Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Keeping Benn as shadow Foreign Sec could make Corbyn look

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited January 2016 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Keeping Benn as shadow Foreign Sec could make Corbyn look weak but sacking him could be even more dangerous

At present I haven’t seen any betting markets on Hilary Benn’s survival as Corbyn’s shadow Foreign Secretary but no doubt these will be opened. There could be three options: Benn stays in current role: Benn remains as part of top team but in a different role or Benn out of the shadow cabinet completely.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    I disagree, the conspirators have to be denied their podium.
    Leaving them in the shadow cabinet will simply continue to allow them with their destabilizing work from a position of authority. This is not a revenge reshuffle but a house cleaning one.

    In the last thread I mentioned that Benn had violated the old roman proverb of "Caesar’s wife must not only be honest but must also be seen to be honest".
    Continuing with the roman theme, it's as good for Corbyn to get rid of Benn now that he can, as it would for Caesar if he got rid of Brutus before he stabbed him.

    And we all know that Benn is going to try to stab Corbyn anyway regardless of whether he's in the shadow cabinet or not, so better to put some distance by removing as much authority from him as possible, preferably throwing him to the political dogs.
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    FPT:

    EPG said:


    UK is a top holiday country
    England for me particularly in the NW and the central bits around the Bristol-Oxford-Norwich axis (no offence to any others)
    Oh and Scotland and Wales and NI

    Dutch tourists seem to love the UK even more than Brits do, and find their way to bits of the country where the Chinese/Japanese/Indian tourist market hasn't really taken off.

    Incidentally, for a rural/urban split, here are the 30 largest (ceremonial) counties by area, and the biggest 30 cities (ok, technically Primary Urban Areas).

    1 North Yorkshire / London
    2 Lincolnshire / Birmingham
    3 Cumbria / Manchester
    4 Devon / Liverpool
    5 Norfolk / Leeds
    6 Northumberland / Sheffield
    7 Somerset / Teesside
    8 Suffolk / Bristol
    9 Hampshire / Bournemouth and Poole
    10 Kent / Stoke-on-Trent
    11 Essex / Leicester
    12 Cornwall / Wirral
    13 Shropshire / Coventry
    14 Wiltshire / Nottingham
    15 Cambridgeshire / Bradford
    16 Gloucestershire / Newcastle
    17 Lancashire / Bolton
    18 Durham / Brighton and Hove
    19 Staffordshire / Plymouth
    20 Dorset / Hull
    21 Derbyshire / Preston
    22 Oxfordshire / Derby
    23 East Riding of Yorkshire / Aldershot and Farnborough
    24 Northamptonshire / Southampton
    25 Cheshire / Wigan
    26 Herefordshire / Barnsley
    27 Nottinghamshire / Portsmouth
    28 Leicestershire / Luton
    29 West Yorkshire / York
    30 West Sussex / Northampton

    I think it must be very rare to have explored, say, 20 of the top 30 from both lists.

    PUAs 31-50 include places around the size of Milton Keynes, Southend, Ipswich, Reading, Oxford, Blackpool or Norwich, some of which are more worth a visit than places that made it into the top 30.
    I was going to say.. The largest city in the UK is the City of Carlisle.
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    Speedy said:

    I disagree, the conspirators have to be denied their podium.
    Leaving them in the shadow cabinet will simply continue to allow them with their destabilizing work from a position of authority. This is not a revenge reshuffle but a house cleaning one.

    In the last thread I mentioned that Benn had violated the old roman proverb of "Caesar’s wife must not only be honest but must also be seen to be honest".
    Continuing with the roman theme, it's as good for Corbyn to get rid of Benn now that he can, as it would for Caesar if he got rid of Brutus before he stabbed him.

    And we all know that Benn is going to try to stab Corbyn anyway regardless of whether he's in the shadow cabinet or not, so better to put some distance by removing as much authority from him as possible, preferably throwing him to the political dogs.

    I thought the idea of a job swap as suggested by someone to someone on behalf of someone else who now denies it, would have allowed everyone to save face. Putting Benn on the backbenches after is incredibly powerful and passionate speech in parliament is going to smash apart the very fragile relationship he has with the PLP.
  • notme said:

    FPT:


    I was going to say.. The largest city in the UK is the City of Carlisle.

    You're quite correct! I meant to write "by population" on the PUAs, but when I edited in the Wikipedia link I forgot to.
  • On topic: where did all this "revenge reshuffle" talk come from anyway? It clearly doesn't help Corbyn overall, since if he decides not to reshuffle then he will look weak. So why talk it up and raise the stakes in the first place? Or was most of the talking up by people trying to pre-empt it?
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293

    notme said:

    FPT:


    I was going to say.. The largest city in the UK is the City of Carlisle.

    You're quite correct! I meant to write "by population" on the PUAs, but when I edited in the Wikipedia link I forgot to.
    Of course it only really exists in its ridiculous 400sq mile boundaries to serve as an administrative area for the Council of the City of Carlisle (as it's officially known).
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039

    On topic: where did all this "revenge reshuffle" talk come from anyway? It clearly doesn't help Corbyn overall, since if he decides not to reshuffle then he will look weak. So why talk it up and raise the stakes in the first place? Or was most of the talking up by people trying to pre-empt it?

    Well I'd wager that the "moderates" are the smarter media managers inside the Labour Party.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    edited January 2016
    By allowing the speculation over Hilary Benn to continue Corbyn has put himself in a position where he looks weak if Corbyn Benn remains. shome mishtake shurely - ed.....

    Corbyn is damned if he does ("revenge", focus for opposition) and is damned if he doesn't ("weak", dis-united Cabinet), meanwhile the made in heaven for the Tories superlative Labour Media Management machine rumbles on......best evah Tory sleeper, that Milne chap.....
  • William_HWilliam_H Posts: 346

    On topic: where did all this "revenge reshuffle" talk come from anyway? It clearly doesn't help Corbyn overall, since if he decides not to reshuffle then he will look weak. So why talk it up and raise the stakes in the first place? Or was most of the talking up by people trying to pre-empt it?

    I'd guess left wing people trying to push Corbyn out of his supine attitude.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,922
    edited January 2016

    EPG said:


    UK is a top holiday country
    England for me particularly in the NW and the central bits around the Bristol-Oxford-Norwich axis (no offence to any others)
    Oh and Scotland and Wales and NI

    Dutch tourists seem to love the UK even more than Brits do, and find their way to bits of the country where the Chinese/Japanese/Indian tourist market hasn't really taken off.

    Incidentally, for a rural/urban split, here are the 30 largest (ceremonial) counties by area, and the biggest 30 cities (ok, technically Primary Urban Areas).

    1 North Yorkshire / London
    2 Lincolnshire / Birmingham
    3 Cumbria / Manchester
    4 Devon / Liverpool
    5 Norfolk / Leeds
    6 Northumberland / Sheffield
    7 Somerset / Teesside
    8 Suffolk / Bristol
    9 Hampshire / Bournemouth and Poole
    10 Kent / Stoke-on-Trent
    11 Essex / Leicester
    12 Cornwall / Wirral
    13 Shropshire / Coventry
    14 Wiltshire / Nottingham
    15 Cambridgeshire / Bradford
    16 Gloucestershire / Newcastle
    17 Lancashire / Bolton
    18 Durham / Brighton and Hove
    19 Staffordshire / Plymouth
    20 Dorset / Hull
    21 Derbyshire / Preston
    22 Oxfordshire / Derby
    23 East Riding of Yorkshire / Aldershot and Farnborough
    24 Northamptonshire / Southampton
    25 Cheshire / Wigan
    26 Herefordshire / Barnsley
    27 Nottinghamshire / Portsmouth
    28 Leicestershire / Luton
    29 West Yorkshire / York
    30 West Sussex / Northampton

    I think it must be very rare to have explored, say, 20 of the top 30 from both lists.

    Bolded places I've been to by train :)
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    'All this goes back to the decision to allow a free vote in the Syria debate.'

    Even that decision was forced upon Corbyn by the threat of multiple resignations by the PLP.

    Jeremy’s problem is not that he is a weak leader, which he undoubtedly is, the problem is that those he is attempting to lead, simply do not wish to be led by him.



  • EPG said:


    UK is a top holiday country
    England for me particularly in the NW and the central bits around the Bristol-Oxford-Norwich axis (no offence to any others)
    Oh and Scotland and Wales and NI

    Dutch tourists seem to love the UK even more than Brits do, and find their way to bits of the country where the Chinese/Japanese/Indian tourist market hasn't really taken off.

    Incidentally, for a rural/urban split, here are the 30 largest (ceremonial) counties by area, and the biggest 30 cities (ok, technically Primary Urban Areas).

    1 North Yorkshire / London
    2 Lincolnshire / Birmingham
    3 Cumbria / Manchester
    4 Devon / Liverpool
    5 Norfolk / Leeds
    6 Northumberland / Sheffield
    7 Somerset / Teesside
    8 Suffolk / Bristol
    9 Hampshire / Bournemouth and Poole
    10 Kent / Stoke-on-Trent
    11 Essex / Leicester
    12 Cornwall / Wirral
    13 Shropshire / Coventry
    14 Wiltshire / Nottingham
    15 Cambridgeshire / Bradford
    16 Gloucestershire / Newcastle
    17 Lancashire / Bolton
    18 Durham / Brighton and Hove
    19 Staffordshire / Plymouth
    20 Dorset / Hull
    21 Derbyshire / Preston
    22 Oxfordshire / Derby
    23 East Riding of Yorkshire / Aldershot and Farnborough
    24 Northamptonshire / Southampton
    25 Cheshire / Wigan
    26 Herefordshire / Barnsley
    27 Nottinghamshire / Portsmouth
    28 Leicestershire / Luton
    29 West Yorkshire / York
    30 West Sussex / Northampton

    I think it must be very rare to have explored, say, 20 of the top 30 from both lists.

    Bolded places I've been to by train :)
    Don't take this in a bad way Dr P but you're considerably less well travelled than I expected!

    Probably a good thing - plenty for you to explore yet :)
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    William_H said:

    On topic: where did all this "revenge reshuffle" talk come from anyway? It clearly doesn't help Corbyn overall, since if he decides not to reshuffle then he will look weak. So why talk it up and raise the stakes in the first place? Or was most of the talking up by people trying to pre-empt it?

    I'd guess left wing people trying to push Corbyn out of his supine attitude.
    Michael Dugher attributes it to 'aides' of Jeremy:

    A variety of sources, some of whom have been attributed as being "aides" to Jeremy or those "close" to the leader have apparently stood up speculation that Hilary Benn, Rosie Winterton, Maria Eagle and me (amongst others) are all for the chop for not voting against extending military action from Iraq into Syria during the recent free vote in the Commons.

    http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/01/talk-revenge-reshuffle-risks-repeating-worst-new-labour

    Sterling work Milne - keep it up!

    Paint your chap into a corner - brilliant!
  • On topic: where did all this "revenge reshuffle" talk come from anyway? It clearly doesn't help Corbyn overall, since if he decides not to reshuffle then he will look weak. So why talk it up and raise the stakes in the first place? Or was most of the talking up by people trying to pre-empt it?

    Well I'd wager that the "moderates" are the smarter media managers inside the Labour Party.
    William_H said:

    On topic: where did all this "revenge reshuffle" talk come from anyway? It clearly doesn't help Corbyn overall, since if he decides not to reshuffle then he will look weak. So why talk it up and raise the stakes in the first place? Or was most of the talking up by people trying to pre-empt it?

    I'd guess left wing people trying to push Corbyn out of his supine attitude.
    Well, those reactions were different.

    Clearly some of the talking-up of the prospect has been done by those trying to forestall it (see e.g. Dugher in the New Statesman) but I do seem to recall some pro-Corbyn figures militating for an aggressive reshuffle, in a threatening kind of way. (But can't recall who exactly. Backroom boys, not MPs, if memory serves.)
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,233
    @RobD

    I've answered your question on the previous thread on the previous thread
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    viewcode said:

    @RobD

    I've answered your question on the previous thread on the previous thread

    Thanks, that was quite detailed. I wonder what the other side of the border looks like.
  • EPG said:


    UK is a top holiday country
    England for me particularly in the NW and the central bits around the Bristol-Oxford-Norwich axis (no offence to any others)
    Oh and Scotland and Wales and NI

    Dutch tourists seem to love the UK even more than Brits do, and find their way to bits of the country where the Chinese/Japanese/Indian tourist market hasn't really taken off.

    Incidentally, for a rural/urban split, here are the 30 largest (ceremonial) counties by area, and the biggest 30 cities (ok, technically Primary Urban Areas).

    1 North Yorkshire / London
    2 Lincolnshire / Birmingham
    3 Cumbria / Manchester
    4 Devon / Liverpool
    5 Norfolk / Leeds
    6 Northumberland / Sheffield
    7 Somerset / Teesside
    8 Suffolk / Bristol
    9 Hampshire / Bournemouth and Poole
    10 Kent / Stoke-on-Trent
    11 Essex / Leicester
    12 Cornwall / Wirral
    13 Shropshire / Coventry
    14 Wiltshire / Nottingham
    15 Cambridgeshire / Bradford
    16 Gloucestershire / Newcastle
    17 Lancashire / Bolton
    18 Durham / Brighton and Hove
    19 Staffordshire / Plymouth
    20 Dorset / Hull
    21 Derbyshire / Preston
    22 Oxfordshire / Derby
    23 East Riding of Yorkshire / Aldershot and Farnborough
    24 Northamptonshire / Southampton
    25 Cheshire / Wigan
    26 Herefordshire / Barnsley
    27 Nottinghamshire / Portsmouth
    28 Leicestershire / Luton
    29 West Yorkshire / York
    30 West Sussex / Northampton

    I think it must be very rare to have explored, say, 20 of the top 30 from both lists.

    Bolded places I've been to by train :)
    Don't take this in a bad way Dr P but you're considerably less well travelled than I expected!

    Probably a good thing - plenty for you to explore yet :)
    Remember, those are by train - been to plenty of the other places by car.

    Incidentally, done nearly 900 miles of "new" rail route in 2015 (ie. routes I hadn't previously done before).
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    edited January 2016

    EPG said:


    UK is a top holiday country
    England for me particularly in the NW and the central bits around the Bristol-Oxford-Norwich axis (no offence to any others)
    Oh and Scotland and Wales and NI

    Dutch tourists seem to love the UK even more than Brits do, and find their way to bits of the country where the Chinese/Japanese/Indian tourist market hasn't really taken off.

    Incidentally, for a rural/urban split, here are the 30 largest (ceremonial) counties by area, and the biggest 30 cities (ok, technically Primary Urban Areas).

    1 North Yorkshire / London
    2 Lincolnshire / Birmingham
    3 Cumbria / Manchester
    4 Devon / Liverpool
    5 Norfolk / Leeds
    6 Northumberland / Sheffield
    7 Somerset / Teesside
    8 Suffolk / Bristol
    9 Hampshire / Bournemouth and Poole
    10 Kent / Stoke-on-Trent
    11 Essex / Leicester
    12 Cornwall / Wirral
    13 Shropshire / Coventry
    14 Wiltshire / Nottingham
    15 Cambridgeshire / Bradford
    16 Gloucestershire / Newcastle
    17 Lancashire / Bolton
    18 Durham / Brighton and Hove
    19 Staffordshire / Plymouth
    20 Dorset / Hull
    21 Derbyshire / Preston
    22 Oxfordshire / Derby
    23 East Riding of Yorkshire / Aldershot and Farnborough
    24 Northamptonshire / Southampton
    25 Cheshire / Wigan
    26 Herefordshire / Barnsley
    27 Nottinghamshire / Portsmouth
    28 Leicestershire / Luton
    29 West Yorkshire / York
    30 West Sussex / Northampton

    I think it must be very rare to have explored, say, 20 of the top 30 from both lists.

    Bolded places I've been to by train :)
    Liverpool has all the major railway firsts in the world, including the world's first overhead electric railway (in 1893), world's first electrical multiple units, firsts EMUs to run in a tunnel, first automatic signalling, first electric light signalling, first escalator...

    Torn down in 1957, you can still find old films of the "Ovie" or "Docker's Umbrella", but I do like this short CGI reconstruction.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyycp23Tuqs

    I often wondered why Herbert Rouse's Tunnel Control Station (the sensational Egyptian/Art Deco building) was built "back-to-front" with its blank wall facing the main street (The Strand). Of course! It had to abut the Overhead Railway Track, so it's entrance and windows are on the other side.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718
    Didn't Liverpool have the first recorded railway death as well? Although there must hve been earlier accidents with tramways etc.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737

    Didn't Liverpool have the first recorded railway death as well? Although there must hve been earlier accidents with tramways etc.

    The first notable, at any rate.

    Poor old Huskisson. The equivalent of Churchill going down on the Titanic, I suppose...
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718
    RodCrosby said:

    Didn't Liverpool have the first recorded railway death as well? Although there must hve been earlier accidents with tramways etc.

    The first notable, at any rate.

    Poor old Huskisson. The equivalent of Churchill going down on the Titanic, I suppose...
    Goes to show that a politician should keep his eyes open to the possibility of disaster, I suppose.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737

    RodCrosby said:

    Didn't Liverpool have the first recorded railway death as well? Although there must hve been earlier accidents with tramways etc.

    The first notable, at any rate.

    Poor old Huskisson. The equivalent of Churchill going down on the Titanic, I suppose...
    Goes to show that a politician should keep his eyes open to the possibility of disaster, I suppose.
    The damned trains. At 30 mph, they moved too fast for the poor bastard. Never having seen one, he remained transfixed, not knowing which way to saunter, until it was too late...

    Amazing that the smoking, belching, fire-breathing monsters survived such an opening débâcle...

    He was a former President of the Board of Trade, Secretary for War, and Leader of the House of Commons.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718
    RodCrosby said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Didn't Liverpool have the first recorded railway death as well? Although there must hve been earlier accidents with tramways etc.

    The first notable, at any rate.

    Poor old Huskisson. The equivalent of Churchill going down on the Titanic, I suppose...
    Goes to show that a politician should keep his eyes open to the possibility of disaster, I suppose.
    The damned trains. At 30 mph, they moved too fast for the poor bastard. Never having seen one, he remained transfixed, not knowing which way to saunter, until it was too late...

    Amazing that the smoking, belching, fire-breathing monsters survived such an opening débâcle...

    He was a former President of the Board of Trade, Secretary for War, and Leader of the House of Commons.
    At 30mph they moved too fast for a lot of people IIRC. Wasn't there something about it being dangerous to the human body to travel at such speeds? Although IIRC horses can do about that!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    RodCrosby said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Didn't Liverpool have the first recorded railway death as well? Although there must hve been earlier accidents with tramways etc.

    The first notable, at any rate.

    Poor old Huskisson. The equivalent of Churchill going down on the Titanic, I suppose...
    Goes to show that a politician should keep his eyes open to the possibility of disaster, I suppose.
    The damned trains. At 30 mph, they moved too fast for the poor bastard. Never having seen one, he remained transfixed, not knowing which way to saunter, until it was too late...

    Amazing that the smoking, belching, fire-breathing monsters survived such an opening débâcle...

    He was a former President of the Board of Trade, Secretary for War, and Leader of the House of Commons.
    At 30mph they moved too fast for a lot of people IIRC. Wasn't there something about it being dangerous to the human body to travel at such speeds? Although IIRC horses can do about that!
    Surely you can move to either side of the tracks well in advanced. I just find it hard to believe they were so transfixed that they literally couldn't move, although I suppose we do live in another era....
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    Only one thing wrong with the CGI. At the relevant time, the Liver Building and others were as black as the hobs of Hell, from soot, and were not cleaned up till the mid-1970s, long after the LOR had gone...

    It amuses me, the constant oohs and aahs over the latest glass abortion to go up in London.
    The Liver Building was the tallest and largest office building in the country, for over 50 years, until Shell Mex went up in London in 1962 - a longevity record, at least, which is unlikely ever to be beaten.

    We still have the largest clocks in the Kingdom, of course, a metre wider than your Big Ben....
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718
    edited January 2016
    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Didn't Liverpool have the first recorded railway death as well? Although there must hve been earlier accidents with tramways etc.

    The first notable, at any rate.

    Poor old Huskisson. The equivalent of Churchill going down on the Titanic, I suppose...
    Goes to show that a politician should keep his eyes open to the possibility of disaster, I suppose.
    The damned trains. At 30 mph, they moved too fast for the poor bastard. Never having seen one, he remained transfixed, not knowing which way to saunter, until it was too late...

    Amazing that the smoking, belching, fire-breathing monsters survived such an opening débâcle...

    He was a former President of the Board of Trade, Secretary for War, and Leader of the House of Commons.
    At 30mph they moved too fast for a lot of people IIRC. Wasn't there something about it being dangerous to the human body to travel at such speeds? Although IIRC horses can do about that!
    Surely you can move to either side of the tracks well in advanced. I just find it hard to believe they were so transfixed that they literally couldn't move, although I suppose we do live in another era....
    No, Rob. Problem was that "those that knew" opined that sitting still and travelling at speed of 30mph, or even more, would cause all sorts of problems, particularly to females, and especially those in a "sensitive condition"

    From a "listening for the beast" perspective, it's much more dangerous now. As a youth I regularly crossed the local railway on an unmanned crossing, just keeping a ear cocked for the sound of the approaching steam train. Can't do that with electric.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Didn't Liverpool have the first recorded railway death as well? Although there must hve been earlier accidents with tramways etc.

    The first notable, at any rate.

    Poor old Huskisson. The equivalent of Churchill going down on the Titanic, I suppose...
    Goes to show that a politician should keep his eyes open to the possibility of disaster, I suppose.
    The damned trains. At 30 mph, they moved too fast for the poor bastard. Never having seen one, he remained transfixed, not knowing which way to saunter, until it was too late...

    Amazing that the smoking, belching, fire-breathing monsters survived such an opening débâcle...

    He was a former President of the Board of Trade, Secretary for War, and Leader of the House of Commons.
    At 30mph they moved too fast for a lot of people IIRC. Wasn't there something about it being dangerous to the human body to travel at such speeds? Although IIRC horses can do about that!
    Surely you can move to either side of the tracks well in advanced. I just find it hard to believe they were so transfixed that they literally couldn't move, although I suppose we do live in another era....
    History doesn't record, but I suppose absinthe might have played a part!
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Didn't Liverpool have the first recorded railway death as well? Although there must hve been earlier accidents with tramways etc.

    The first notable, at any rate.

    Poor old Huskisson. The equivalent of Churchill going down on the Titanic, I suppose...
    Goes to show that a politician should keep his eyes open to the possibility of disaster, I suppose.
    The damned trains. At 30 mph, they moved too fast for the poor bastard. Never having seen one, he remained transfixed, not knowing which way to saunter, until it was too late...

    Amazing that the smoking, belching, fire-breathing monsters survived such an opening débâcle...

    He was a former President of the Board of Trade, Secretary for War, and Leader of the House of Commons.
    At 30mph they moved too fast for a lot of people IIRC. Wasn't there something about it being dangerous to the human body to travel at such speeds? Although IIRC horses can do about that!
    Surely you can move to either side of the tracks well in advanced. I just find it hard to believe they were so transfixed that they literally couldn't move, although I suppose we do live in another era....
    I'm not sure that's right. As far as I can remember, what happened was:

    A series of trains (denoted by colour) were travelling in convoy down one line, stopping periodically to 'inspect' bridges and the like.

    Stephenson was patrolling up and down the other line in the Rocket.

    A bunch of people got down from the wagons in the train carrying Husskinson, Wellington (the PM) and the other VIPs. They were just sitting in altered wagons, not carriages. The locomotives had no meaningful brakes (in fact, did not have such for a few years).

    Husskinson went to talk to Wellington as Stephenson and the Rocket approached on the other line. Shouts warned them of the encroaching Rocket, and they all scrambled either into the wagons, under them, or into the cess on the other side. Husskinson had been ill and clambered half up, holding onto a door. As the Rocket passed, the door swung outwards, crushing his legs. He was taken to a nearby ?farm? as Stephenson rushed to Liverpool to fetch help. Sadly there was little that could be done, and Husskinson died that night.

    From memory; details might be wrong ...

    So it was not a case of being transfixed; just a case of bad luck, poor timing and non-existent safety standards. Oh, and ripe for a conspiracy theory about Wellington's involvement. Except they did not have tinfoil in those days ... ;)
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    notme said:

    FPT:

    EPG said:


    UK is a top holiday country
    England for me particularly in the NW and the central bits around the Bristol-Oxford-Norwich axis (no offence to any others)
    Oh and Scotland and Wales and NI

    Dutch tourists seem to love the UK even more than Brits do, and find their way to bits of the country where the Chinese/Japanese/Indian tourist market hasn't really taken off.

    Incidentally, for a rural/urban split, here are the 30 largest (ceremonial) counties by area, and the biggest 30 cities (ok, technically Primary Urban Areas).

    1 North Yorkshire / London
    2 Lincolnshire / Birmingham
    3 Cumbria / Manchester
    4 Devon / Liverpool
    5 Norfolk / Leeds
    6 Northumberland / Sheffield
    7 Somerset / Teesside
    8 Suffolk / Bristol
    9 Hampshire / Bournemouth and Poole
    10 Kent / Stoke-on-Trent
    11 Essex / Leicester
    12 Cornwall / Wirral
    13 Shropshire / Coventry
    14 Wiltshire / Nottingham
    15 Cambridgeshire / Bradford
    16 Gloucestershire / Newcastle
    17 Lancashire / Bolton
    18 Durham / Brighton and Hove
    19 Staffordshire / Plymouth
    20 Dorset / Hull
    21 Derbyshire / Preston
    22 Oxfordshire / Derby
    23 East Riding of Yorkshire / Aldershot and Farnborough
    24 Northamptonshire / Southampton
    25 Cheshire / Wigan
    26 Herefordshire / Barnsley
    27 Nottinghamshire / Portsmouth
    28 Leicestershire / Luton
    29 West Yorkshire / York
    30 West Sussex / Northampton

    I think it must be very rare to have explored, say, 20 of the top 30 from both lists.

    PUAs 31-50 include places around the size of Milton Keynes, Southend, Ipswich, Reading, Oxford, Blackpool or Norwich, some of which are more worth a visit than places that made it into the top 30.
    I was going to say.. The largest city in the UK is the City of Carlisle.
    Not only have I visited (explored?) all those places bar Barnsley, I've walked in them. I've also visited many of their highest natural points ...
  • They should change their foreign policy.
    International politics
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718

    notme said:

    FPT:

    EPG said:


    UK is a top holiday country
    England for me particularly in the NW and the central bits around the Bristol-Oxford-Norwich axis (no offence to any others)
    Oh and Scotland and Wales and NI

    Dutch tourists seem to love the UK even more than Brits do, and find their way to bits of the country where the Chinese/Japanese/Indian tourist market hasn't really taken off.

    Incidentally, for a rural/urban split, here are the 30 largest (ceremonial) counties by area, and the biggest 30 cities (ok, technically Primary Urban Areas).

    1 North Yorkshire / London
    2 Lincolnshire / Birmingham
    3 Cumbria / Manchester
    4 Devon / Liverpool
    5 Norfolk / Leeds
    6 Northumberland / Sheffield
    7 Somerset / Teesside
    8 Suffolk / Bristol
    9 Hampshire / Bournemouth and Poole
    10 Kent / Stoke-on-Trent
    11 Essex / Leicester
    12 Cornwall / Wirral
    13 Shropshire / Coventry
    14 Wiltshire / Nottingham
    15 Cambridgeshire / Bradford
    16 Gloucestershire / Newcastle
    17 Lancashire / Bolton
    18 Durham / Brighton and Hove
    19 Staffordshire / Plymouth
    20 Dorset / Hull
    21 Derbyshire / Preston
    22 Oxfordshire / Derby
    23 East Riding of Yorkshire / Aldershot and Farnborough
    24 Northamptonshire / Southampton
    25 Cheshire / Wigan
    26 Herefordshire / Barnsley
    27 Nottinghamshire / Portsmouth
    28 Leicestershire / Luton
    29 West Yorkshire / York
    30 West Sussex / Northampton

    I think it must be very rare to have explored, say, 20 of the top 30 from both lists.

    PUAs 31-50 include places around the size of Milton Keynes, Southend, Ipswich, Reading, Oxford, Blackpool or Norwich, some of which are more worth a visit than places that made it into the top 30.
    I was going to say.. The largest city in the UK is the City of Carlisle.
    Not only have I visited (explored?) all those places bar Barnsley, I've walked in them. I've also visited many of their highest natural points ...
    There used to be a traffic policeman in Barnsley with a magnificent handlebar moustache
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    Morning. So is today the day of the big reshuffle, where all those who voted the wrong way in a free vote get to pay the price for excercising their freedom?

    Corbyn had better not interrupt the cricket with his damn reshuffle! *goes and gets two lots of popcorn*
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    edited January 2016

    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Didn't Liverpool have the first recorded railway death as well? Although there must hve been earlier accidents with tramways etc.

    Poor old Huskisson. The equivalent of Churchill going down on the Titanic, I suppose...
    Goes to show that a politician should keep his eyes open to the possibility of disaster, I suppose.

    He was a former President of the Board of Trade, Secretary for War, and Leader of the House of Commons.
    At 30mph they moved too fast for a lot of people IIRC. Wasn't there something about it being dangerous to the human body to travel at such speeds? Although IIRC horses can do about that!
    Surely you can move to either side of the tracks well in advanced. I just find it hard to believe they were so transfixed that they literally couldn't move, although I suppose we do live in another era....
    I'm not sure that's right. As far as I can remember, what happened was:

    A series of trains (denoted by colour) were travelling in convoy down one line, stopping periodically to 'inspect' bridges and the like.

    Stephenson was patrolling up and down the other line in the Rocket.

    Husskinson went to talk to Wellington as Stephenson and the Rocket approached on the other line. Shouts warned them of the encroaching Rocket, and they all scrambled either into the wagons, under them, or into the cess on the other side. Husskinson had been ill and clambered half up, holding onto a door. As the Rocket passed, the door swung outwards, crushing his legs. He was taken to a nearby ?farm? as Stephenson rushed to Liverpool to fetch help. Sadly there was little that could be done, and Husskinson died that night.

    From memory; details might be wrong ...

    So it was not a case of being transfixed; just a case of bad luck, poor timing and non-existent safety standards. Oh, and ripe for a conspiracy theory about Wellington's involvement. Except they did not have tinfoil in those days ... ;)
    A contemporary report.

    http://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/from-the-archive-blog/2011/may/06/newspapers-national-newspapers2

    The clear description is he was "flurried" by the approach of The Rocket.

    Which suggests he was confused or panicked.

    The failure, or swinging, of the door may have been the instant mode of the fatality, but his inability to move with alacrity, despite his companions' ample warnings, suggests some other contributory cause to the accident.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,401
    Mike's analysis is pretty much spot on.

    The only point where I'd diverge slightly is on the option of switching Benn to a different post. In practice, while Home Sec probably ranks below Foreign Sec, in Shadow terms it should be the other way round. There are plenty of opportunities for an opposition spokesman to get stuck into the government on the domestic brief; the foreign one usually just involves technical detail or statesmanlike comment. That Benn ended up agreeing with the government and opposing his own side simply showed him more fit for office than opposition.

    However, while it might be a promotion of sorts to be switched, it would still be a move of weakness for both men. For Corbyn would still have a Bastard in the ranks and not only that: the prime Bastard around whom others were willing to rally. He could lead a revolt against Corbyn just as much from SHS as from SFS. The issue is not the post he's given, it's whether he's in the Shadow Cabinet or not at all. Meanwhile, for Benn, to allow himself to be moved to what most would see as a lesser role (even if it's not), having made a considerable success of his current one would equally be seen as a sign of acquiescence and weakness.

    For both men, if there is to be a reshuffle, it really needs to be all or nothing.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    edited January 2016

    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Didn't Liverpool have the first recorded railway death as well? Although there must hve been earlier accidents with tramways etc.

    The first notable, at any rate.

    Poor old Huskisson. The equivalent of Churchill going down on the Titanic, I suppose...
    Goes to show that a politician should keep his eyes open to the possibility of disaster, I suppose.
    The damned trains. At 30 mph, they moved too fast for the poor bastard. Never having seen one, he remained transfixed, not knowing which way to saunter, until it was too late...

    Amazing that the smoking, belching, fire-breathing monsters survived such an opening débâcle...

    He was a former President of the Board of Trade, Secretary for War, and Leader of the House of Commons.
    At 30mph they moved too fast for a lot of people IIRC. Wasn't there something about it being dangerous to the human body to travel at such speeds? Although IIRC horses can do about that!
    Surely you can move to either side of the tracks well in advanced. I just find it hard to believe they were so transfixed that they literally couldn't move, although I suppose we do live in another era....
    No, Rob. Problem was that "those that knew" opined that sitting still and travelling at speed of 30mph, or even more, would cause all sorts of problems, particularly to females, and especially those in a "sensitive condition"

    From a "listening for the beast" perspective, it's much more dangerous now. As a youth I regularly crossed the local railway on an unmanned crossing, just keeping a ear cocked for the sound of the approaching steam train. Can't do that with electric.
    I'm not sure those views were widely held, Dr Dionysius Lardner and scandal sheets aside.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dionysius_Lardner

    Although there was much more to Lardner than that. I wonder if there's a biography of him somewhere ...

    There were lots of people against the new form of transport who would stoke any fear to delay it (e.g. many of the canal owners, landowners).
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    RodCrosby said:

    A contemporary report.

    http://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/from-the-archive-blog/2011/may/06/newspapers-national-newspapers2

    The clear description is he was "flurried" by the approach of The Rocket.

    Which suggests he was confused or panicked.

    The failure, or swinging, of the door may have been the instant mode of the fatality, but his inability to move with alacrity, despite his companions' ample warnings, suggests some other contributory cause to the accident.

    AIUI there were many witnesses giving varied accounts of the detail of what happened. It's well worth reading "The Last Journey of William Huskisson: How a Day of Triumph Became a Day of Despair at the Turn of a Wheel"

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Last-Journey-William-Huskisson/dp/0571210481

    It's also featured in various biographies of Stephenson, Wellington and others.

    Huskisson and Wellington did not get on. Huskisson left government over ?Retford?, taking the Canningite faction with him. It would have been like a motorcade containing Blair and Brown breaking down on the M1 in 2006, and Brown being hit by a passing lorry. All very suspicious to those of a certain mindset.
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    The Syria debate was the "let a hundred flowers bloom; let a hundred schools of thought contend" stage. next comes the ruthless purge. Then, the mass executions, then the systematisation of the villages (a.k.a. constituency boundary review and deselections).
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718

    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Didn't Liverpool have the first recorded railway death as well? Although there must hve been earlier accidents with tramways etc.

    The first notable, at any rate.

    Poor old Huskisson. The equivalent of Churchill going down on the Titanic, I suppose...
    Goes to show that a politician should keep his eyes open to the possibility of disaster, I suppose.
    The damned trains. At 30 mph, they moved too fast for the poor bastard. Never having seen one, he remained transfixed, not knowing which way to saunter, until it was too late...

    Amazing that the smoking, belching, fire-breathing monsters survived such an opening débâcle...

    He was a former President of the Board of Trade, Secretary for War, and Leader of the House of Commons.
    At 30mph they moved too fast for a lot of people IIRC. Wasn't there something about it being dangerous to the human body to travel at such speeds? Although IIRC horses can do about that!
    Surely you can move to either side of the tracks well in advanced. I just find it hard to believe they were so transfixed that they literally couldn't move, although I suppose we do live in another era....
    No, Rob. Problem was that "those that knew" opined that sitting still and travelling at speed of 30mph, or even more, would cause all sorts of problems, particularly to females, and especially those in a "sensitive condition"

    From a "listening for the beast" perspective, it's much more dangerous now. As a youth I regularly crossed the local railway on an unmanned crossing, just keeping a ear cocked for the sound of the approaching steam train. Can't do that with electric.
    I'm not sure those views were widely held, Dr Dionysius Lardner and scandal sheets aside.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dionysius_Lardner

    Although there was much more to Lardner than that. I wonder if there's a biography of him somewhere ...

    There were lots of people against the new form of transport who would stoke any fear to delay it (e.g. many of the canal owners, landowners).
    Bit like LEAVE, then.

    (Ducks and runs)
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,625

    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Didn't Liverpool have the first recorded railway death as well? Although there must hve been earlier accidents with tramways etc.

    The first notable, at any rate.

    Poor old Huskisson. The equivalent of Churchill going down on the Titanic, I suppose...
    Goes to show that a politician should keep his eyes open to the possibility of disaster, I suppose.
    The damned trains. At 30 mph, they moved too fast for the poor bastard. Never having seen one, he remained transfixed, not knowing which way to saunter, until it was too late...

    Amazing that the smoking, belching, fire-breathing monsters survived such an opening débâcle...

    He was a former President of the Board of Trade, Secretary for War, and Leader of the House of Commons.
    At 30mph they moved too fast for a lot of people IIRC. Wasn't there something about it being dangerous to the human body to travel at such speeds? Although IIRC horses can do about that!
    Surely you can move to either side of the tracks well in advanced. I just find it hard to believe they were so transfixed that they literally couldn't move, although I suppose we do live in another era....
    No, Rob. Problem was that "those that knew" opined that sitting still and travelling at speed of 30mph, or even more, would cause all sorts of problems, particularly to females, and especially those in a "sensitive condition"

    From a "listening for the beast" perspective, it's much more dangerous now. As a youth I regularly crossed the local railway on an unmanned crossing, just keeping a ear cocked for the sound of the approaching steam train. Can't do that with electric.
    I'm not sure those views were widely held, Dr Dionysius Lardner and scandal sheets aside.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dionysius_Lardner

    Although there was much more to Lardner than that. I wonder if there's a biography of him somewhere ...

    There were lots of people against the new form of transport who would stoke any fear to delay it (e.g. many of the canal owners, landowners).
    There is a genuine phenomenon where people have trouble realising the speed of an on coming train - IIRC because the train doesn't move from side to side as it moves forward (as an animal would do) it doesn't trigger the "instinctive" feature of the human brain. You have to know and think about it, as it were. Hence kids on railway lines....

    I reckon this is what got Huskisson.
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    AndyJS said:

    Useless fact: I visited Southend for the first time today, on what is probably their least busy day of the year. Had a go on the pier railway.

    Even more useless fact: I visited Southend about 20 years ago to visit the Cifal (the world leader) of the Volapük movement.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    More to the point, will current Labour MPs take cover from the oncoming train?

    Surely too soon to jump just yet...
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517

    There is a genuine phenomenon where people have trouble realising the speed of an on coming train - IIRC because the train doesn't move from side to side as it moves forward (as an animal would do) it doesn't trigger the "instinctive" feature of the human brain. You have to know and think about it, as it were. Hence kids on railway lines....

    I reckon this is what got Huskisson.

    That might well be part of it. But imagine the scene: you have four or five (I forget how many) trains in a row, each with a steam engine noisily simmering away at the front. The wagons are filled with people taking part in the celebration, yet also annoyed by the delays in the procession, noisily talking. Several people got down as well as Huskisson, whose mind might well have been on the conversation he wanted to have with Wellington. He might not even have seen the oncoming train until very late due to the other people on the track.

    Add in the factor you mention, and the fact people were not used to trains, then it was literally an accident waiting to happen. As indeed many early railways accidents were.

    Wellington's government fell within a month or two. It has been proposed that Huskisson was wanting to talk to Wellington about coming to an accommodation. In which case Earl Grey might not have become PM< and who knows what would have happened to the Great Reform Act.

    The first railway death may have changed more than railway history ...
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,625

    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Didn't Liverpool have the first recorded railway

    Goes to show that a politician should keep his eyes open to the possibility of disaster, I suppose.

    The damned trains. At 30 mph, they moved too fast for the poor bastard. Never having seen one, he remained transfixed, not knowing which way to saunter, until it was too late...

    Amazing that the smoking, belching, fire-breathing monsters survived such an opening débâcle...

    He was a former President of the Board of Trade, Secretary for War, and Leader of the House of Commons.
    At 30mph they moved too fast for a lot of people IIRC. Wasn't there something about it being dangerous to the human body to travel at such speeds? Although IIRC horses can do about that!
    Surely you can move to either side of the tracks well in advanced. I just find it hard to believe they were so transfixed that they literally couldn't move, although I suppose we do live in another era....
    No, Rob. Problem was that "those that knew" opined that sitting still and travelling at speed of 30mph, or even more, would cause all sorts of problems, particularly to females, and especially those in a "sensitive condition"

    From a "listening for the beast" perspective, it's much more dangerous now. As a youth I regularly crossed the local railway on an unmanned crossing, just keeping a ear cocked for the sound of the approaching steam train. Can't do that with electric.
    I'm not sure those views were widely held, Dr Dionysius Lardner and scandal sheets aside.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dionysius_Lardner

    Although there was much more to Lardner than that. I wonder if there's a biography of him somewhere ...

    There were lots of people against the new form of transport who would stoke any fear to delay it (e.g. many of the canal owners, landowners).
    On Lardner - his problem was that he tried to be an expert on things that were totally outside he field of knowledge.

    Reminds me of a Radio 4 program after the Herald of Free Enterprise disaster when a mathematics professor was trying to claim that all RoRo ferries would capsise if they got half an inch of water on the car deck. He was let down very gently by DK Brown (the naval architect) would pointed out he was using the equations he'd found in a basic book on the subject in a completely incorrect manner. When he wibbled further, Brown pointed out that he had written that section of the book (acknowledged by the author in the foreword)....
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517

    On Lardner - his problem was that he tried to be an expert on things that were totally outside he field of knowledge.

    Reminds me of a Radio 4 program after the Herald of Free Enterprise disaster when a mathematics professor was trying to claim that all RoRo ferries would capsise if they got half an inch of water on the car deck. He was let down very gently by DK Brown (the naval architect) would pointed out he was using the equations he'd found in a basic book on the subject in a completely incorrect manner. When he wibbled further, Brown pointed out that he had written that section of the book (acknowledged by the author in the foreword)....

    BTW, thanks for recommending the two books by Knight wrt Warrior. I've bought them, and although I've had a quick flick through, haven't got round to reading them yet. But they look very interesting, and I've already learnt a few things I didn't know. So thanks.

    As for the Herald: I see the 'half-inch' claim regularly, and thought it was true ...
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,625
    JohnLoony said:

    The Syria debate was the "let a hundred flowers bloom; let a hundred schools of thought contend" stage. next comes the ruthless purge. Then, the mass executions, then the systematisation of the villages (a.k.a. constituency boundary review and deselections).

    Grin.

    Yet it is so very true how quickly the emoting left (empathy rather than that cold stuff about balancing budgets) turns to complete rigidity and orthodoxy.

    Has Benn actually been involved in plotting against Corbyn? Has he briefed against him? Or merely been touted as a successor?

    The problem the Labour party has at the moment is a lack of depth of talent. True - this affects the parties as well. The Labour problem seems to come from a series of leaders who (especially Brown) destroyed anything that looked like opposition.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517

    More to the point, will current Labour MPs take cover from the oncoming train?

    Surely too soon to jump just yet...

    Breaking news: Labour have abandoned the Red Flag, and have a new, very apt, replacement:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkOLq17GReg
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    What's the worst that can happen from Jeremy Corbyn's perspective if he reshuffles? He knows that the bulk of the Parliamentary party don't want him or rate him. He calculates that they can't get rid of him so all they can do is squawk. We could expect lots of fierce words. And then what?

    The danger is that it will impair his reputation with the party membership. But the twitterati seem fully onside.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,625

    On Lardner - his problem was that he tried to be an expert on things that were totally outside he field of knowledge.

    Reminds me of a Radio 4 program after the Herald of Free Enterprise disaster when a mathematics professor was trying to claim that all RoRo ferries would capsise if they got half an inch of water on the car deck. He was let down very gently by DK Brown (the naval architect) would pointed out he was using the equations he'd found in a basic book on the subject in a completely incorrect manner. When he wibbled further, Brown pointed out that he had written that section of the book (acknowledged by the author in the foreword)....

    BTW, thanks for recommending the two books by Knight wrt Warrior. I've bought them, and although I've had a quick flick through, haven't got round to reading them yet. But they look very interesting, and I've already learnt a few things I didn't know. So thanks.

    As for the Herald: I see the 'half-inch' claim regularly, and thought it was true ...
    I think it was in Warrior to Dreadnought he mentions in passing in the index on stability the ridiculousness of carrying the approximation to such extremes. It was obviously inspired by that debate.... though he mentioned no names.

    In the later book that covers the second world war he explains the real issue - that for proper safety RoRo vessels should be stable with a vehicle deck open to flooding.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    JohnLoony said:

    The Syria debate was the "let a hundred flowers bloom; let a hundred schools of thought contend" stage. next comes the ruthless purge. Then, the mass executions, then the systematisation of the villages (a.k.a. constituency boundary review and deselections).

    Grin.

    Yet it is so very true how quickly the emoting left (empathy rather than that cold stuff about balancing budgets) turns to complete rigidity and orthodoxy.

    Has Benn actually been involved in plotting against Corbyn? Has he briefed against him? Or merely been touted as a successor?

    The problem the Labour party has at the moment is a lack of depth of talent. True - this affects the parties as well. The Labour problem seems to come from a series of leaders who (especially Brown) destroyed anything that looked like opposition.
    How, when and to whom did Brown do this? Blair axed Robin Cook and Mo Mowlam. Brown had David Miliband, Alan Johnson and James Purnell in the Cabinet.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    More to the point, will current Labour MPs take cover from the oncoming train?

    Surely too soon to jump just yet...

    Breaking news: Labour have abandoned the Red Flag, and have a new, very apt, replacement:
    www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkOLq17GReg

    I am sure that New Labour will be singing this old folk standard:

    http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FHKxk719AMc
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,349
    edited January 2016
    What will Jezza do?

    What are his aims ...

    (1) Firstly, convert labour to a Trotskyite party.
    (2) Secondly, get elected.

    As (1) has precedence, it suggests Benn is dog meat as long as he can do it without too much blow back. As labour is a party of shivering cissies, he may succeed.

    However, I listened to one Labour grandee (Kim Howells) yesterday on R5L and he was amusingly honest.

    As I live near Rainhill, I took the Aussie grandkids round the railway exhibition when they were here. They loved it.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,625

    JohnLoony said:

    The Syria debate was the "let a hundred flowers bloom; let a hundred schools of thought contend" stage. next comes the ruthless purge. Then, the mass executions, then the systematisation of the villages (a.k.a. constituency boundary review and deselections).

    Grin.

    Yet it is so very true how quickly the emoting left (empathy rather than that cold stuff about balancing budgets) turns to complete rigidity and orthodoxy.

    Has Benn actually been involved in plotting against Corbyn? Has he briefed against him? Or merely been touted as a successor?

    The problem the Labour party has at the moment is a lack of depth of talent. True - this affects the parties as well. The Labour problem seems to come from a series of leaders who (especially Brown) destroyed anything that looked like opposition.
    How, when and to whom did Brown do this? Blair axed Robin Cook and Mo Mowlam. Brown had David Miliband, Alan Johnson and James Purnell in the Cabinet.
    Brown became infamous under Blair for destroying anyone who he saw as possible opposition to his hoped for coronation. Damien McBride got his reputation for trashing people inside the Labour party (at his masters biding) long before he turned his stupidity externally.

    Milliband, *Johnson*, Purnell - those are your big beasts? LOL. If that was all that Brown could tolerate....
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    edited January 2016
    We were talking about leadership qualities last night.

    @Tom and, of course, @Cyclefree explained very well the necessary qualities, involving, mainly, the ability to lead.

    NPXMPX2 believes that a leader should be a nice bloke.

    Let Jezza lead here, let him clear out those who don't agree with him and create a party in his own image. It is, after all, what those few hundred thousand members want. Cons may not like the look of the new shadow cabinet but we would respect the fact (and only that fact) that he has the guts to lead.
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    Since he was elected I've said on here that Corbyn has no desire to be PM, it's all an ego trip for him. We'll see if I'm right in the next 6 months by the team he builds around him. Does he surround himself with pals to indulge him or does fill his cabinet with bruisers and create some sort of credible opposition.

    He owes it to everybody to oppose this govt, they're really not much cop but are getting a very easy ride as Corbyn sails along seemingly oblivious to what his role as leader of the opposition entails.

    No idea who advises him or indeed if he looks for it, but he's making a pigs ear of a once in a lifetime opportunity.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    JohnLoony said:

    AndyJS said:

    Useless fact: I visited Southend for the first time today, on what is probably their least busy day of the year. Had a go on the pier railway.

    Even more useless fact: I visited Southend about 20 years ago to visit the Cifal (the world leader) of the Volapük movement.
    The what now?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Good morning, everyone.

    Benn might go for Home Secretary. Depends whether he views it as weakness or a sideways move, compromise between intransigence and outright rebellion.

    It would be a sign of weakness, of course.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718
    kle4 said:

    JohnLoony said:

    AndyJS said:

    Useless fact: I visited Southend for the first time today, on what is probably their least busy day of the year. Had a go on the pier railway.

    Even more useless fact: I visited Southend about 20 years ago to visit the Cifal (the world leader) of the Volapük movement.
    The what now?
    Never really took off, did it?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517

    Since he was elected I've said on here that Corbyn has no desire to be PM, it's all an ego trip for him. We'll see if I'm right in the next 6 months by the team he builds around him. Does he surround himself with pals to indulge him or does fill his cabinet with bruisers and create some sort of credible opposition.

    He owes it to everybody to oppose this govt, they're really not much cop but are getting a very easy ride as Corbyn sails along seemingly oblivious to what his role as leader of the opposition entails.

    No idea who advises him or indeed if he looks for it, but he's making a pigs ear of a once in a lifetime opportunity.

    Corbyn and the others around him seem to think that if they build a party that meets their long-held philosophy, the voting public will flock to it. Think Kevin Costner in Field of Dreams.

    I doubt he's interested in surrounding himself with bruisers: he's more interested in ideological purity. That does not mean he hypocritically will not discipline or ban bruisers who attack people inside his own party. There are plenty of useful idiots.

    Corbyn thinks he's nice. On a personal level that might be true. On a political level it's as far from the truth as you can get.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Sweden's introduced border controls with Denmark:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35218921

    After letting bloody everyone in, they've now swung the other way. I wonder if the fourth series of The Bridge will involve a tense case revolving around a man who commutes from Denmark to Sweden for work.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    On topic: where did all this "revenge reshuffle" talk come from anyway? It clearly doesn't help Corbyn overall, since if he decides not to reshuffle then he will look weak. So why talk it up and raise the stakes in the first place? Or was most of the talking up by people trying to pre-empt it?

    One of the whips sent a (now deleted) Tweet, thus proving Dave's maxim once again...
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    The government's now in the housebuilding game:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35217418

    Still, at least it means Northstowe might finally get started after more than twelve years ...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northstowe
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    RE the Eaton tweet. why would anyone believe a single word emanating from Burnham. If Burnham said good morning, I'd check to see if it really was.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718
    edited January 2016

    The government's now in the housebuilding game:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35217418

    Still, at least it means Northstowe might finally get started after more than twelve years ...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northstowe

    It's in the list quoted by the BBC. Whether, of course, it'll been as "green" as originally envisaged.......

    Local government used to do a lot of that sort of thing ....... build houses ..... of course!
    Why did they stop?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    The government's now in the housebuilding game:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35217418

    Still, at least it means Northstowe might finally get started after more than twelve years ...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northstowe

    It's in the list quoted by the BBC. Whether, of course, it'll been as "green" as originally envisaged.......

    Local government used to do a lot of that sort of thing ....... build houses ..... of course!
    Why did they stop?
    Because the housing they built was of appalling quality and universally despised?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718

    The government's now in the housebuilding game:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35217418

    Still, at least it means Northstowe might finally get started after more than twelve years ...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northstowe

    It's in the list quoted by the BBC. Whether, of course, it'll been as "green" as originally envisaged.......

    Local government used to do a lot of that sort of thing ....... build houses ..... of course!
    Why did they stop?
    Because the housing they built was of appalling quality and universally despised?
    Generally speaking untrue.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517

    The government's now in the housebuilding game:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35217418

    Still, at least it means Northstowe might finally get started after more than twelve years ...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northstowe

    It's in the list quoted by the BBC. Whether, of course, it'll been as "green" as originally envisaged.......

    Local government used to do a lot of that sort of thing ....... build houses ..... of course!
    Why did they stop?
    Because the housing they built was of appalling quality and universally despised?
    Generally speaking untrue.
    Before my time, but my impression is that the problem with much of the post-war housing stock is not the building quality per se (some appalling examples excepted). The problem was the philosophies that lay behind large-scale building, particularly in the 60s and 70s.

    As I keep on saying: you need to build communities, not homes. And that costs much more.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,401

    Since he was elected I've said on here that Corbyn has no desire to be PM, it's all an ego trip for him. We'll see if I'm right in the next 6 months by the team he builds around him. Does he surround himself with pals to indulge him or does fill his cabinet with bruisers and create some sort of credible opposition.

    He owes it to everybody to oppose this govt, they're really not much cop but are getting a very easy ride as Corbyn sails along seemingly oblivious to what his role as leader of the opposition entails.

    No idea who advises him or indeed if he looks for it, but he's making a pigs ear of a once in a lifetime opportunity.

    Are we surprised? He's like a football fan who having spouted his opinion from the terraces for years has suddenly and somehow, via a boardroom brainstorm, become manager of the club. It's not quite as easy a job as it might appear from the sidelines.
  • flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903
    I came here intending to post on the Times story, but now its being denied. Now of course they will both look foolish if it actually happens.
    It would indeed be the most absurd notion in the history of reshuffles. Labour have got themselves into a stupid 'damned if they do damned if they don't' position.
    I believe the other name this is known by is 'incompetence'.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,401

    JohnLoony said:

    The Syria debate was the "let a hundred flowers bloom; let a hundred schools of thought contend" stage. next comes the ruthless purge. Then, the mass executions, then the systematisation of the villages (a.k.a. constituency boundary review and deselections).

    Grin.

    Yet it is so very true how quickly the emoting left (empathy rather than that cold stuff about balancing budgets) turns to complete rigidity and orthodoxy.

    Has Benn actually been involved in plotting against Corbyn? Has he briefed against him? Or merely been touted as a successor?

    The problem the Labour party has at the moment is a lack of depth of talent. True - this affects the parties as well. The Labour problem seems to come from a series of leaders who (especially Brown) destroyed anything that looked like opposition.
    How, when and to whom did Brown do this? Blair axed Robin Cook and Mo Mowlam. Brown had David Miliband, Alan Johnson and James Purnell in the Cabinet.
    Cook resigned; he wasn't sacked. Mowlam was moved sideways from N Ireland but that was a justified move given that her relationship with Unionists was pretty poor by that point; she remained in the Cabinet until she left parliament in a move that was in no small part health-related.

    Brown, by contrast, was implicated in briefings by his allies and colleagues specifically designed to undermine people who might pose a challenge to him. It's too long ago for me to remember the details but I'm pretty sure that the general memory is right.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540

    The government's now in the housebuilding game:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35217418

    Still, at least it means Northstowe might finally get started after more than twelve years ...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northstowe

    It's in the list quoted by the BBC. Whether, of course, it'll been as "green" as originally envisaged.......

    Local government used to do a lot of that sort of thing ....... build houses ..... of course!
    Why did they stop?
    Because the housing they built was of appalling quality and universally despised?
    Generally speaking untrue.
    Before my time, but my impression is that the problem with much of the post-war housing stock is not the building quality per se (some appalling examples excepted). The problem was the philosophies that lay behind large-scale building, particularly in the 60s and 70s.

    As I keep on saying: you need to build communities, not homes. And that costs much more.

    The government's now in the housebuilding game:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35217418

    Still, at least it means Northstowe might finally get started after more than twelve years ...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northstowe

    It's in the list quoted by the BBC. Whether, of course, it'll been as "green" as originally envisaged.......

    Local government used to do a lot of that sort of thing ....... build houses ..... of course!
    Why did they stop?
    Because the housing they built was of appalling quality and universally despised?
    Generally speaking untrue.
    Before my time, but my impression is that the problem with much of the post-war housing stock is not the building quality per se (some appalling examples excepted). The problem was the philosophies that lay behind large-scale building, particularly in the 60s and 70s.

    As I keep on saying: you need to build communities, not homes. And that costs much more.
    As someone who grew up on a 'Housing Scheme' in Scotland the quality - even within one development - could vary enormously - to the solid three bedroom terraced houses (in blocks of 4) we were lucky to be housed in - half a century on, still doing fine - to the tenements which were in trouble from the get go. Much Scottish Local Authority housing stock is of good quality - but some big schemes atrocious.....
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    The government's now in the housebuilding game:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35217418

    Still, at least it means Northstowe might finally get started after more than twelve years ...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northstowe

    Nothing in the Northern Powerhouse. Maybe they are waiting till it dries out.
  • dugarbandierdugarbandier Posts: 2,596

    Since he was elected I've said on here that Corbyn has no desire to be PM, it's all an ego trip for him. We'll see if I'm right in the next 6 months by the team he builds around him. Does he surround himself with pals to indulge him or does fill his cabinet with bruisers and create some sort of credible opposition.

    He owes it to everybody to oppose this govt, they're really not much cop but are getting a very easy ride as Corbyn sails along seemingly oblivious to what his role as leader of the opposition entails.

    No idea who advises him or indeed if he looks for it, but he's making a pigs ear of a once in a lifetime opportunity.

    Are we surprised? He's like a football fan who having spouted his opinion from the terraces for years has suddenly and somehow, via a boardroom brainstorm, become manager of the club. It's not quite as easy a job as it might appear from the sidelines.
    Garry Monk
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,969
    edited January 2016
    Emily Thornberry, Diane Abbott or Flip Flop Burnham as Shadow Foreign Secretary and the Tories should be worried.

    Jez has a mahoosive mandate, he can do what he pleases, the faithful still think he is like the pre-WW2 Emperor of Japan.

    May might be a wake up call for them or it might not be. I suspect an electoral Hiroshima and Nagasaki is needed not a Guadalcanal or Midway.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718
    edited January 2016

    The government's now in the housebuilding game:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35217418

    Still, at least it means Northstowe might finally get started after more than twelve years ...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northstowe

    It's in the list quoted by the BBC. Whether, of course, it'll been as "green" as originally envisaged.......

    Local government used to do a lot of that sort of thing ....... build houses ..... of course!
    Why did they stop?
    Because the housing they built was of appalling quality and universally despised?
    Generally speaking untrue.
    Before my time, but my impression is that the problem with much of the post-war housing stock is not the building quality per se (some appalling examples excepted). The problem was the philosophies that lay behind large-scale building, particularly in the 60s and 70s.

    As I keep on saying: you need to build communities, not homes. And that costs much more.
    I'd agree with that Mr J. Some of the very big estates with no services ....... shops, pubs etc ,,,,, were bad, as were some (not all) of the high rise developments. Smaller estates, with community services, such as shops, schools, GP surgeries etc were fine, and as you say, developed good community spirit. People knock, for example, Basildon, but, particularly among the early "settlers" there was a fierce pride in what they were participating in. Harlow too, which was a series of "neighbourhoods" linked by good public bus services to the centre did and still does, well.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    edited January 2016

    The government's now in the housebuilding game:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35217418

    Still, at least it means Northstowe might finally get started after more than twelve years ...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northstowe

    Nothing in the Northern Powerhouse. Maybe they are waiting till it dries out.
    I would have thought that a supporter of the party which had the insane 'Pathfinder' scheme as its flagship policy for housing would be a bit more quiescent about housing in the north ...
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    JohnLoony said:

    The Syria debate was the "let a hundred flowers bloom; let a hundred schools of thought contend" stage. next comes the ruthless purge. Then, the mass executions, then the systematisation of the villages (a.k.a. constituency boundary review and deselections).

    Grin.

    Yet it is so very true how quickly the emoting left (empathy rather than that cold stuff about balancing budgets) turns to complete rigidity and orthodoxy.

    Has Benn actually been involved in plotting against Corbyn? Has he briefed against him? Or merely been touted as a successor?

    The problem the Labour party has at the moment is a lack of depth of talent. True - this affects the parties as well. The Labour problem seems to come from a series of leaders who (especially Brown) destroyed anything that looked like opposition.
    How, when and to whom did Brown do this? Blair axed Robin Cook and Mo Mowlam. Brown had David Miliband, Alan Johnson and James Purnell in the Cabinet.
    Cook resigned; he wasn't sacked. Mowlam was moved sideways from N Ireland but that was a justified move given that her relationship with Unionists was pretty poor by that point; she remained in the Cabinet until she left parliament in a move that was in no small part health-related.

    Brown, by contrast, was implicated in briefings by his allies and colleagues specifically designed to undermine people who might pose a challenge to him. It's too long ago for me to remember the details but I'm pretty sure that the general memory is right.
    Mowlam's move was (alleged at the time) either to make room for Mandelson or for daring to get a bigger ovation than Blair. Cook was demoted from Foreign Secretary.
  • flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903

    The government's now in the housebuilding game:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35217418

    Still, at least it means Northstowe might finally get started after more than twelve years ...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northstowe

    It's in the list quoted by the BBC. Whether, of course, it'll been as "green" as originally envisaged.......

    Local government used to do a lot of that sort of thing ....... build houses ..... of course!
    Why did they stop?
    Because the housing they built was of appalling quality and universally despised?
    The houses were OK in fact - often better than spec built housing, but often the estates were not. I think the other issue was that of councils maintaining these houses and the application of market rents which covered the costs. In a related subject we also had the generally somewhat scandalous workings of council direct works departments.
    As it is we have housing associations, separate from local government, who provide rental accommodation.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited January 2016
    "Migrant crisis: Sweden border checks come into force

    Sweden has introduced identity checks for travellers from Denmark in an attempt to reduce the number of migrants arriving in the country.
    All travellers wanting to cross the Oresund bridge by train or bus, or use ferry services, will be refused entry without the necessary documents."


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35218921
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540

    The government's now in the housebuilding game:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35217418

    Still, at least it means Northstowe might finally get started after more than twelve years ...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northstowe

    Nothing in the Northern Powerhouse. Maybe they are waiting till it dries out.
    Surely the point of the Northern Power House is to get local councils to do stuff not central government?
  • ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    RodCrosby said:

    Only one thing wrong with the CGI. At the relevant time, the Liver Building and others were as black as the hobs of Hell, from soot, and were not cleaned up till the mid-1970s, long after the LOR had gone...

    It amuses me, the constant oohs and aahs over the latest glass abortion to go up in London.
    The Liver Building was the tallest and largest office building in the country, for over 50 years, until Shell Mex went up in London in 1962 - a longevity record, at least, which is unlikely ever to be beaten.

    We still have the largest clocks in the Kingdom, of course, a metre wider than your Big Ben....

    And the largest proportion of obnoxious people with an overblown sense of self-importance.
  • flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903

    The government's now in the housebuilding game:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35217418

    Still, at least it means Northstowe might finally get started after more than twelve years ...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northstowe

    It's in the list quoted by the BBC. Whether, of course, it'll been as "green" as originally envisaged.......

    Local government used to do a lot of that sort of thing ....... build houses ..... of course!
    Why did they stop?
    Because the housing they built was of appalling quality and universally despised?
    Generally speaking untrue.
    Before my time, but my impression is that the problem with much of the post-war housing stock is not the building quality per se (some appalling examples excepted). The problem was the philosophies that lay behind large-scale building, particularly in the 60s and 70s.

    As I keep on saying: you need to build communities, not homes. And that costs much more.
    The worst examples were not 'houses' as such but 'flats' both high rise and deck access. The problems in all the regeneration work lay with the planners not really the builders. I suppose you could blame architects as well - there were some severe problems with system built properties - but strictly I think it was the planners. Some of this accommodation has been modernised but there are some classic examples of whole estates being blown up, and rebuilt.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,921
    Torsten Bell actually sounds a bit like Ed Miliband - especially with 'you know'.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,401

    Emily Thornberry, Diane Abbott or Flip Flop Burnham as Shadow Foreign Secretary and the Tories should be worried.

    Jez has a mahoosive mandate, he can do what he pleases, the faithful still think he is like the pre-WW2 Emperor of Japan.

    May might be a wake up call for them or it might not be. I suspect an electoral Hiroshima and Nagasaki is needed not a Guadalcanal or Midway.

    The electoral results have developed not necessarily to our advantage?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    The government's now in the housebuilding game:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35217418

    Still, at least it means Northstowe might finally get started after more than twelve years ...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northstowe

    Nothing in the Northern Powerhouse. Maybe they are waiting till it dries out.
    Surely the point of the Northern Power House is to get local councils to do stuff not central government?
    HMG is to build houses in six places, all in the south. There are councils in the south. There are places to build houses in the north.
  • Mortimer said:

    Torsten Bell actually sounds a bit like Ed Miliband - especially with 'you know'.

    The architect of the Edstone. A true genius.
  • WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838

    Since he was elected I've said on here that Corbyn has no desire to be PM, it's all an ego trip for him. We'll see if I'm right in the next 6 months by the team he builds around him. Does he surround himself with pals to indulge him or does fill his cabinet with bruisers and create some sort of credible opposition.

    He owes it to everybody to oppose this govt, they're really not much cop but are getting a very easy ride as Corbyn sails along seemingly oblivious to what his role as leader of the opposition entails.

    No idea who advises him or indeed if he looks for it, but he's making a pigs ear of a once in a lifetime opportunity.

    Are we surprised? He's like a football fan who having spouted his opinion from the terraces for years has suddenly and somehow, via a boardroom brainstorm, become manager of the club. It's not quite as easy a job as it might appear from the sidelines.
    Ha. Janan Ganesh did say that making him leader was like Arsenal replacing Wenger with Gunnersaurus.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,401

    JohnLoony said:

    The Syria debate was the "let a hundred flowers bloom; let a hundred schools of thought contend" stage. next comes the ruthless purge. Then, the mass executions, then the systematisation of the villages (a.k.a. constituency boundary review and deselections).

    Grin.

    Yet it is so very true how quickly the emoting left (empathy rather than that cold stuff about balancing budgets) turns to complete rigidity and orthodoxy.

    Has Benn actually been involved in plotting against Corbyn? Has he briefed against him? Or merely been touted as a successor?

    The problem the Labour party has at the moment is a lack of depth of talent. True - this affects the parties as well. The Labour problem seems to come from a series of leaders who (especially Brown) destroyed anything that looked like opposition.
    How, when and to whom did Brown do this? Blair axed Robin Cook and Mo Mowlam. Brown had David Miliband, Alan Johnson and James Purnell in the Cabinet.
    Cook resigned; he wasn't sacked. Mowlam was moved sideways from N Ireland but that was a justified move given that her relationship with Unionists was pretty poor by that point; she remained in the Cabinet until she left parliament in a move that was in no small part health-related.

    Brown, by contrast, was implicated in briefings by his allies and colleagues specifically designed to undermine people who might pose a challenge to him. It's too long ago for me to remember the details but I'm pretty sure that the general memory is right.
    Mowlam's move was (alleged at the time) either to make room for Mandelson or for daring to get a bigger ovation than Blair. Cook was demoted from Foreign Secretary.
    Both true, though as I said, Mowlam's move away from NI was justified in the context of the time, though her sidelining wasn't. Cook didn't really make a success of Foreign Sec and was much more suited to Leader of the House - but it was a demotion. All the same, he kept them both in the cabinet until they chose to leave.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517

    The government's now in the housebuilding game:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35217418

    Still, at least it means Northstowe might finally get started after more than twelve years ...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northstowe

    It's in the list quoted by the BBC. Whether, of course, it'll been as "green" as originally envisaged.......

    Local government used to do a lot of that sort of thing ....... build houses ..... of course!
    Why did they stop?
    Because the housing they built was of appalling quality and universally despised?
    Generally speaking untrue.
    Before my time, but my impression is that the problem with much of the post-war housing stock is not the building quality per se (some appalling examples excepted). The problem was the philosophies that lay behind large-scale building, particularly in the 60s and 70s.

    As I keep on saying: you need to build communities, not homes. And that costs much more.
    I'd agree with that Mr J. Some of the very big estates with no services ....... shops, pubs etc ,,,,, were bad, as were some (not all) of the high rise developments. Smaller estates, with community services, such as shops, schools, GP surgeries etc were fine, and as you say, developed good community spirit. People knock, for example, Basildon, but, particularly among the early "settlers" there was a fierce pride in what they were participating in. Harlow too, which was a series of "neighbourhoods" linked by good public bus services to the centre did and still does, well.
    It's all about the design of the communities. My village (designed in the mid-1990s, with construction ongoing) had several design decisions that have served it well. Firstly, it was split into three 'villages', each separated by green space / parks and lakes. Any woodland that was on the land was kept, and the housing built around it. Few roads are straight, keeping traffic speeds down. There is only one link road between the villages, situated at the hub of the village where there are shops and a supermarket. There is a green walkway around the entire village that gives joggers a lovely route. Many roads have cycle paths alongside them.

    It's not perfect, but it's far better than the post-war developments I'd lived in immediately before (e.g. in North Baddesley, Romsey, and Great Shelford). Most of the problems are due to implementation rather than design.

    Sadly, they appear to be forgetting some of these lessons with Northstowe, mainly because they are expensive.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540

    RodCrosby said:

    Only one thing wrong with the CGI. At the relevant time, the Liver Building and others were as black as the hobs of Hell, from soot, and were not cleaned up till the mid-1970s, long after the LOR had gone...

    It amuses me, the constant oohs and aahs over the latest glass abortion to go up in London.
    The Liver Building was the tallest and largest office building in the country, for over 50 years, until Shell Mex went up in London in 1962 - a longevity record, at least, which is unlikely ever to be beaten.

    We still have the largest clocks in the Kingdom, of course, a metre wider than your Big Ben....

    And the largest proportion of obnoxious people with an overblown sense of self-importance.
    It is one of the riddles how nearby Manchester- confronted with similar challenges appears to have made so much a better fist of reinventing itself.....
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718
    edited January 2016

    The government's now in the housebuilding game:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35217418

    Still, at least it means Northstowe might finally get started after more than twelve years ...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northstowe

    It's in the list quoted by the BBC. Whether, of course, it'll been as "green" as originally envisaged.......

    Local government used to do a lot of that sort of thing ....... build houses ..... of course!
    Why did they stop?
    Because the housing they built was of appalling quality and universally despised?
    Generally speaking untrue.
    Before my time, but my impression is that the problem with much of the post-war housing stock is not the building quality per se (some appalling examples excepted). The problem was the philosophies that lay behind large-scale building, particularly in the 60s and 70s.

    As I keep on saying: you need to build communities, not homes. And that costs much more.
    The worst examples were not 'houses' as such but 'flats' both high rise and deck access. The problems in all the regeneration work lay with the planners not really the builders. I suppose you could blame architects as well - there were some severe problems with system built properties - but strictly I think it was the planners. Some of this accommodation has been modernised but there are some classic examples of whole estates being blown up, and rebuilt.
    Having lived in and worked across Essex for many years I'd say that was a fair summary. There are too some big private developments with zilch services; we moved off one for a smaller house but a much better quality of life. However near us now is a fairly big private estate with NOTHING; no shop, no pub, no school, and the exit is onto one of the busiest and most congested roads in the County.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,969
    edited January 2016

    Emily Thornberry, Diane Abbott or Flip Flop Burnham as Shadow Foreign Secretary and the Tories should be worried.

    Jez has a mahoosive mandate, he can do what he pleases, the faithful still think he is like the pre-WW2 Emperor of Japan.

    May might be a wake up call for them or it might not be. I suspect an electoral Hiroshima and Nagasaki is needed not a Guadalcanal or Midway.

    The electoral results have developed not necessarily to our advantage?
    Indeed and they are going to have to keep enduring the unendurable when the realise that like Hirohito, Corbyn isn't divine.
  • flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903

    JohnLoony said:

    The Syria debate was the "let a hundred flowers bloom; let a hundred schools of thought contend" stage. next comes the ruthless purge. Then, the mass executions, then the systematisation of the villages (a.k.a. constituency boundary review and deselections).

    Grin.

    Yet it is so very true how quickly the emoting left (empathy rather than that cold stuff about balancing budgets) turns to complete rigidity and orthodoxy.

    Has Benn actually been involved in plotting against Corbyn? Has he briefed against him? Or merely been touted as a successor?

    The problem the Labour party has at the moment is a lack of depth of talent. True - this affects the parties as well. The Labour problem seems to come from a series of leaders who (especially Brown) destroyed anything that looked like opposition.
    How, when and to whom did Brown do this? Blair axed Robin Cook and Mo Mowlam. Brown had David Miliband, Alan Johnson and James Purnell in the Cabinet.
    Brown became infamous under Blair for destroying anyone who he saw as possible opposition to his hoped for coronation. Damien McBride got his reputation for trashing people inside the Labour party (at his masters biding) long before he turned his stupidity externally.

    Milliband, *Johnson*, Purnell - those are your big beasts? LOL. If that was all that Brown could tolerate....
    Robin Cook resigned didn't he? Blair did shift him from Foreign Sec, but he was lets face it useless at that. And this was in govt where if you do not perform you can expect to be shuffled.
    McBride's book tells of various plots against rivals (eg Reid) and even Cherie Blair as part of his war with Blair.
  • WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838


    May might be a wake up call for them or it might not be. I suspect an electoral Hiroshima and Nagasaki is needed not a Guadalcanal or Midway.

    Yes, and the sooner the better.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    King Cole, it's also an issue with expanding current villages/towns.

    If there's no parking, but old shops and brownfield area get made into houses, streets become clogged. If there are no more schools, they become overcrowded. Building on fields mean fewer places for dogs to be walked off-street, and more muck on the pavements.

    As an aside, the most interesting geography lesson I had (not that this was a competitive field...) was when we were given graph paper which had a river drawn on it. Using a set of step-by-step guidelines, we had to colour in a few squares at a time to show where we'd build, then expand, a settlement through time. Problems with new ships being too large to go a long way upstream, or the risk of flooding etc, made it quite interesting, as did the variety of settlement layouts that came about.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Eagles, you're assuming they will realise that.

    They may simply decide the electorate are heretics.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718

    King Cole, it's also an issue with expanding current villages/towns.

    If there's no parking, but old shops and brownfield area get made into houses, streets become clogged. If there are no more schools, they become overcrowded. Building on fields mean fewer places for dogs to be walked off-street, and more muck on the pavements.

    As an aside, the most interesting geography lesson I had (not that this was a competitive field...) was when we were given graph paper which had a river drawn on it. Using a set of step-by-step guidelines, we had to colour in a few squares at a time to show where we'd build, then expand, a settlement through time. Problems with new ships being too large to go a long way upstream, or the risk of flooding etc, made it quite interesting, as did the variety of settlement layouts that came about.

    Indeed, Mr Dancer. "Expanding" towns by simply building satellite estates is a fairly quick way to hell.

    I do think, though that you were, for a brief period at least, incredibly lucky in your geography teacher!
  • weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820

    The government's now in the housebuilding game:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35217418

    Still, at least it means Northstowe might finally get started after more than twelve years ...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northstowe

    Nothing in the Northern Powerhouse. Maybe they are waiting till it dries out.
    Surely the point of the Northern Power House is to get local councils to do stuff not central government?
    HMG is to build houses in six places, all in the south. There are councils in the south. There are places to build houses in the north.
    One good drought is all that is needed.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    King Cole, I wasn't, trust me. That was the briefest good lesson amid years of woe.

    During a Key Skills [a short-lived Labour nonsense] 'lesson' I asked the same chap a very simple question and got talked at for literally 40 minutes. The pupils sat ahead of me kept looking back and smirking as I answered in the most bland/disinterested way possible and the bloody man kept on talking.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    I came here intending to post on the Times story, but now its being denied. Now of course they will both look foolish if it actually happens.
    It would indeed be the most absurd notion in the history of reshuffles. Labour have got themselves into a stupid 'damned if they do damned if they don't' position.
    I believe the other name this is known by is 'incompetence'.

    Allowing the job swap would be a climbdown for the leadership, but there is a suspicion in the party that the harshest briefings on the reshuffle had little to do with Corbyn, and came while he was incommunicado in Malta over Christmas. This briefing to the Independent, in which Benn’s sacking was mooted along with a purge of Blairite ‘serial losers’, is widely believed to have come from Corbyn’s director of communications, Seumas Milne. Party figures suggest that the briefing seems to have calmed down since the leader returned from his holiday. Corbyn and his staff know that they cannot look weak by allowing those who appear disloyal to continue in place, but they also cannot look ludicrous by sacking everyone with experience and replacing them with chums who agree with the Labour leader.
    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/01/how-far-can-jeremy-corbyn-go-in-his-reshuffle/
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    Emily Thornberry, Diane Abbott or Flip Flop Burnham as Shadow Foreign Secretary and the Tories should be worried.

    Jez has a mahoosive mandate, he can do what he pleases, the faithful still think he is like the pre-WW2 Emperor of Japan.

    May might be a wake up call for them or it might not be. I suspect an electoral Hiroshima and Nagasaki is needed not a Guadalcanal or Midway.

    The electoral results have developed not necessarily to our advantage?
    LOL, but they won't see that there's a problem, given they rate ideological purity above electability at this stage. They appear to think that they will be able to persuade the people of their awesomeness given enough time.
This discussion has been closed.