days on the same basis.
    Jonathan said:



    Hi Nick, are you happy with Corbyn so far?

    Early days, but mostly, yes. There are two decisions I'd have taken differently, but then I'm not LOTO.

    I commented on it on my blog, which still reaches 10% of the voters in my former constituency - the arguments are ones I've put here too:

    http://www.nickpalmer.org.uk/

    Response has been heavy and interesting. Labour and Green supporters generally over the moon ("I was on the point of giving up on British politics but now I'm filled with hope"), but two defections (both on the defence issue) and a few "well, I see what you mean, I'm not keen but maybe". Tory supporters downright hostile and a couple of unsubscriptions - "I've enjoyed reading your columns in the past but I can't believe what I'm reading here". Unaligned people cautiously interested - "he does sound different but talk is one thing, let's see what he's like in practice".

    Thanks for your honesty. In all seriousness, that (the above) should tell you something.

  • Yes, they broke the law. And they were not pickets.

    So you agree that Unite is willing to use intimidation and illegal tactics against ordinary people and their families.

    Good. Now tell me why I should have sympathy with such a union? They're meant to be helping people, not being sick thugs.

    And who was up to his eyeballs in that mess? The new deputy leader of the Labour party! He even resigned over Falkirk!

    Not sure what this has to do with the proposed legislation.

    If Unite members break the law they should be prosecuted.

  • In case you missed it last night. YouGov/Times Scotland poll.

    I call Tory surge

    Constituency VI. SNP 51 Lab 22 Con 18 (+3) LD 4 (-3). SNP lead up 5% since May

    List VI. SNP 45 (+2) Lab 20 (-4) Con 18 (+2) greens 9
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 2,995

    wow Suddenly NNXMPX2 has woken up now he doesn't care for the system that worked so well for his buddies Tone and Gordy ... who,d a thunk it

    I've always supported PR, since I think that FPTP delivering governments on 35-40% of the vote is a recipe for permanent trouble. But my point was that it's hypocritical for a government elected on less than 40% of the vote, allowing them to send us to war or do pretty much anything else it likes, to play the "unrepresentative" card against people who want to take industrial action for a couple of days on the same basis.

    (snip)
    But that's a fallacious argument, unless you're saying that all votes should be held under the same system and with the same rules?
    It's an apples and oranges argument, and I think the arguments against the new legislation are strong enough in their own right. They're illiberal and strike at what should be basic democratic freedoms.

    The threat and impact of strikes in this country is reasonably small. I'm a union man myself, though I don't strike and generally find the WE DISAGREE WITH EVERYTHING stance taken by most unions to be laughable. In fact the 50% rule is something that might force union leaders to start taking their membership more seriously (less soap-box posturing, more help with actual workplace issues on which they are generally - surprise surprise - useless). The fact is it's often the malcontents, refuseniks and folk who are crap at their day job who gravitate towards union office - a fact which really helps nobody in the long run. I'm a bit wary of invoking Germany (as they often seem to be) but by and large the relationship between labour and management there is far more effective and civilised than here (or e.g. Italy, France).

    BUT the right of workers to organise and, with the right grounds, strike, is an important pillar of a functioning democratic society. Not a popular opinion on these boards, but there it is!
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    On topic:

    While I agree there is a danger of this government becoming too authoritarian, the author seems to have included a bunch of things that are nothing to do with authoritarianism while avoiding other more major worries.

    On the lobbying act, these are entirely reasonable reforms. It is perfectly acceptable for independent charities to criticise governments. What is wrong is for pseudo-parts of the civil service to do it. The Brown government shifted a bunch of the state into third sector hands to free them up to advocate for left-wing governance. The Conservatives are merely re-addressing the balance.

    It is a fair criticism on debates and TV interviews. The debates have been positives in both the last two election and should be formalised. On the BBC, the Conservatives have actually backed down from taking the necessary step of removing the enforced subscription model. The main problem here is that they have not gone far enough.

    The devolution to city-regions has not been rejected by referendums. That was devolution to specific city limits areas - many people voted no for this reason.

    The trade union bill is mostly positive, bringing some needed restraint to unions and allowing companies to operate without blackmail from union barons. I do agree that things like arm bands for all strikers is a step too far and needs to be removed.

    The criticism of the Leader of the Opposition as a threat to national security is an unusual one, but then a Leader of the Opposition being a threat to national security is an unusual situation. The Conservatives should rightly point out that the Labour front bench is now staffed with terrorist supporters and racists.

    The family size argument is a ridiculous one. Parents who have more than two children are not having any of their money taking away. What is happening is that they will not be given extra money from the state. It is unreasonable to have a large family and expect other people to pay for it. It is mind boggling Labour people can not understand this.

    Meanwhile there are valid criticisms to be made over the Prime Minister not allowing cabinet members to campaign freely in the Euroref, of the lack of judicial control over GCHQ, fr the continuation of various anti-free speech laws, of the European Arrest Warrant and a number of other issues.
  • In Henry's defence, this piece was sent to me yesterday afternoon minutes after Corporeal's piece went up. So long before anything to do with the reshuffle happened and in his email he does say he'll come onto Corbyn shortly.
    The original plan was for this was to go up last night, but well the reshuffle happened and I moved it to this morning.
    So Henry isn't ignoring the reshuffle.

    Thats no excuse for him ignoring reality.
  • Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. Eagles, that attack ad is mostly competent, except the special effect (breaking glass sound) at the end, which sounds pathetic. They need a stronger, deeper, more menacing sound.
  • TOPPING said:

    @TheScreamingEagles

    If Dave engages in so much as a smidge of bonhomie or smiles at all at any time unless it is laughing at, not with Jezza on Wednesday at midday I might resign from the Conservative Party.

    No Dave has to play it nice with Corbyn on Wednesday. Has to welcome to his role.

    I think Dave's approach will be split Corbyn from the parliamentary Labour party.

    "Hands up if you're happy that Labour elected Corbyn?"

    Cue every Tory MP putting their hands up and about 20 Labour MPs doing the same
  • JonathanD said:

    Roger said:

    Our policy towards the refugee crisis is really shameful and turning us into the pariahs of Europe. If anyone bothers to watch french TV or indeed any news outlet less parochial than the UK's they might get some idea of the human catastrophe happening out there and our inglorious part in it

    Sad how ready you are to believe the worst about your own country. I suppose at some point in the last few months you thought Jeremy Corbyn was a good idea.
    Country £ GBP value of aid sent
    1. United States £2,800,986,584
    2. United Kingdom £920,646,584
    ...
    16. France £70,017,598
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugees_of_the_Syrian_Civil_War#Aid_given
    Correct - just the usual socialist lies. This weaponising of refugees by labour is disgusting.
  • Labour are like a recovering alcoholic having a relapse back to its bad old days ; Corbyn is a total and complete Labourholic ....the LP will never be trusted again with the levers of power and all of Blair's work has be for nought ...the Blairites really should form their own party as I don't think the Labour brand can ever recover from this debacle ...Corbynism has merely reinforced the very worst and darkest suspicions about Labour
  • isamisam Posts: 40,731
    Thinking about who might be the leader after Corbyn... Has a previously defeated runner ever won the leadership of a party?
  • Cromwell said:

    Labour are like a recovering alcoholic having a relapse back to its bad old days ; Corbyn is a total and complete Labourholic ....the LP will never be trusted again with the levers of power and all of Blair's work has be for nought ...the Blairites really should form their own party as I don't think the Labour brand can ever recover from this debacle ...Corbynism has merely reinforced the very worst and darkest suspicions about Labour

    The voters told the Labour Party what they thought of Labour; now the Labour Party has told the voters what they think of them.
  • Bob__SykesBob__Sykes Posts: 1,176

    Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. Eagles, that attack ad is mostly competent, except the special effect (breaking glass sound) at the end, which sounds pathetic. They need a stronger, deeper, more menacing sound.

    I did question the Tory tactics on here yesterday, the Fallon quote for example, but I think this is a good example of the more "forensic and focused" approach I was calling for.

    Could they not find any footage of him shaking hands with Gerry Adams or Martin McGuinness, to round it off nicely?
  • Metatron said:

    Corbyn is a threat to national security (take his altitude to drones),Why should parents get child benefit for 3 or more children ?Workaholic tory ministers are right to avoid live interviews as the tv/radio is controlled mostly by the progressive left who try to trap them

    Thank you for making my point (comment at 9.15am)

  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @PClipp


    ''The fact is that a lot of people - not everybody, of course - greatly prefer the previous Coalition to the present Tory government. So Henry Mason is absolutely right to speak about the Lib Dems in positive terms in his closing paragraphs.'


    That's because the Lib Dems were a serious party led by Clegg and not the current Andrex Puppy who blindly jumps on every band wagon available.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674

    malcolmg said:

    the new trade union legislation is deeply repugnant. As David Davis says, parts of it are Francoist. But Labour is no longer a serious political party, so the Tories have free rein to do as they wish.

    Why is it repugnant to require half of trade unionists to vote in a ballot to make a strike legal?

    Most people are fed up of wildcat strikes on the tube.
    Because the same rule is not applied to politicians, who affect all our lives much more substantially than the occasional strike. Plenty of MPs who will vote on this legislation don't even have 40% of the vote, let alone 50%. If governments could only act if they had the support of 50% of the population, the libertarian dream of virtually no government at all would come true.
    Why should it apply? They're different things.
    LOL, cue right wing frothers being outraged that their puppets should have to meet same criteria as they force on others
    Why should all votes and elections have the same rules, regardless of what people are voting for?
    Nobody is saying they should be the same , but they should be fair.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    @rustinpeace00

    'He's married more women than he has placed shadowing the great offices of state'. Roaring. #ComedyCabinet
  • James O'Brien, now Newsnight presenter, has an interesting tweet.

    https://twitter.com/mrjamesob/status/643323420428627968

    Basically, lambasts the Sun for a splash on a Corbyn quote from 3 years ago.

    Hmm. I can see that it's not 'new', but in the same way the press only raised Laws' expenses issues when he became (briefly, alas) important, it's understandable the rambling of a 30 year backbencher didn't make the front page three years ago.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095

    Roger said:

    OT Just heard David Milliband on Radio 5 talking about the refugee crisis.

    He is excellent. Really excellent

    What have Labour done?

    Exactly my thought when I saw him on Breakfast News.

    Once Labour MPs pass a vote of no confidence in Corbyn, possibly this week, I expect the clamour to force DMili back will become defeaning, I imagine various Lab MPs will be offering him their safe seat to end the nightmare that has befallen them.

    That Sky News video is staggering. Does this joker really think he can become PM?

    He's not going to last a month, possibly not even this week, I'm increasingly thinking that.
    I'm puzzled by the fuss over Milliband, he lost to this useless little brother and flounced of to NY in a sulk to earn his fortune. He won't unite Labour, the unions would savage him, quite rightly.
    Brand Miliband is buggered. Labour has to look to a Jarvis or a Starmer. Somebody they have not put before the public yet.

    And they have to come up with some policies. Preferably, ones the public wants, not what they think the public SHOULD want for their own progressive good.
    A self publicist such as Starmer.. Heaven forbid.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,969
    edited September 2015

    Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. Eagles, that attack ad is mostly competent, except the special effect (breaking glass sound) at the end, which sounds pathetic. They need a stronger, deeper, more menacing sound.

    I did question the Tory tactics on here yesterday, the Fallon quote for example, but I think this is a good example of the more "forensic and focused" approach I was calling for.

    Could they not find any footage of him shaking hands with Gerry Adams or Martin McGuinness, to round it off nicely?
    That's going to be for later.

    This is going to be brutal and bloody.

    Andy Burnham who is now Jezbollah's Shadow Home Secretary is going to explain how he has someone with Warrington roots and is also an MP in Greater Manchester is comfortable with someone who met with Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness shortly after the IRA terrorist attacks.

    The strategy is not to just take down Corbyn but the whole Labour party in the process.
  • Bob__SykesBob__Sykes Posts: 1,176

    TOPPING said:

    @TheScreamingEagles

    If Dave engages in so much as a smidge of bonhomie or smiles at all at any time unless it is laughing at, not with Jezza on Wednesday at midday I might resign from the Conservative Party.

    No Dave has to play it nice with Corbyn on Wednesday. Has to welcome to his role.

    I think Dave's approach will be split Corbyn from the parliamentary Labour party.

    "Hands up if you're happy that Labour elected Corbyn?"

    Cue every Tory MP putting their hands up and about 20 Labour MPs doing the same
    Hm, doesn't really sit well with the Tory attack line if 300 Tory MPs put their hands up to that one!

    Otherwise I agree. Think Dave should be sober and indeed sombre. He's facing a man who can't even talk to the media as the Sky News clip confirms, and if he does it turns into a shouting match like his C4 News car crash with Krishnan G-M.

    So no need for Flashman, no need for comedy. Focus on the Labour MPs sat behind him and making them squirm.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674

    the new trade union legislation is deeply repugnant. As David Davis says, parts of it are Francoist. But Labour is no longer a serious political party, so the Tories have free rein to do as they wish.

    Why is it repugnant to require half of trade unionists to vote in a ballot to make a strike legal?

    Most people are fed up of wildcat strikes on the tube.

    Read the proposals. See what David Davis has to say.

    The tube strikes would not be affected by the new laws.

    I've read them. Sorry, I don't find them repugnant in the slightest.

    David Davis has his own agenda.

    Fair enough.

    So presumably you believe these rules should apply to all public gatherings?.

    There is already a requirement for the details of stewards to be provided to the police for any demonstration that blocks or uses the public highway (marches etc). There is a voluntary code that the Met ask static demonstrations to abide by which also requires details of stewards.



    As I said I don't think these rules should apply to anyone. But given that pickets are effectively bouncers trying to control who does and does not enter a place of work I see no reason why they should be treated any differently to a night club bouncer.

    Pickets are explicitly not allowed to prevent people from entering a place of work and any attempt to do so is already illegal. That does not apply to bouncers.

    Ahem:
    A senior manager at the Ineos chemical company claims that a mob of protesters were sent to his home, leaving him fearing for his safety.
    The tricks were organised by the “Leverage team”, it is alleged, in an echo of the union militancy of the 1970s and 1980s.
    The Ineos director told the Daily Mail that he had feared for his wife and two young children when 30 protesters arrived at his home during the school holidays, telling his neighbours he was “evil”.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/10416408/Unite-union-accused-of-using-bully-tactics-in-Grangemouth-dispute.html

    Ha Ha Ha , game over when you are using the Mail as your evidence. Poor billionaire gets upset that a few people have placards outside his house , but JJ happy that he can sack hundreds without giving a hoot and wants to restrict the workers from having any say whatsoever.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    edited September 2015

    TOPPING said:

    @TheScreamingEagles

    If Dave engages in so much as a smidge of bonhomie or smiles at all at any time unless it is laughing at, not with Jezza on Wednesday at midday I might resign from the Conservative Party.

    No Dave has to play it nice with Corbyn on Wednesday. Has to welcome to his role.

    I think Dave's approach will be split Corbyn from the parliamentary Labour party.

    "Hands up if you're happy that Labour elected Corbyn?"

    Cue every Tory MP putting their hands up and about 20 Labour MPs doing the same
    I will accept business-like. Especially after that ad, to welcome him into the club (unless it is to try to embarrass him in front of his extreme left, new kind of politics supporters) would both be hypocritical and bad strategy.

    We are not joking here, politics as well as just having got surreal, has also got serious. Jezza is a very real threat to the UK in one way (economic) or another (national security). Dave's attitude must reflect this.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,535
    Floater said:

    I can report that of last night they are in a very buoyant mood seeing a way back.

    The Lib Dems should be cock-a-hoop, the Labour Party has given up even pretending to be a sensible centre-left party. The Lib Dems face a long road back to significant levels of public support and parliamentary representation, but the Labour Party won't be standing in the way.
  • Ghedebrav said:

    wow Suddenly NNXMPX2 has woken up now he doesn't care for the system that worked so well for his buddies Tone and Gordy ... who,d a thunk it

    I've always supported PR, since I think that FPTP delivering governments on 35-40% of the vote is a recipe for permanent trouble. But my point was that it's hypocritical for a government elected on less than 40% of the vote, allowing them to send us to war or do pretty much anything else it likes, to play the "unrepresentative" card against people who want to take industrial action for a couple of days on the same basis.

    (snip)
    But that's a fallacious argument, unless you're saying that all votes should be held under the same system and with the same rules?
    It's an apples and oranges argument, and I think the arguments against the new legislation are strong enough in their own right. They're illiberal and strike at what should be basic democratic freedoms.

    The threat and impact of strikes in this country is reasonably small. I'm a union man myself, though I don't strike and generally find the WE DISAGREE WITH EVERYTHING stance taken by most unions to be laughable. In fact the 50% rule is something that might force union leaders to start taking their membership more seriously (less soap-box posturing, more help with actual workplace issues on which they are generally - surprise surprise - useless). The fact is it's often the malcontents, refuseniks and folk who are crap at their day job who gravitate towards union office - a fact which really helps nobody in the long run. I'm a bit wary of invoking Germany (as they often seem to be) but by and large the relationship between labour and management there is far more effective and civilised than here (or e.g. Italy, France).

    BUT the right of workers to organise and, with the right grounds, strike, is an important pillar of a functioning democratic society. Not a popular opinion on these boards, but there it is!
    As I've said many times passim, I'm in favour of unions. The working man needs a representative, and (some/many) employers need the threats of strikes and other actions to restrain them.

    But you make a very important point, and one that SO and myself have discussed many times on here - the relationship between unions and employers can be very constructive and mutually advantageous. Unfortunately the situation here in the UK is often miles away from that.

    Unfortunately, the times when the relationship between unions, management and employees does work do not get publicised, as if all sides are rather embarrassed that the system has actually worked.

    But Unite in particular needs restraining.
  • watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474
    edited September 2015
    malcolmg said:

    kle4 said:



    "The BBC has since been duffed up". The BBC's governance arrangements are archaic and needed updating (a process which should go further still). Its (in)ability to project a balanced output should be questioned and addressed. In any case, the cuts in its output could be minimised were it run more efficiently.

    "Trade Union Reform Bill". A Labour Party less dependent on the unions would be a good thing. Besides, unions should be representing members, not running the country. As for regulations, strikes and union activities have always been regulated and rightly so. The Miners Strike was fought and won on the principle that unions couldn't ignore that fact.


    "family size of the non-affluent is now government business". Welfare is certainly government business.

    "a heterosexual couple on a modest income will have their pennies pinched by the Treasury if they don’t obey a ‘two child’ policy". Benefits are taxpayers' pennies, not the recipients.

    "Some voters may soon start to notice". That's the idea.

    While I'd like the gov to do or not do things listed inthis piece, I have to agree with a lot of this.particularly re benefits changes, whic iirc are one of the few things done that is very popular - it is taxpayer money and the public is generally in favour of being tighter with it. It certainly isn't a sign of abandoning the centre. I do think motives are suspect on the BBC and trade unions, but they e not done much on the former yet and the latter is. It proof of a wholesale move to the right.

    But the Tory mood on here has understandably been triumphant the past few days, it's important to remember the challenges and accusations that need to be defended against, the luck won't always be with them.

    That said, one of the problems labour had was portraying Cameron as so e malevolent figure which didn't match what the public saw, which was he's a bit crap and that's it, like most pms. It is simply hyperbole to talk of not recognising him anymore as though he's managed a complete transformation in a few months, when he's not even done much. It is overplaying the spin again.
    What has happened to Cameron , he gets more like a red faced Mr Potatohead every time I see him , what is he eating, certainly not hard work that is causing it.
    Malky, it would appear that you're confusing the bathroom mirror with your TV.
  • KingaKinga Posts: 59
    Has it dawned on the PLP yet that the first policy announcement by John McDonell will by necessity be the abolition of the Office of Budget Responsibility.

    How's that going to go down with the electorate, I wonder?
  • Mr. Sykes, one imagines there's a vast array of past utterances being collected by the Conservatives, and others [UKIP will probably be focusing heavily on migration].
  • DeClareDeClare Posts: 483

    In case you missed it last night. YouGov/Times Scotland poll.

    I call Tory surge

    Constituency VI. SNP 51 Lab 22 Con 18 (+3) LD 4 (-3). SNP lead up 5% since May

    List VI. SNP 45 (+2) Lab 20 (-4) Con 18 (+2) greens 9


    Long way to go and still a lot to do but wouldn't it be hilarious if the Tories went on to become the main opposition party up there.
  • malcolmg said:



    Ha Ha Ha , game over when you are using the Mail as your evidence. Poor billionaire gets upset that a few people have placards outside his house , but JJ happy that he can sack hundreds without giving a hoot and wants to restrict the workers from having any say whatsoever.

    Thugs are thugs. Even if they are union thugs or Scottish thugs.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Scott_P said:

    Ooh, unlucky...

    THE former SNP government aide at the centre of a row over cronyism and T in the Park has abandoned her bid to come an MSP next year.

    Public relations consultant Jennifer Dempsie, 33, confirmed she had withdrawn her nomination to become an SNP list candidate in the Highlands & Islands region.
    http://m.heraldscotland.com/news/13717555.Aide_at_centre_of_T_in_the_Park_row_abandons_MSP_bid/

    Good day to bury a bad crony - in cement.

  • isamisam Posts: 40,731
    Amol Rajan here with a kind of companion piece to Henry's thread header;

    https://twitter.com/amolrajan/status/643336764208320512
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674
    watford30 said:

    malcolmg said:

    kle4 said:



    "The BBC has since been duffed up". The BBC's governance arrangements are archaic and needed updating (a process which should go further still). Its (in)ability to project a balanced output should be questioned and addressed. In any case, the cuts in its output could be minimised were it run more efficiently.

    "Trade Union Reform Bill". A Labour Party less dependent on the unions would be a good thing. Besides, unions should be representing members, not running the country. As for regulations, strikes and union activities have always been regulated and rightly so. The Miners Strike was fought and won on the principle that unions couldn't ignore that fact.


    "family size of the non-affluent is now government business". Welfare is certainly government business.

    "a heterosexual couple on a modest income will have their pennies pinched by the Treasury if they don’t obey a ‘two child’ policy". Benefits are taxpayers' pennies, not the recipients.

    "Some voters may soon start to notice". That's the idea.

    While I'd like the gov to do or not do things listed inthis piece, I have to agree with a lot of this.particularly re benefits changes, whic iirc are one of the few things done that is very popular - it is taxpayer money and the public is generally in favour of being tighter with it. It certainly isn't a sign of abandoning the centre. I do think motives are suspect on the BBC and trade unions, but they e not done much on the former yet and the latter is. It proof of a wholesale move to the right.

    But the Tory mood on here has understandably been triumphant the past few days, it's important to remember the challenges and accusations that need to be defended against, the luck won't always be with them.

    That said, one of the problems labour had was portraying Cameron as so e malevolent figure which didn't match what the public saw, which was he's a bit crap and that's it, like most pms. It is simply hyperbole to talk of not recognising him anymore as though he's managed a complete transformation in a few months, when he's not even done much. It is overplaying the spin again.
    What has happened to Cameron , he gets more like a red faced Mr Potatohead every time I see him , what is he eating, certainly not hard work that is causing it.
    Malky, it would appear that you're confusing the bathroom mirror with your TV.
    Good joke from your single malfunctioning brain cell.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674
    edited September 2015

    malcolmg said:



    Ha Ha Ha , game over when you are using the Mail as your evidence. Poor billionaire gets upset that a few people have placards outside his house , but JJ happy that he can sack hundreds without giving a hoot and wants to restrict the workers from having any say whatsoever.

    Thugs are thugs. Even if they are union thugs or Scottish thugs.
    You last bit is very telling, sore loser you resort to your bigotry. I presume you had their nationality checked out.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    Henry does draw attention to one very important issue facing left of centre voters. Just because Corbyn is a disaster we shouldn't lose sight of the increasing ghastliness of the Conservatives and Cameron in particular. A real case of a trojan horse.

    The thing Henry hasn't got round to yet for reason's explained by Eagle is where normal left of centre voters are supposed to go. We're faced with ugly right-wingery not seen since Thatcher or the equally ugly Union led left wingery not seen since Benn.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @MichaelPDeacon: Communities & Local Government Questions in Commons in four and a half hours. There is no shadow Communities & Local Government Secretary
  • What a thoroughly disappointing article. I had started it expecting to some some genuine and reasoned complaints but all we have is a series of party political whines. Perhaps the only complaint that is justified is the packing of the Lords. Compared to the authoritarian, statist garbage Labour were producing for 13 years with genuine attacks on freedom and a massive increase in state powers and surveillence Henry's complaints are completely insignificant.

    Even as a Cameron critic, this is perhaps the weakest article I have seen presented here in a very long time.

    I seem to remember that every article by Manson has been on the same lines as this one. Biased blinkered and self servingly Labour. Its nothing new. The response of turnip brain and co tells us how desperate the left are. Indeed reduced to crude personal invective. As Labour move hard left and vote in a supporters of terrorists and followers of communism for its two key positions we get his drivel from him which ignores the reasons why the govt is controlling and cutting its spending - ie Labour's own profligacy and incompetence. It gives us a pretty good insight into the warped mindset of the socialists.
    Sturgeon's response makes more sense - sign up Corbyn to really frighten off the English. And of course the last thing she wants is a Labour Party that might actually gain power in Westminster.
    The response of turnip brain and co tells us how desperate the left are. Indeed reduced to crude personal invective

    perhaps you don't see the irony in that statement ?
    Shut up fatso...
    Now thats personal invective. (I am in fact always happy to peruse your comments of course)
    And come on now - Mr turnip brain was the one calling Cameron fat and a potato head. I was being deliberately ironic. But you are right - maybe I should have used quotes.

  • Mr. Roger, the Trojans didn't vote to allow the Greeks to pillage Troy.

    The Conservatives won an election, they didn't ambush the Queen and steal the keys to Parliament.
  • Off-topic:

    This website is interesting:

    http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

    Currently wind is generating 3% of power, nuclear 19%, gas 45%, and coal 21%

    Long live the wind revolution!
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    felix said:

    Ha hahaha - pathetic diversionary twaddle - nobody's gonna fall for it. Not today of all days.

    What he said

  • Off-topic:

    This website is interesting:

    http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

    Currently wind is generating 3% of power, nuclear 19%, gas 45%, and coal 21%

    Long live the wind revolution!

    Does it mention my roof?
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,124

    the new trade union legislation is deeply repugnant. As David Davis says, parts of it are Francoist. But Labour is no longer a serious political party, so the Tories have free rein to do as they wish.

    Why is it repugnant to require half of trade unionists to vote in a ballot to make a strike legal?

    Most people are fed up of wildcat strikes on the tube.
    Because the same rule is not applied to politicians, who affect all our lives much more substantially than the occasional strike. Plenty of MPs who will vote on this legislation don't even have 40% of the vote, let alone 50%. If governments could only act if they had the support of 50% of the population, the libertarian dream of virtually no government at all would come true.
    Ah so you support Union strike votes being open to all voters and not just members do you? No thought not.
  • Roger said:

    Henry does draw attention to one very important issue facing left of centre voters. Just because Corbyn is a disaster we shouldn't lose sight of the increasing ghastliness of the Conservatives and Cameron in particular. A real case of a trojan horse.

    The thing Henry hasn't got round to yet for reason's explained by Eagle is where normal left of centre voters are supposed to go. We're faced with ugly right-wingery not seen since Thatcher or the equally ugly Union led left wingery not seen since Benn.

    The thing is, when you, or Tyson, or Innocent Abroad, criticise Cameron in such ludicrous and hyperbolic terms it just convinces me he's doing the right thing.

    I take far more notice of the reasoned analysis of centrists like DavidL, foxinsox or antifrank.
  • I've come to the conclusion that Corbyn is on nothing more than a vanity trip. On here last week somebody posted a pamphlet by Dan Jarvis saying the first thing Labour most do is win back the Ukip vote, unless they do they'll make no progress.

    And within minutes of his coronation Corbyn went on a refugee march.

    He isn't interested in becoming PM, he just wants to show the world how caring and inclusive he is.
  • Ghedebrav said:

    wow Suddenly NNXMPX2 has woken up now he doesn't care for the system that worked so well for his buddies Tone and Gordy ... who,d a thunk it

    I've always supported PR, since I think that FPTP delivering governments on 35-40% of the vote is a recipe for permanent trouble. But my point was that it's hypocritical for a government elected on less than 40% of the vote, allowing them to send us to war or do pretty much anything else it likes, to play the "unrepresentative" card against people who want to take industrial action for a couple of days on the same basis.

    (snip)
    But that's a fallacious argument, unless you're saying that all votes should be held under the same system and with the same rules?
    It's an apples and oranges argument, and I think the arguments against the new legislation are strong enough in their own right. They're illiberal and strike at what should be basic democratic freedoms.



    BUT the right of workers to organise and, with the right grounds, strike, is an important pillar of a functioning democratic society. Not a popular opinion on these boards, but there it is!
    As I've said many times passim, I'm in favour of unions. The working man needs a representative, and (some/many) employers need the threats of strikes and other actions to restrain them.

    But you make a very important point, and one that SO and myself have discussed many times on here - the relationship between unions and employers can be very constructive and mutually advantageous. Unfortunately the situation here in the UK is often miles away from that.

    Unfortunately, the times when the relationship between unions, management and employees does work do not get publicised, as if all sides are rather embarrassed that the system has actually worked.

    But Unite in particular needs restraining.
    When I was a convenor steward I never initiated industrial action. I didn't need to. I published a newsletter which listed all the mistakes management had made and held them up to ridicule. One day the boss offered me his job, which I turned down, saying "you don't think I think it's doable, do you?"

    If your boss has a boss - or if one of your reports has a report - then the outfit's too big to be efficient, and it deserves all the trouble it gets. Think guerrillas and regular armies.

  • isamisam Posts: 40,731

    James O'Brien, now Newsnight presenter, has an interesting tweet.

    https://twitter.com/mrjamesob/status/643323420428627968

    Basically, lambasts the Sun for a splash on a Corbyn quote from 3 years ago.

    Hmm. I can see that it's not 'new', but in the same way the press only raised Laws' expenses issues when he became (briefly, alas) important, it's understandable the rambling of a 30 year backbencher didn't make the front page three years ago.

    Last year a Ukip candidate was sacked for making some offensive remark. He stood as an independent in the 2014 locals instead.

    O'Brien interviewed Farage this year and started quizzing him over the emergence of offensive remarks from a 'UKIP councillor'.. As if they had been made overnight. Farage said he didn't know the person but didn't think he was a councillor..

    O'Brien: 'He is a UKIP councillor...'

    He wasn't and never had been.

    O'Brien is a typical smug virtue signalling leftie. I am amazed @SeanT rates him. He lies in interviews to distort the answer, an all round mugerroo

  • malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:



    Ha Ha Ha , game over when you are using the Mail as your evidence. Poor billionaire gets upset that a few people have placards outside his house , but JJ happy that he can sack hundreds without giving a hoot and wants to restrict the workers from having any say whatsoever.

    Thugs are thugs. Even if they are union thugs or Scottish thugs.
    You last bit is very telling, sore loser you resort to your bigotry. I presume you had their nationality checked out.
    So you're denying that 'Scottish thugs' are not thugs? Are Scottish thugs some form of enlightened higher life form in your mind?

    Or are they just lowlife scum, just like English or Welsh thugs?
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    edited September 2015
    Roger said:

    Henry does draw attention to one very important issue facing left of centre voters. Just because Corbyn is a disaster we shouldn't lose sight of the increasing ghastliness of the Conservatives and Cameron in particular. A real case of a trojan horse.

    The thing Henry hasn't got round to yet for reason's explained by Eagle is where normal left of centre voters are supposed to go. We're faced with ugly right-wingery not seen since Thatcher or the equally ugly Union led left wingery not seen since Benn.

    That's right Roger, blame the voters, its all their fault you are faced with such misery, the voters are of course Labour Party voters who have elected a nutjob to be your leader. WE feel your pain
  • Off-topic:

    This website is interesting:

    http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

    Currently wind is generating 3% of power, nuclear 19%, gas 45%, and coal 21%

    Long live the wind revolution!

    The wind doesn't blow all the time, are you watching the meters to see when the wind results are low so you can post here?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    So you're denying that 'Scottish thugs' are not thugs? Are Scottish thugs some form of enlightened higher life form in your mind?

    Depends if they voted Yes or No...
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674

    What a thoroughly disappointing article. I had started it expecting to some some genuine and reasoned complaints but all we have is a series of party political whines. Perhaps the only complaint that is justified is the packing of the Lords. Compared to the authoritarian, statist garbage Labour were producing for 13 years with genuine attacks on freedom and a massive increase in state powers and surveillence Henry's complaints are completely insignificant.

    Even as a Cameron critic, this is perhaps the weakest article I have seen presented here in a very long time.

    I seem to remember that every article by Manson has been on the same lines as this one. Biased blinkered and self servingly Labour. Its nothing new. The response of turnip brain and co tells us how desperate the left are. Indeed reduced to crude personal invective. As Labour move hard left and vote in a supporters of terrorists and followers of communism for its two key positions we get his drivel from him which ignores the reasons why the govt is controlling and cutting its spending - ie Labour's own profligacy and incompetence. It gives us a pretty good insight into the warped mindset of the socialists.
    Sturgeon's response makes more sense - sign up Corbyn to really frighten off the English. And of course the last thing she wants is a Labour Party that might actually gain power in Westminster.
    The response of turnip brain and co tells us how desperate the left are. Indeed reduced to crude personal invective

    perhaps you don't see the irony in that statement ?
    Shut up fatso...
    Now thats personal invective. (I am in fact always happy to peruse your comments of course)
    And come on now - Mr turnip brain was the one calling Cameron fat and a potato head. I was being deliberately ironic. But you are right - maybe I should have used quotes.

    LOL, you really are cuckoo. I merely pointed out a fact , just for you that means , "he looks like a red faced potato on TV recently". Did you look up ironic so that you had any idea what it means before you dribbled on your keyboard.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    MTimT said:

    This does not feel like a PB article. I don't mind robustly debating political issues of the day, but an outright party political attack on the government as the entire purpose of the article with no real tie in to betting markets just doesn't seem right.

    I know what you mean - but can you just imagine the pain Henry is in right now?

    Snigger

  • flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903
    edited September 2015

    'As a father..'

    twitter.com/AngrySalmond/status/643341842977849344

    They are not Lebanese refugees - they are Syrian refugees in Lebanon. And its British money helping them. Unlike the Germans we are being consistent and generous in our aid efforts.
    The other point is that he has appointed a minister for Syrian refugees and says the UK will help train, equip and mentor the Lebanese armed forces.
  • Betting gurus,

    I realised betting on the morning of Corbynbirth is a risky idea but I just can't see him being leader by end the of 2015 let come 2020 election.

    what are are the best odds for me to lay or bet he'll be gone by 1/1/16?
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    isam said:

    Thinking about who might be the leader after Corbyn... Has a previously defeated runner ever won the leadership of a party?

    Foot 1980, Wilson 1963...
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @PeterMannionMP: John McDonnell reminds media "I was Chancellor of the Exchequer for London" a.k.a. GLC Chair of Finance, sacked by Ken Livingstone! #corbyn
  • Betting gurus,

    I realised betting on the morning of Corbynbirth is a risky idea but I just can't see him being leader by end the of 2015 let come 2020 election.

    what are are the best odds for me to lay or bet he'll be gone by 1/1/16?

    10/1 with ladbrokes

    http://bit.ly/1Oaawzr
  • Mr. Scrapheap, afraid I don't know the answer to that, but I do know we're going to get a real world answer to whether or not Labour will ever commit regicide.

    Unless Corbyn resigns of his own accord, obviously.
  • Off-topic:

    This website is interesting:

    http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

    Currently wind is generating 3% of power, nuclear 19%, gas 45%, and coal 21%

    Long live the wind revolution!

    The wind doesn't blow all the time, are you watching the meters to see when the wind results are low so you can post here?
    Of course the wind doesn't blow all the time: that's exactly the point. As well as wind power getting high subsidies, the gas and coal station need to be ready to take the strain when the wind doesn't blow. And that costs even more: the power stations aren't kept open on the vain puffery of greenies, but on vast amounts of money from consumers.

    And I had the tab open from the other day, and I just noticed it. I doubt people would be very interested in hearing about the latest developments in the roll-out of ERTMS, which is in one of my other tabs. :)

    But just in case they are:
    http://www.railengineer.uk/2015/08/28/ertms-a-reality-check/

    :)
  • RodCrosby said:

    isam said:

    Thinking about who might be the leader after Corbyn... Has a previously defeated runner ever won the leadership of a party?

    Foot 1980, Wilson 1963...
    Michael Howard lost in 1997 and became leader in 2003
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Scott_P said:

    So you're denying that 'Scottish thugs' are not thugs? Are Scottish thugs some form of enlightened higher life form in your mind?

    Depends if they voted Yes or No...
    I enjoyed Wings over Bath's delicious meltdown at being airbrushed from the Sunday Herald's 1 year anniversary of the glorious defeat. Included his analysis of polls before and after the publishing of his much discredited "little blue book" .

  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503

    I've come to the conclusion that Corbyn is on nothing more than a vanity trip. On here last week somebody posted a pamphlet by Dan Jarvis saying the first thing Labour most do is win back the Ukip vote, unless they do they'll make no progress.

    And within minutes of his coronation Corbyn went on a refugee march.

    He isn't interested in becoming PM, he just wants to show the world how caring and inclusive he is.

    For many people (apparently) the attraction _is_ that he is an elemental, unchanging force of nature. You don't need to ask what Corbyn thinks today; simply look up what he thought in (say) 1980. That's somehow more endearing than someone whose thinking has evolved over the years.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Mr. Scrapheap, afraid I don't know the answer to that, but I do know we're going to get a real world answer to whether or not Labour will ever commit regicide.

    Unless Corbyn resigns of his own accord, obviously.

    I think Corbyn resigning is much more likely than an official contest to out him in which he stands.

  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    Fat_Steve said:

    "An authoritarian Tory government will undo Cameron’s early work" ?
    Possibly. Luckily, we have the opposition to hold them to account.

    Are you really sure the Lib Dems and the SNP are up to that task?

    Oh, you meant LABOUR LOL

    Labour have hung up the "closed for redecorating" sign.
  • Cromwell said:

    Labour are like a recovering alcoholic having a relapse back to its bad old days ; Corbyn is a total and complete Labourholic ....the LP will never be trusted again with the levers of power and all of Blair's work has be for nought ...the Blairites really should form their own party as I don't think the Labour brand can ever recover from this debacle ...Corbynism has merely reinforced the very worst and darkest suspicions about Labour

    The voters told the Labour Party what they thought of Labour; now the Labour Party has told the voters what they think of them.
    Too true , the grass roots have given the electorate the royal two fingered salute , they are , metaphorically speaking , showing the Red flag with pride as the Labour ship sinks ...surely this is the end of the LP as a serious contender for government ; the Blairites need to save themselves and abandon ship

  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Holy Moly - what a cracking attack ad.

    Well the Tory attack videos have been launched (look away now Henry)

    ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hgJokgNJHo&app=desktop

  • watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474
    edited September 2015
    Some pointers to where Labour are heading were offered by Gisela Stuart and Charles Clarke on the Today programme this morning. The latter was suggesting that some Labour MPs would be working hard to produce their own economic alternatives to John McDonnell. Not good.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b069jd2m

    Listen to John Humphries laughing at Hilary Benn at 2hrs 17m into the recording.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Corbyn's walk of silence gets better each time you see it.
  • Am just watching the Corbyn long walk to silence video.

    Blimey.
  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    'Meanwhile family size of the non-affluent is now government business. Child Tax Credits will be restricted to the first two children after 2017'

    If families want more than two kids it's a life style choice, why should it depend on taxpayer funded handouts ?
  • isamisam Posts: 40,731
    I can't help thinking the next Labour leader will be Chuka Umunna or Stella Creasy...

    Someone who hasn't run before
    BAME or female
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    edited September 2015
    john_zims said:

    'Meanwhile family size of the non-affluent is now government business. Child Tax Credits will be restricted to the first two children after 2017'

    If families want more than two kids it's a life style choice, why should it depend on taxpayer funded handouts ?

    Don't forget that if you do have a third baby, a state appointed Tory will be along to eat it shortly thereafer.

    Good post by the way; I shall wait (probably in vain) for Henry to provide an answer. My interpretation is that the government is saying that family size is now none of its business; if you want more kids, make sure you can afford them.
  • Well, Churchill doubled up the roles of PM and Defence Secretary. Might Corbyn have to do the same as LOTO as Shadow Defence Secretary?

    Then again, Churchill was pro-UK so I doubt Corbyn would want to emulate him in any way.
  • isam said:

    I can't help thinking the next Labour leader will be Chuka Umunna or Stella Creasy...

    Someone who hasn't run before
    BAME or female

    The Labour Party doesn't do female leaders. The time isn't right.
  • Am just watching the Corbyn long walk to silence video.

    Blimey.


    Eventually, Mr Corbyn said to a staffer: "There are people bothering me."

    It's very North Korean.

  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited September 2015
    Scott_P said:

    @PeterMannionMP: John McDonnell reminds media "I was Chancellor of the Exchequer for London" a.k.a. GLC Chair of Finance, sacked by Ken Livingstone! #corbyn

    Fun and games begin, a delusional McDonnell over embellishing his CV a tad methinks.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,279
    Former England & Yorkshire cricket captain Brian Close dies aged 84 http://bbc.in/1QzLNmk
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Twitter rumours that Lucas has been asked to be shadow DECC.

    Watermelons for lunch.
  • Well, Churchill doubled up the roles of PM and Defence Secretary. Might Corbyn have to do the same as LOTO as Shadow Defence Secretary?

    Then again, Churchill was pro-UK so I doubt Corbyn would want to emulate him in any way.

    He was Minister for Defence, slightly different to the role of the current Defence Secretary and the past Secretary of State for War
  • watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474
    edited September 2015

    Am just watching the Corbyn long walk to silence video.

    Blimey.

    Whining that a naturally inquisitive and questioning media are 'bothering him'. Extraordinary.

    Strange, crazy, angry man. He'll lose it soon, and publicly. Particularly as by choosing to ignore the press, they pick away at him until he does.
  • TGOHF said:

    Twitter rumours that Lucas has been asked to be shadow DECC.

    Watermelons for lunch.

    No way.....

    I mean...no way....
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    I used to listen to him on LBC and he's a hard core Lefty in the Ken Livingstone mould - now that's fine on a station packed with opinionated presenters - but not for Newsnight.

    James O'Brien, now Newsnight presenter, has an interesting tweet.

    https://twitter.com/mrjamesob/status/643323420428627968

    Basically, lambasts the Sun for a splash on a Corbyn quote from 3 years ago.

    Hmm. I can see that it's not 'new', but in the same way the press only raised Laws' expenses issues when he became (briefly, alas) important, it's understandable the rambling of a 30 year backbencher didn't make the front page three years ago.

  • DeClareDeClare Posts: 483

    RodCrosby said:

    isam said:

    Thinking about who might be the leader after Corbyn... Has a previously defeated runner ever won the leadership of a party?

    Foot 1980, Wilson 1963...
    Michael Howard lost in 1997 and became leader in 2003
    In the SDO leadership election 1982 Roy Jenkins beat David Owen by 26256 to 20864, only fully paid up members were allowed to vote.
    In the 1983 General Election the SDP only won 6 seats and Owen took over as leader.
  • Holy Moly - what a cracking attack ad.

    Well the Tory attack videos have been launched (look away now Henry)

    ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hgJokgNJHo&app=desktop

    that's quite brutal.
  • Miss Plato, quite.

    Moments later he conceded that if Farage had said something dodgy 3 years ago they (the press) would be all over it, and that was a fair point.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:



    Ha Ha Ha , game over when you are using the Mail as your evidence. Poor billionaire gets upset that a few people have placards outside his house , but JJ happy that he can sack hundreds without giving a hoot and wants to restrict the workers from having any say whatsoever.

    Thugs are thugs. Even if they are union thugs or Scottish thugs.
    You last bit is very telling, sore loser you resort to your bigotry. I presume you had their nationality checked out.
    So you're denying that 'Scottish thugs' are not thugs? Are Scottish thugs some form of enlightened higher life form in your mind?

    Or are they just lowlife scum, just like English or Welsh thugs?
    I just wondered why you highlighted "Scottish Thugs" all of a sudden when it was never in the discussion. We were talking about people with placards and had never mentioned nationality. From what I saw of the "incident " a few people with placards were on the pavement and did very little so not sure that makes them "THUGS" but even so to get that to "Scottish THUGS " takes some doing even for you.
  • SandraMSandraM Posts: 206
    Has Cat Smith been offered anything yet in the Shadow Cabinet?
Sign In or Register to comment.