Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Big message from #Traingate: Virgin/Branson don’t think C

SystemSystem Posts: 11,683
edited August 2016 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Big message from #Traingate: Virgin/Branson don’t think Corbyn’s got a remote chance of ever making it to Number 10

Ed Miliband fmr advisor Matt Lazo: "If Virgin thought Labour was going to win & took Labour seriously, they wouldn't have released this"

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • Options
    JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    All of this proves that Jeremy Corbyn is a decadent reactionary lickspittle of the American imperialists, Soviet revisionists, renegade Titoite cliques, a cynicalist, opportunist, obscurantist, debauched traitor who is plotting against the people's power. He has earned the enduring contempt and ridicule of the vast majority of ordinary normal decent proletarian workers, peasants, soldiers, students, revolutionary intellectuals and petty-bourgeois commuter class.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750

    JohnLoony said:

    Mulholland Drive? I don't think I've ever even heard of it. What's it about? (I only want the premise, not the actualité; if it sounds good enough I might go and buy the DVD).

    I once heard a film review programme on the radio where the idiotic studio guest kept on saying "prim-EYES" instead of "PREM-iss".

    You can't really describe the plot in a few words. If we told you what it is was about it would spoil it....And ultimately, its a David Lynch film, its about what you make it to be about.

    PS...It is a very good movie. That and Lost Highway are my favourite of his movies.
    Cannot really describe the plot and is about what you make it to be about? So it is confirmed to be self indulgent clap trap then.
    JohnLoony said:

    All of this proves that Jeremy Corbyn is a decadent reactionary lickspittle of the American imperialists, Soviet revisionists, renegade Titoite cliques, a cynicalist, opportunist, obscurantist, debauched traitor who is plotting against the people's power. He has earned the enduring contempt and ridicule of the vast majority of ordinary normal decent proletarian workers, peasants, soldiers, students, revolutionary intellectuals and petty-bourgeois commuter class.

    He must have been busy to be a lickspittle of so many.

    I predict we'll be moving into the next phase fight back on this story, where Corbyn defenders start mocking how the story has no impact upon polling etc, even though almost no one will even have claimed it would, acting as though those mocking him thought this alone would topple him.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750
    edited August 2016
    Smith is talking about blocking Brexit again I see, so that should stop people talking about this train story. I'd say that was an error, taking the focus off Corbyn at best showing himself not to be above spinning like a normal politician, but I guess it is not as though such a story had much further to run even in silly season, and smith still needs to win votes not just undermine Corbyn support, and going for the much more remain labour selectorate is necessary.

    Though curiously, like the Isis remarks, it's one area I expect most Tories will feel Corbyn once again comes across as more sensible. Until any bad effects become much more incontestable and immediate, I don't know that among the wider remain backers there is any desire to push for EuroRef 2, this time get it right. And we know how leave supporters including labour ones will react.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37167253
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,150
    I don't know how much of the Labour vote is unaligned but I think this is very bad: Corbyn's whole brand is that he's genuine and unspun. This pulls the wings off that butterfly, and he looks ridiculous to boot.
  • Options
    I posted my thoughts about Mulholland Drive on the last thread. Will not disturbe your reposts here.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Mike .... Headline reads "though" instead of "thought".

    Beautiful sunrise this morning .. :smile:
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    National - IPSOS/Reuters

    Clinton 45 .. Trump 33

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-poll-idUSKCN10Y28J
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    I have to say this was a great piece of "tokenism" by Jez.

    Meanwhile I can't find anywhere to sit down on this thread despite there being only a handful of comments so I'll move through to the next thread and probably end up sitting in the archives.
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    JohnLoony said:

    All of this proves that Jeremy Corbyn is a decadent reactionary lickspittle of the American imperialists, Soviet revisionists, renegade Titoite cliques, a cynicalist, opportunist, obscurantist, debauched traitor who is plotting against the people's power. He has earned the enduring contempt and ridicule of the vast majority of ordinary normal decent proletarian workers, peasants, soldiers, students, revolutionary intellectuals and petty-bourgeois commuter class.

    Sooooo......put you down as a "maybe" then.........
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    SkyNews
    Jeremy Corbyn is to pledge cash for "patients not contractors" as he sets out plans to "renationalise" the NHS https://t.co/3VunPd1bYG
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Ironically this may strengthen Corbyn.

    It proves (supporters will say) that Corbyn should remain authentic and banish the spinners who brought us such fiascos as the Edstone, Gordon Brown inviting Mrs Thatcher round for tea, and, well, this.
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    edited August 2016
    kle4 said:

    Smith is talking about blocking Brexit again I see, so that should stop people talking about this train story. I'd say that was an error, taking the focus off Corbyn at best showing himself not to be above spinning like a normal politician, but I guess it is not as though such a story had much further to run even in silly season, and smith still needs to win votes not just undermine Corbyn support, and going for the much more remain labour selectorate is necessary.

    Though curiously, like the Isis remarks, it's one area I expect most Tories will feel Corbyn once again comes across as more sensible. Until any bad effects become much more incontestable and immediate, I don't know that among the wider remain backers there is any desire to push for EuroRef 2, this time get it right. And we know how leave supporters including labour ones will react.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37167253

    The problem with a second vote is we then fall into the EU trap as the Irish did voting until it was considered the correct decision had been considers to have been achieved.

    The first UK vote is obviously considered the "wrong answer" which then results in a second vote and then this vote reverses the original decision. Then what? Well then that second vote will be binding of course and no more votes required or ever given. Certain people will have considered we have given the "right answer" or as you put it "this time got it right".

    To the majority the right decision has already been achieved but it was just not the answer the minority wanted.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750
    PlatoSaid said:

    SkyNews
    Jeremy Corbyn is to pledge cash for "patients not contractors" as he sets out plans to "renationalise" the NHS https://t.co/3VunPd1bYG

    I've long since stopped caring about pronouncements on the NHS as it seems clear it's an unsalvageable mess we just have to make the best of and no one really has any idea how to fix, other than to throw more money at it while also insisting it's not enough money. Though I note Corbyn's going to the old favourite of the Tories having run the NHS into the ground, eg the 24 hours to save the NHS style of policy. Always a popular one, and in fairness I doubt his tweaks will make a difference either way. First year and or ten years into a Corbyn administration the NHS will be facing crisis every winter, and summer. And Spring and Autumn.
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    PlatoSaid said:

    SkyNews
    Jeremy Corbyn is to pledge cash for "patients not contractors" as he sets out plans to "renationalise" the NHS https://t.co/3VunPd1bYG

    .......and right on q Labour return to its "safe space" of the NHS when under attack. Of course Andy Burnham a Labour health minister still remains the only minister ever to privatise an NHS hospital.
    As was pointed out recently by another poster Labour also introduced more private services within the NHS than the Tories ever did.

    Even their NHS "safe space" is becoming an inconvenient truth.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419
    PlatoSaid said:

    SkyNews
    Jeremy Corbyn is to pledge cash for "patients not contractors" as he sets out plans to "renationalise" the NHS https://t.co/3VunPd1bYG

    He needs to say how he'd replace the services the contractors provide.
  • Options
    tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,546
    Moses_ said:

    kle4 said:

    Smith is talking about blocking Brexit again I see, so that should stop people talking about this train story. I'd say that was an error, taking the focus off Corbyn at best showing himself not to be above spinning like a normal politician, but I guess it is not as though such a story had much further to run even in silly season, and smith still needs to win votes not just undermine Corbyn support, and going for the much more remain labour selectorate is necessary.

    Though curiously, like the Isis remarks, it's one area I expect most Tories will feel Corbyn once again comes across as more sensible. Until any bad effects become much more incontestable and immediate, I don't know that among the wider remain backers there is any desire to push for EuroRef 2, this time get it right. And we know how leave supporters including labour ones will react.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37167253

    The problem with a second vote is we then fall into the EU trap as the Irish did voting until it was considered the correct decision had been considers to have been achieved.

    The first UK vote is obviously considered the "wrong answer" which then results in a second vote and then this vote reverses the original decision. Then what? Well then that second vote will be binding of course and no more votes required or ever given. Certain people will have considered we have given the "right answer" or as you put it "this time got it right".

    To the majority the right decision has already been achieved but it was just not the answer the minority wanted.
    Clearly no point in 2nd ref on principle, but when it comes to exit terms, they are sure to be unacceptable to some as the Leave campaign promised whatever the speaker felt like at the time. When you only have a base of 52% to start with you can't lose many to keep a majority. What would happen if terms were rejected I don't know though - there would be no mandate to rejoin and not likely to get better terms with a rejection of any deal. A bit like the Greek referendum last year when terms were rejected and then worse was agreed in the next fortnight.

    Coming back to the UK today after a couple of weeks holiday. When I left it was all Brexit gloom and I'm coming back to sporting glory and arguing about train seats. Has 2016 finally calmed down while I've been away?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750
    edited August 2016
    Moses_ said:

    kle4 said:

    Smith is talking about blocking Brexit again I see, so that should stop people talking about this train story. I'd say that was an error, taking the focus off Corbyn at best showing himself not to be above spinning like a normal politician, but I guess it is not as though such a story had much further to run even in silly season, and smith still needs to win votes not just undermine Corbyn support, and going for the much more remain labour selectorate is necessary.

    Though curiously, like the Isis remarks, it's one area I expect most Tories will feel Corbyn once again comes across as more sensible. Until any bad effects become much more incontestable and immediate, I don't know that among the wider remain backers there is any desire to push for EuroRef 2, this time get it right. And we know how leave supporters including labour ones will react.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37167253

    The problem with a second vote is we then fall into the EU trap as the Irish did voting until it was considered the correct decision had been considers to have been achieved.

    The first UK vote is obviously considered the "wrong answer" which then results in a second vote and then this vote reverses the original decision. Then what? Well then that second vote will be binding of course and no more votes required or ever given. Certain people will have considered we have given the "right answer" or as you put it "this time got it right".

    To the majority the right decision has already been achieved but it was just not the answer the minority wanted.
    Oh there's huge problems with a second vote idea indeed. It's one reason that petition on a second vote is interesting (being a pre result petition from a brexiter) as the idea of thresholds for victory or turnout In an attempt to secure a truly definitive result is worthy of debate (if irrelevant for this situation as there were no such thresholds in place). If a vote is not binding then it is not inherently wrong to suggest, if circumstances change, that people coukd be asked again, but it is very open to abuse as to who decides that as anything can be claimed to be a change, but at some point you'd need to draw a line under things and say no more revotes. But how many is fair if there is still demand for a third or fourth?

    Politically it's a non starter, such an emotive and likely damaging fight to pick, but smith is free to claim to want it without too much harm. He can play the arch remainer card attempting to win among labour members, but by the time of any election article 50 will have been declared, so he can say ge would have stopped it but it is too late now, nasty Tories pushed it through,
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    I suppose his names Dave and he will have mental health issues....

    "A French national who went on a knife rampage at a Queensland hostel late on Tuesday night screamed 'Allahu Akbar' before killing a British woman, 21, and critically wounding a man, 30, also from the UK, police said on Wednesday. The knifeman, 29, is being investigated over possible links to terrorism, and screamed the Muslim phrase again when police arrived to arrest him. A third man was also stabbed but did not suffer serious injuries"

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3755684/Woman-dead-man-fighting-life-French-tourist-went-stabbing-rampage-Queensland-backpackers-hostel.html
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750
    tpfkar said:

    Moses_ said:

    kle4 said:

    Smith is talking about blocking Brexit again I see, so that should stop people talking about this train story. I'd say that was an error, taking the focus off Corbyn at best showing himself not to be above spinning like a normal politician, but I guess it is not as though such a story had much further to run even in silly season, and smith still needs to win votes not just undermine Corbyn support, and going for the much more remain labour selectorate is necessary.

    Though curiously, like the Isis remarks, it's one area I expect most Tories will feel Corbyn once again comes across as more sensible. Until any bad effects become much more incontestable and immediate, I don't know that among the wider remain backers there is any desire to push for EuroRef 2, this time get it right. And we know how leave supporters including labour ones will react.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37167253

    The problem with a second vote is we then fall into the EU trap as the Irish did voting until it was considered the correct decision had been considers to have been achieved.

    The first UK vote is obviously considered the "wrong answer" which then results in a second vote and then this vote reverses the original decision. Then what? Well then that second vote will be binding of course and no more votes required or ever given. Certain people will have considered we have given the "right answer" or as you put it "this time got it right".

    To the majority the right decision has already been achieved but it was just not the answer the minority wanted.
    Clearly no point in 2nd ref on principle, but when it comes to exit terms, they are sure to be unacceptable to some as the Leave campaign promised whatever the speaker felt like at the time. When you only have a base of 52% to start with you can't lose many to keep a majority. What would happen if terms were rejected I don't know though - there would be no mandate to rejoin and not likely to get better terms with a rejection of any deal. A bit like the Greek referendum last year when terms were rejected and then worse was agreed in the next fortnight.

    Coming back to the UK today after a couple of weeks holiday. When I left it was all Brexit gloom and I'm coming back to sporting glory and arguing about train seats. Has 2016 finally calmed down while I've been away?
    More got exhausted by politics for a short time.

    The Greece example is a good reason there's no point having a vote on the negotiated terms. Even if it were stated this is the only deal we'd get, if it lost people would probably be just as angry at what we end up with, so it'd be a headache for the government they don't need. If someone doesn't like the deal they can campaign to scrap that too later.
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,150
    kle4 said:

    But how many is fair if there is still demand for a third or fourth?

    If the voters have an actual, considered opinion and referendums can show you what it is then you could have as many as you like, just get the people who want it to pay for it. It shouldn't matter how often you ask, you'll keep getting the same answer back.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Moses_ said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SkyNews
    Jeremy Corbyn is to pledge cash for "patients not contractors" as he sets out plans to "renationalise" the NHS https://t.co/3VunPd1bYG

    .......and right on q Labour return to its "safe space" of the NHS when under attack. Of course Andy Burnham a Labour health minister still remains the only minister ever to privatise an NHS hospital.
    As was pointed out recently by another poster Labour also introduced more private services within the NHS than the Tories ever did.

    Even their NHS "safe space" is becoming an inconvenient truth.
    It's virtual reality NHS sloganising. Make up a situation, then say you'd fix it using whatever cliché suits your agenda.

    No facts required.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750

    kle4 said:

    But how many is fair if there is still demand for a third or fourth?

    If the voters have an actual, considered opinion and referendums can show you what it is then you could have as many as you like, just get the people who want it to pay for it. It shouldn't matter how often you ask, you'll keep getting the same answer back.
    On this issue perhaps - as long as the sky fails to fall in even if there were a were another vote, which there wont be, it would result in the same outcome e but even more decisively I suspect, as some who voted remain In fear don't do so again and arch leavers are even more riled up - but the theoretical issue was when circumstances change on a matter voted upon. How big a change and how long since a previous vote coukd have an impact on whether an outcome was the same, it wouldn't be guaranteed.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,282
    kle4 said:

    Moses_ said:

    kle4 said:

    Smith is talking about blocking Brexit again I see, so that should stop people talking about this train story

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37167253

    The problem with a second vote is we then fall into the EU trap as the Irish did voting until it was considered the correct decision had been considers to have been achieved.

    The first UK vote is obviously considered the "wrong answer" which then results in a second vote and then this vote reverses the original decision. Then what? Well then that second vote will be binding of course and no more votes required or ever given. Certain people will have considered we have given the "right answer" or as you put it "this time got it right".

    Oh there's huge problems with a second vote idea indeed. It's one reason that petition on a second vote is interesting (being a pre result petition from a brexiter) as the idea of thresholds for victory or turnout In an attempt to secure a truly definitive result is worthy of debate (if irrelevant for this situation as there were no such thresholds in place). If a vote is not binding then it is not inherently wrong to suggest, if circumstances change, that people coukd be asked again, but it is very open to abuse as to who decides that as anything can be claimed to be a change, but at some point you'd need to draw a line under things and say no more revotes. But how many is fair if there is still demand for a third or fourth?

    Politically it's a non starter, such an emotive and likely damaging fight to pick, but smith is free to claim to want it without too much harm. He can play the arch remainer card attempting to win among labour members, but by the time of any election article 50 will have been declared, so he can say ge would have stopped it but it is too late now, nasty Tories pushed it through,
    It only flies if it is obvious that we are heading for economic calamity and also obvious there is clamour for a rethink (from people who voted out). Neither is the case right now, and increasingly it appears that neither will be the case at least through to the actual exit. So it's a non starter as others have said. Not sure why Citizen Smith thinks it makes any sense, except as a more or less the only pitch to the Blairites that he can make without appearing too Blairite (apart from just being not Corbyn, of course).

    On Corbyn, I don't blame him for not taking reserved but vacant seats - long distance trains are often full of these and it can be very annoying - but in his position he would have been sensible not to risk a "Corbyn stole my seat" story getting legs if someone turned up and found him sitting there. So the issue is whether and why he marched past the alleged unreserved seats?
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Moses_ said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SkyNews
    Jeremy Corbyn is to pledge cash for "patients not contractors" as he sets out plans to "renationalise" the NHS https://t.co/3VunPd1bYG

    .......and right on q Labour return to its "safe space" of the NHS when under attack. Of course Andy Burnham a Labour health minister still remains the only minister ever to privatise an NHS hospital.
    As was pointed out recently by another poster Labour also introduced more private services within the NHS than the Tories ever did.

    Even their NHS "safe space" is becoming an inconvenient truth.
    The Conservatives are the same with military matters. It is the Tories who have hacked our armed forces to bits, both now and under Mrs Thatcher, yet it is Labour seen as weak on defence. Nixon and China.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,226
    Morning all,

    Dreadful headlines for Jezza, although Mike is right and it will make no difference to the vote. The Corbynista will just see it as neo-liberals and press ganging up on their man.

    Still it bodes well for popcorn sales during the actual GE campaign in (2017/20). No doubt there'll be plenty more of these cackhanded stunts during the campaign. The whole thing has a ring of a student protest idea.
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    PlatoSaid said:

    Moses_ said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SkyNews
    Jeremy Corbyn is to pledge cash for "patients not contractors" as he sets out plans to "renationalise" the NHS https://t.co/3VunPd1bYG

    .......and right on q Labour return to its "safe space" of the NHS when under attack. Of course Andy Burnham a Labour health minister still remains the only minister ever to privatise an NHS hospital.
    As was pointed out recently by another poster Labour also introduced more private services within the NHS than the Tories ever did.

    Even their NHS "safe space" is becoming an inconvenient truth.
    It's virtual reality NHS sloganising. Make up a situation, then say you'd fix it using whatever cliché suits your agenda.

    No facts required.
    The main problem with the NHS is itself. It's truly an "emperors clothes " situation and until someone has the courage to stand up and say so it will remain a political bottomless pit into which "resources" are thrown but without any meaningful efficient outcome.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750
    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    Moses_ said:

    kle4 said:

    Smith is talking about blocking Brexit again I see, so that should stop people talking about this train story

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37167253

    The problem with a second vote is we then fall into the EU trap as the Irish did voting until it was considered the correct decision had been considers to have been achieved.

    The first UK vote is obviously considered the "wrong answer" which then results in a second vote and then this vote reverses the original decision. Then what? Well then that second vote will be binding of course and no more votes required or ever given. Certain people will have considered we have given the "right answer" or as you put it "this time got it right".

    Oh there's huge problems with a second vote idea indeed. It's one reason that petition on a second vote is interesting (being a pre result petition from a brexiter) as the idea of thresholds for victory or turnout In an attempt to secure a truly definitive result is worthy of debate (if irrelevant for this situation as there were no such thresholds in place). If a vote is not binding then it is not inherently wrong to suggest, if circumstances change, that people coukd be asked again, non
    It only flies if it is obvious that we are heading for economic calamity and also obvious there is clamour for a rethink (from people who voted out). Neither is the case right now, and increasingly it appears that neither will be the case at least through to the actual exit. So it's a non starter as others have said. Not sure why Citizen Smith thinks it makes any sense, except as a more or less the only pitch to the Blairites that he can make without appearing too Blairite (apart from just being not Corbyn, of course).

    On Corbyn, I don't blame him for not taking reserved but vacant seats - long distance trains are often full of these and it can be very annoying - but in his position he would have been sensible not to risk a "Corbyn stole my seat" story getting legs if someone turned up and found him sitting there. So the issue is whether and why he marched past the alleged unreserved seats?
    Don't think that's the issue either. The issue is why he spun events to make a point when it wasn't necessary. There were seats available if he wanted them. If he was happy not to take them fine, plenty do the same, but he mis presented the situation instead seemingly just to make a point, which is pretty cynical standard political tactics.

    Smith is just making a play for the 48% knowing he doesn't have to deliver.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750

    Moses_ said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SkyNews
    Jeremy Corbyn is to pledge cash for "patients not contractors" as he sets out plans to "renationalise" the NHS https://t.co/3VunPd1bYG

    .......and right on q Labour return to its "safe space" of the NHS when under attack. Of course Andy Burnham a Labour health minister still remains the only minister ever to privatise an NHS hospital.
    As was pointed out recently by another poster Labour also introduced more private services within the NHS than the Tories ever did.

    Even their NHS "safe space" is becoming an inconvenient truth.
    The Conservatives are the same with military matters. It is the Tories who have hacked our armed forces to bits, both now and under Mrs Thatcher, yet it is Labour seen as weak on defence. Nixon and China.
    Sounds like we voters are pretty silly. We all really need to do more watching what people do, not only what they say.

    The corollary for the Internet is to watch what people say, not what they say that they say, if you follow me.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750
    Moses_ said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    Moses_ said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SkyNews
    Jeremy Corbyn is to pledge cash for "patients not contractors" as he sets out plans to "renationalise" the NHS https://t.co/3VunPd1bYG

    .......and right on q Labour return to its "safe space" of the NHS when under attack. Of course Andy Burnham a Labour health minister still remains the only minister ever to privatise an NHS hospital.
    As was pointed out recently by another poster Labour also introduced more private services within the NHS than the Tories ever did.

    Even their NHS "safe space" is becoming an inconvenient truth.
    It's virtual reality NHS sloganising. Make up a situation, then say you'd fix it using whatever cliché suits your agenda.

    No facts required.
    The main problem with the NHS is itself. It's truly an "emperors clothes " situation and until someone has the courage to stand up and say so it will remain a political bottomless pit into which "resources" are thrown but without any meaningful efficient outcome.
    Fact. I cannot believe, even admitting the enormous pressures it faces, that endlessly throwing money without improving processes (people I know who have to work with the NHS say it's worse than Whitehall) that would also save money, is the only option.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,242
    I've just caught up with Danny 565's umm, interesting claim that Corbyn did better than Hague or Miliband, because he came very slightly ahead of the Conservatives.

    Let's crunch the figures.

    1998 Hague, 1085 councillors, +254, 32%
    2002 IDS, 2007, +238, 34%
    2011, Miliband, 2459, +857, 38%
    2016, Corbyn, 1326, -18, 31%.

    And that's a worse performance than it looks(!) as about half the seats were in the major metropolitan areas - Manchester, West Yorkshire and Newcastle - where his message is meant to be strong.

    It does however explain Labour members' firm, unshakeable conviction that Corbyn is going to lead them to victory. If net losses from a low base are more impressive than net gains from a high base, than Corbyn is set to be Labour's most successful leader since Arthur Henderson in 1931.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,282
    kle4 said:

    Moses_ said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    Moses_ said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SkyNews
    Jeremy Corbyn is to pledge cash for "patients not contractors" as he sets out plans to "renationalise" the NHS https://t.co/3VunPd1bYG

    .......and right on q Labour return to its "safe space" of the NHS when under attack. Of course Andy Burnham a Labour health minister still remains the only minister ever to privatise an NHS hospital.
    As was pointed out recently by another poster Labour also introduced more private services within the NHS than the Tories ever did.

    Even their NHS "safe space" is becoming an inconvenient truth.
    It's virtual reality NHS sloganising. Make up a situation, then say you'd fix it using whatever cliché suits your agenda.

    No facts required.
    The main problem with the NHS is itself. It's truly an "emperors clothes " situation and until someone has the courage to stand up and say so it will remain a political bottomless pit into which "resources" are thrown but without any meaningful efficient outcome.
    Fact. I cannot believe, even admitting the enormous pressures it faces, that endlessly throwing money without improving processes (people I know who have to work with the NHS say it's worse than Whitehall) that would also save money, is the only option.
    Coming into contact with the NHS quite often, almost always the takeaway impression is of wonderful medical care from hard working medical staff, backed up by pitiful bread-and-butter organisation. Which would suggest getting in some decent managers, except that they've tried expensive management before, it isn't politically popular, and the organisation appears to repel attempts to impose simple management solutions.

    Having spent years in the public sector I do know that people who come from the private sector under the impression that 'common sense and some initiative' are all it needs usually crash and burn, or burnout. To get things done in a large complex organisation generally takes a certain wiliness and a huge reserve of persistence.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    IanB2 said:



    On Corbyn, I don't blame him for not taking reserved but vacant seats - long distance trains are often full of these and it can be very annoying - but in his position he would have been sensible not to risk a "Corbyn stole my seat" story getting legs if someone turned up and found him sitting there. So the issue is whether and why he marched past the alleged unreserved seats?

    probably because he naively assumed he could find an unreserved block of 4 to allow him to sit with his team
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,282
    Charles said:

    IanB2 said:



    On Corbyn, I don't blame him for not taking reserved but vacant seats - long distance trains are often full of these and it can be very annoying - but in his position he would have been sensible not to risk a "Corbyn stole my seat" story getting legs if someone turned up and found him sitting there. So the issue is whether and why he marched past the alleged unreserved seats?

    probably because he naively assumed he could find an unreserved block of 4 to allow him to sit with his team
    In which case the whole thing is a storm in a teacup - he just needs to sack whichever communication numpty thought it a good idea to try and make something of it on Twitter, new labour style.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,981
    I don't think the above is right. Virgin trains east coast is 90% owned by stagecoach whose owners are (from memory) big snp supporters.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    This all looks very strange to me. Is it more than silly season filler?

    Germany may reintroduce a form of national service for civilians to help the army deal with a future disaster.

    The role of civilians is part of a new civil defence strategy to be discussed by the government on Wednesday. Since the strategy was leaked to the media there has been intense debate about stockpiling food and water.

    In a crisis civilians might be obliged to help direct traffic or provide fuel and accommodation for the military, German news agency DPA reported. Germans appeared generally unfazed by what some MPs have called government "scaremongering" but the word "Wehrpflicht" (conscription) was trending on social media on Tuesday.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37164960
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    eek said:

    I don't think the above is right. Virgin trains east coast is 90% owned by stagecoach whose owners are (from memory) big snp supporters.

    49%
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    IanB2 said:

    Charles said:

    IanB2 said:



    On Corbyn, I don't blame him for not taking reserved but vacant seats - long distance trains are often full of these and it can be very annoying - but in his position he would have been sensible not to risk a "Corbyn stole my seat" story getting legs if someone turned up and found him sitting there. So the issue is whether and why he marched past the alleged unreserved seats?

    probably because he naively assumed he could find an unreserved block of 4 to allow him to sit with his team
    In which case the whole thing is a storm in a teacup - he just needs to sack whichever communication numpty thought it a good idea to try and make something of it on Twitter, new labour style.
    The whole think is largely irrelevant although it's unusual for a politician to be caught actually lying (vs. Misleading, spinning, whatever). Whoever made the point that Virgin has written off Corbyn's chances was interesting as well.but it's all second order effects.
  • Options
    CD13CD13 Posts: 6,351
    If it wasn't so amusing, it would be tragic.

    Corbyn vs Smith for the soul of the Labour party. A twenty-watt light bulb vs .... well, Pontypandy must be missing its village idiot. You could pick two labour MPs out at random and they'd be far more impressive, almost.

    I accept you've got Ms Abbott, labour's anti-obesity spokesperson, but it would take some doing to find two worse candidates.

    Why not put all the MPs into a raffle and just draw the next leader out of a hat?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,242
    IanB2 said:

    Charles said:

    IanB2 said:



    On Corbyn, I don't blame him for not taking reserved but vacant seats - long distance trains are often full of these and it can be very annoying - but in his position he would have been sensible not to risk a "Corbyn stole my seat" story getting legs if someone turned up and found him sitting there. So the issue is whether and why he marched past the alleged unreserved seats?

    probably because he naively assumed he could find an unreserved block of 4 to allow him to sit with his team
    In which case the whole thing is a storm in a teacup - he just needs to sack whichever communication numpty thought it a good idea to try and make something of it on Twitter, new labour style.
    Unfortunately, having put out at least two and possibly three demonstrably false press statements to try and discredit the evidence, Corbyn has made it about trust - obviously he and his team will lie when it suits them and therefore cannot be trusted on anything - and about competence, as their denials have the skill and sophistication of a three year old with crumbs round her mouth and her hand in the biscuit tin saying she hadn't stolen any cookies.

    This one could well run for some weeks.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,242
    CD13 said:

    If it wasn't so amusing, it would be tragic.

    Corbyn vs Smith for the soul of the Labour party. A twenty-watt light bulb vs .... well, Pontypandy must be missing its village idiot. You could pick two labour MPs out at random and they'd be far more impressive, almost.

    I accept you've got Ms Abbott, labour's anti-obesity spokesperson, but it would take some doing to find two worse candidates.

    Why not put all the MPs into a raffle and just draw the next leader out of a hat?

    Richard Burgon, John Macdonnell, Paul Flynn...
  • Options
    Paul_BedfordshirePaul_Bedfordshire Posts: 3,632
    edited August 2016
    FPT



    BR were increasing passengers very fast after the 1980s sectorization reforms, until the idiot Major thought it a good idea to raise interest rates to stratospheric levels to support ERM membership stuffing the economy and raising unemployment to 3 - 4 million with consequent fall in pax numbers.

    Again, LOL. Look at the chart in passenger numbers: the 1980s increase was tiny in comparison to what happened afterwards.

    http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/22056/passenger-rail-usage-2015-16-q4.pdf

    (And yes, I've praised sectorisation many times in the past on here. It shows what happens when the government became hands-off and gave management more responsibility).

    Look at the recent line closure of the Settle and Carlisle because of the failure of the hillside. Twenty years ago BR would be looking to close the line because of that. Similarly, the problems on the Dover to Folkestone line.

    Instead, NR just gets on and fix them. It's a can-do will-do mindset issue.

    This conversation's funny. I'm coming up with reports, charts and figures: you're coming up with hearsay and excuses. So please, let's have real facts and figures from you to play with.
    Sorry but that graph backs up what I said. It shows a 33% growth in the late 80s after sectorization from 600m to 800m passengers per year, before declining to 700 million in Majors unnecessary ERM recession.

    As for BR closing Dover to Folkestone if that had happened in the 1980s. Bilge. In 1989 the Ness Viaduct collapsed severing the far north and Kyle lines. BR "just got on with it", rebulding the viaduct and bulding a temporary maintenance depot at Dingwall and shipping enough trains there by road to operate from Dingwall to Kyle and Thurso with a bus connection to Inverness until the viaduct was rebuilt.

    Yes, BR tried somewhat half heartedly to close Settle and Carlisle. I was among the objectors - even though I worked for BR at the time - however at the time of the closure proposal they had a 70 mile route with two two car trains a day, one station without another nearby and an alternative route with capacity via Giggleswick.

    What saved the Settle and Carlisle was Thatchers destruction of the coal mining industry with the result that the big Yorks and Notts Coal Power stations instead of getting their coal from nearby mines had to import it via Ayr meaning that suddenly the S&C was needed for a good number of block coal freight trains every day. Mind ypu, it didnt help the closure case when the BR manager in charge of closing it decided to "experimentally" reopen nine intermediate stations on the line.....

    I'm actually a bit concerned for the long term future of the S&C now that the coal power stations are closing fast.
  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    When Paliament returns for the first PMQ's, all the Tory front bench should sit on the floor.
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    kle4 said:

    Moses_ said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    Moses_ said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SkyNews
    Jeremy Corbyn is to pledge cash for "patients not contractors" as he sets out plans to "renationalise" the NHS https://t.co/3VunPd1bYG

    .......and right on q Labour return to its "safe space" of the NHS when under attack. Of course Andy Burnham a Labour health minister still remains the only minister ever to privatise an NHS hospital.
    As was pointed out recently by another poster Labour also introduced more private services within the NHS than the Tories ever did.

    Even their NHS "safe space" is becoming an inconvenient truth.
    It's virtual reality NHS sloganising. Make up a situation, then say you'd fix it using whatever cliché suits your agenda.

    No facts required.
    The main problem with the NHS is itself. It's truly an "emperors clothes " situation and until someone has the courage to stand up and say so it will remain a political bottomless pit into which "resources" are thrown but without any meaningful efficient outcome.
    Fact. I cannot believe, even admitting the enormous pressures it faces, that endlessly throwing money without improving processes (people I know who have to work with the NHS say it's worse than Whitehall) that would also save money, is the only option.
    That's why I said "resources" as opposed to Money or cash.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750
    ydoethur said:

    CD13 said:

    If it wasn't so amusing, it would be tragic.

    Corbyn vs Smith for the soul of the Labour party. A twenty-watt light bulb vs .... well, Pontypandy must be missing its village idiot. You could pick two labour MPs out at random and they'd be far more impressive, almost.

    I accept you've got Ms Abbott, labour's anti-obesity spokesperson, but it would take some doing to find two worse candidates.

    Why not put all the MPs into a raffle and just draw the next leader out of a hat?

    Richard Burgon, John Macdonnell, Paul Flynn...
    McDonnell has a general air of competence at least.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,242


    Yes, BR tried somewhat half heartedly to close Settle and Carlisle. I was among the objectors - even though I worked for BR at the time - however at the time of the closure proposal they had a 70 mile route with two two car trains a day, one station without another nearby and an alternative route with capacity via Giggleswick.

    What saved the Settle and Carlisle was Thatchers destruction of the coal mining industry with the result that the big Yorks and Notts Coal Power stations instead of getting their coal from nearby mines had to import it via Ayr meaning that suddenly the S&C was needed for a good number of block coal freight trains every day. Mind ypu, it didnt help the closure case when the BR manager in charge of closing it decided to "experimentally" reopen nine intermediate stations on the line.....

    I'm actually a bit concerned for the long term future of the S&C now that the coal power stations are closing fast.

    Putting up closure notices is 'half-hearted'?! Moreover, there is a suggestion that BR had been deliberately diverting traffic from the S&C to justify closure in order not to spend £2 million repairing those huge brick viaducts (they put the cost at £6 million in press releases).

    Passenger numbers seem healthy and it's also hauling quarry stone from Arcow and Dry Rigg. I think your fears are misplaced.
  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    Its not surprising that people (especially black people) do not trust the police, when they do things like this.. to one of their own. Its appalling.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37167741
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,335

    Moses_ said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SkyNews
    Jeremy Corbyn is to pledge cash for "patients not contractors" as he sets out plans to "renationalise" the NHS https://t.co/3VunPd1bYG

    .......and right on q Labour return to its "safe space" of the NHS when under attack. Of course Andy Burnham a Labour health minister still remains the only minister ever to privatise an NHS hospital.
    As was pointed out recently by another poster Labour also introduced more private services within the NHS than the Tories ever did.

    Even their NHS "safe space" is becoming an inconvenient truth.
    The Conservatives are the same with military matters. It is the Tories who have hacked our armed forces to bits, both now and under Mrs Thatcher, yet it is Labour seen as weak on defence. Nixon and China.
    I agree the 2010 defence review was a disgrace.

    The Labour 1998 defence review was actually quite good, but it was never funded to implement it properly and ended up in the usual place of continued salami slicing.
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    edited August 2016
    Mr Paul

    Let's get one thing straight once and for all. Thatcher did not destroy the coal industry. Labour and Wilson closed twice as many mines in half the time taken by Thatcher. It is also said Thatcher destroyed industry however a quick check will show the decline was worst before and after her premiership.

    It matters not its keeps getting said this is what happened just google it for 30 seconds and you will see for yourself.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    Moses_ said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SkyNews
    Jeremy Corbyn is to pledge cash for "patients not contractors" as he sets out plans to "renationalise" the NHS https://t.co/3VunPd1bYG

    .......and right on q Labour return to its "safe space" of the NHS when under attack. Of course Andy Burnham a Labour health minister still remains the only minister ever to privatise an NHS hospital.
    As was pointed out recently by another poster Labour also introduced more private services within the NHS than the Tories ever did.

    Even their NHS "safe space" is becoming an inconvenient truth.
    The Conservatives are the same with military matters. It is the Tories who have hacked our armed forces to bits, both now and under Mrs Thatcher, yet it is Labour seen as weak on defence. Nixon and China.
    I agree the 2010 defence review was a disgrace.

    The Labour 1998 defence review was actually quite good, but it was never funded to implement it properly and ended up in the usual place of continued salami slicing.
    The 2010 defence review was done by Hammond, now our Chancellor. The Autumn statement will show where else his axe will fall. He has a certain amount of form.
  • Options
    not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 4,341
    MaxPB said:

    eek said:

    I don't think the above is right. Virgin trains east coast is 90% owned by stagecoach whose owners are (from memory) big snp supporters.

    49%
    90% is correct. Virgin own 49% of Virgin West Coast.
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865

    Moses_ said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SkyNews
    Jeremy Corbyn is to pledge cash for "patients not contractors" as he sets out plans to "renationalise" the NHS https://t.co/3VunPd1bYG

    .......and right on q Labour return to its "safe space" of the NHS when under attack. Of course Andy Burnham a Labour health minister still remains the only minister ever to privatise an NHS hospital.
    As was pointed out recently by another poster Labour also introduced more private services within the NHS than the Tories ever did.

    Even their NHS "safe space" is becoming an inconvenient truth.
    The Conservatives are the same with military matters. It is the Tories who have hacked our armed forces to bits, both now and under Mrs Thatcher, yet it is Labour seen as weak on defence. Nixon and China.
    I agree the 2010 defence review was a disgrace.

    The Labour 1998 defence review was actually quite good, but it was never funded to implement it properly and ended up in the usual place of continued salami slicing.
    It was a new coalition government though and under certain influences as part of the deal. Doesn't make it right of course but we should look at the context.
  • Options
    There's been a magnitude 6 earthquake in Italy.

    I wouldn't expect a major political impact in Italy, unless their government badly mishandles the aftermath. However, prominent assistance from the UK might have some impact on the Brexit negotiations.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,306
    If Corbyn ever did make it to number 10 one of his objectives would be to take this and other franchises away from Virgin because nationalising the network is somehow magically going to create more trains and more seats. But Virgin have bigger fish to fry so I agree that this well timed and precise attack shows that they have little to fear.

    Corbyn, stupid, naïve, disorganised but honest. Except when he's not. Jeez...
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    Excellent, my copy of Stiglitz's new book has arrived. I'm told it is the best he's written.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,335

    Moses_ said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SkyNews
    Jeremy Corbyn is to pledge cash for "patients not contractors" as he sets out plans to "renationalise" the NHS https://t.co/3VunPd1bYG

    .......and right on q Labour return to its "safe space" of the NHS when under attack. Of course Andy Burnham a Labour health minister still remains the only minister ever to privatise an NHS hospital.
    As was pointed out recently by another poster Labour also introduced more private services within the NHS than the Tories ever did.

    Even their NHS "safe space" is becoming an inconvenient truth.
    The Conservatives are the same with military matters. It is the Tories who have hacked our armed forces to bits, both now and under Mrs Thatcher, yet it is Labour seen as weak on defence. Nixon and China.
    I agree the 2010 defence review was a disgrace.

    The Labour 1998 defence review was actually quite good, but it was never funded to implement it properly and ended up in the usual place of continued salami slicing.
    The 2010 defence review was done by Hammond, now our Chancellor. The Autumn statement will show where else his axe will fall. He has a certain amount of form.
    Fox was defence secretary. Osborne Chancellor and Danny Alexander Chief Sec.

    At the time Hammond was transport secretary.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750

    Its not surprising that people (especially black people) do not trust the police, when they do things like this.. to one of their own. Its appalling.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37167741

    Even more concerning than the treatment is the view of the judge on the Detective Inspector involved:

    Judge Jan Luba QC was withering about Det Insp Rees, saying she appeared "glib, almost flippant", and he expressed his astonishment at her "loose and casual grasp of the law".

    I know TV show coppers have a very low grasp of the law and are flippant about it because they're the heroes, damnit, they don't have time for rules or the law when it comes to catching bad guys (no matter they won't get convicted half the time), but a little worrying an Inspector in real life apparently cares not a jot about it either, for less cause.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Charles said:

    IanB2 said:



    On Corbyn, I don't blame him for not taking reserved but vacant seats - long distance trains are often full of these and it can be very annoying - but in his position he would have been sensible not to risk a "Corbyn stole my seat" story getting legs if someone turned up and found him sitting there. So the issue is whether and why he marched past the alleged unreserved seats?

    probably because he naively assumed he could find an unreserved block of 4 to allow him to sit with his team
    Isn't there always one carriage completely unreserved? , though of course one would have to be quick off the mark.

    Better to have booked seats, which may well have permitted some magnaminity to fellow passengers if indeed the train was overcrowded.

    Train travel can be quite cheap if pre-booked, but very expensive for those disorganised enough to just turn up and go. A simplification of ticket prices is long overdue.
  • Options
    Moses_ said:

    Mr Paul

    Let's get one thing straight once and for all. Thatcher did not destroy the coal industry. Labour and Wilson closed twice as many mines in half the time taken by Thatcher. It is also said Thatcher destroyed industry however a quick check will show the decline was worst before and after her premiership.

    It matters not its keeps getting said this is what happened just google it for 30 seconds and you will see for yourself.

    Is it correct that Thatcher turned more Grammar schools into Comprehensives than any other education secretary?
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,549
    Moses_ said:

    Moses_ said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SkyNews
    Jeremy Corbyn is to pledge cash for "patients not contractors" as he sets out plans to "renationalise" the NHS https://t.co/3VunPd1bYG

    .......and right on q Labour return to its "safe space" of the NHS when under attack. Of course Andy Burnham a Labour health minister still remains the only minister ever to privatise an NHS hospital.
    As was pointed out recently by another poster Labour also introduced more private services within the NHS than the Tories ever did.

    Even their NHS "safe space" is becoming an inconvenient truth.
    The Conservatives are the same with military matters. It is the Tories who have hacked our armed forces to bits, both now and under Mrs Thatcher, yet it is Labour seen as weak on defence. Nixon and China.
    I agree the 2010 defence review was a disgrace.

    The Labour 1998 defence review was actually quite good, but it was never funded to implement it properly and ended up in the usual place of continued salami slicing.
    It was a new coalition government though and under certain influences as part of the deal. Doesn't make it right of course but we should look at the context.
    2010 was a low point, but many of the problems were inherited, the carriers and Nimrod for starters. 2010 and the new government did start the improvements to procurement which are now coming through.

    2015 was much better news. Both carriers going into service, Typhoon upgrades, commitment to the F-35, P-8 orders, Sentinel service extension, new Predator UAVs. In terms of equipment procurement decisions we haven't had such sensible choices for decades. A friend of mine who is quite involved with this was chuffed by the results.

    I think we should spend more on defence, but at least we seem to be making better choices for the money we have.

  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,983
    Good morning, everyone.

    Too humid and warm today. Boreas, where are you?

    I just want the Labour contest to be over. Feels like it's been going on forever.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    Moses_ said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SkyNews
    Jeremy Corbyn is to pledge cash for "patients not contractors" as he sets out plans to "renationalise" the NHS https://t.co/3VunPd1bYG

    .......and right on q Labour return to its "safe space" of the NHS when under attack. Of course Andy Burnham a Labour health minister still remains the only minister ever to privatise an NHS hospital.
    As was pointed out recently by another poster Labour also introduced more private services within the NHS than the Tories ever did.

    Even their NHS "safe space" is becoming an inconvenient truth.
    The Conservatives are the same with military matters. It is the Tories who have hacked our armed forces to bits, both now and under Mrs Thatcher, yet it is Labour seen as weak on defence. Nixon and China.
    I agree the 2010 defence review was a disgrace.

    The Labour 1998 defence review was actually quite good, but it was never funded to implement it properly and ended up in the usual place of continued salami slicing.
    The 2010 defence review was done by Hammond, now our Chancellor. The Autumn statement will show where else his axe will fall. He has a certain amount of form.
    Fox was defence secretary. Osborne Chancellor and Danny Alexander Chief Sec.

    At the time Hammond was transport secretary.
    He did conduct the second round of cuts when he took over in Oct 2011, but it is useful to be reminded of the uselessness of the Brexiteer Liam Fox.
  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095

    Good morning, everyone.

    Too humid and warm today. Boreas, where are you?

    I just want the Labour contest to be over. Feels like it's been going on forever.

    Oh I don't know, its rather fun watching these idiots attack each other, a sort of LCD race to the bottom.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,226

    Good morning, everyone.

    Too humid and warm today. Boreas, where are you?

    I just want the Labour contest to be over. Feels like it's been going on forever.

    Thunderstorms later though.

    Yes, I agree, Labour contest has dragged and to little purpose as far as I can see from outside. The idea of annual leadership elections (author: Jezza) has been shown to be plainly bonkers. Can you imagine a party spending every summer undergoing all that hassle and expense?
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    glw said:

    Moses_ said:

    Moses_ said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SkyNews
    Jeremy Corbyn is to pledge cash for "patients not contractors" as he sets out plans to "renationalise" the NHS https://t.co/3VunPd1bYG

    .......and right on q Labour return to its "safe space" of the NHS when under attack. Of course Andy Burnham a Labour health minister still remains the only minister ever to privatise an NHS hospital.
    As was pointed out recently by another poster Labour also introduced more private services within the NHS than the Tories ever did.

    Even their NHS "safe space" is becoming an inconvenient truth.
    The Conservatives are the same with military matters. It is the Tories who have hacked our armed forces to bits, both now and under Mrs Thatcher, yet it is Labour seen as weak on defence. Nixon and China.
    I agree the 2010 defence review was a disgrace.

    The Labour 1998 defence review was actually quite good, but it was never funded to implement it properly and ended up in the usual place of continued salami slicing.
    It was a new coalition government though and under certain influences as part of the deal. Doesn't make it right of course but we should look at the context.
    2010 was a low point, but many of the problems were inherited, the carriers and Nimrod for starters. 2010 and the new government did start the improvements to procurement which are now coming through.

    2015 was much better news. Both carriers going into service, Typhoon upgrades, commitment to the F-35, P-8 orders, Sentinel service extension, new Predator UAVs. In terms of equipment procurement decisions we haven't had such sensible choices for decades. A friend of mine who is quite involved with this was chuffed by the results.

    I think we should spend more on defence, but at least we seem to be making better choices for the money we have.

    Hopefully the next spending review will look at the huge shortfall in our naval power. We will have two carriers at that point but no escort groups to project the power. It's ridiculous.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,190

    There's been a magnitude 6 earthquake in Italy.

    I wouldn't expect a major political impact in Italy, unless their government badly mishandles the aftermath. However, prominent assistance from the UK might have some impact on the Brexit negotiations.

    Will they all be sleeping in tents liken they're on holiday?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,897
    Charles said:

    IanB2 said:



    On Corbyn, I don't blame him for not taking reserved but vacant seats - long distance trains are often full of these and it can be very annoying - but in his position he would have been sensible not to risk a "Corbyn stole my seat" story getting legs if someone turned up and found him sitting there. So the issue is whether and why he marched past the alleged unreserved seats?

    probably because he naively assumed he could find an unreserved block of 4 to allow him to sit with his team
    Nah. Even if the train had been empty he would have still sat in the corner and made his protest.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,226
    MaxPB said:

    Excellent, my copy of Stiglitz's new book has arrived. I'm told it is the best he's written.

    I am envious. I plan to read it when I actually get some time.
  • Options
    Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,601
    ydoethur said:

    I've just caught up with Danny 565's umm, interesting claim that Corbyn did better than Hague or Miliband, because he came very slightly ahead of the Conservatives.

    Let's crunch the figures.

    1998 Hague, 1085 councillors, +254, 32%
    2002 IDS, 2007, +238, 34%
    2011, Miliband, 2459, +857, 38%
    2016, Corbyn, 1326, -18, 31%.

    And that's a worse performance than it looks(!) as about half the seats were in the major metropolitan areas - Manchester, West Yorkshire and Newcastle - where his message is meant to be strong.

    It does however explain Labour members' firm, unshakeable conviction that Corbyn is going to lead them to victory. If net losses from a low base are more impressive than net gains from a high base, than Corbyn is set to be Labour's most successful leader since Arthur Henderson in 1931.

    You meant I think least successful. But Arthur Henderson in 1931 got 30.6% of the vote. Labour under Corbyn are incapable of achieving that. Granted that Henderson only achieved 57 seats, but that was against a completely united opposition polling 55% - imagine the impact under FPTP of an electoral pact between Conservative, UKIP and the LIb Dems and you get the idea of what Henderson was up against.
  • Options
    ydoethur said:


    Yes, BR tried somewhat half heartedly to close Settle and Carlisle. I was among the objectors - even though I worked for BR at the time - however at the time of the closure proposal they had a 70 mile route with two two car trains a day, one station without another nearby and an alternative route with capacity via Giggleswick.

    What saved the Settle and Carlisle was Thatchers destruction of the coal mining industry with the result that the big Yorks and Notts Coal Power stations instead of getting their coal from nearby mines had to import it via Ayr meaning that suddenly the S&C was needed for a good number of block coal freight trains every day. Mind ypu, it didnt help the closure case when the BR manager in charge of closing it decided to "experimentally" reopen nine intermediate stations on the line.....

    I'm actually a bit concerned for the long term future of the S&C now that the coal power stations are closing fast.

    Putting up closure notices is 'half-hearted'?! Moreover, there is a suggestion that BR had been deliberately diverting traffic from the S&C to justify closure in order not to spend £2 million repairing those huge brick viaducts (they put the cost at £6 million in press releases).

    Passenger numbers seem healthy and it's also hauling quarry stone from Arcow and Dry Rigg. I think your fears are misplaced.
    Appleby - the principal intermediate station had 70,000 pax last year. Thats 200 a day - four busloads - on a 70 mile long double track mainline through hostile hilly terrain with lots of large expensive to maintain structures.

    The economics of that are in basket case territory - it would probably be cheaper to send everyone by taxi.

    We had better hope the quarry traffic holds up....

    Similarly if the SNP get their wish for independence and have to fund the lines north of Inverness and Northwest of Glasgow themselves (the ones up to 160 miles long with three two car sprinters a day), I wouldn't bet on them seeing out the Century.

    A disproportionate amount of railway funding is on lines that are complete basket cases but were not closed in the beeching era for political reasons (labour marginals) and had far worse economics than lines elsewhere that carried far more passengers and made marginal losses but were closed as they were in safe tory constituencies. Good example being the Horsham to Brighton line which had an hourly service, lots of commuters and closed despite preliminary works on electrification starting and no attempt to reduce costs by destaffing stations, singling the line etc.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    Charles said:

    IanB2 said:



    On Corbyn, I don't blame him for not taking reserved but vacant seats - long distance trains are often full of these and it can be very annoying - but in his position he would have been sensible not to risk a "Corbyn stole my seat" story getting legs if someone turned up and found him sitting there. So the issue is whether and why he marched past the alleged unreserved seats?

    probably because he naively assumed he could find an unreserved block of 4 to allow him to sit with his team
    Isn't there always one carriage completely unreserved? , though of course one would have to be quick off the mark.

    Better to have booked seats, which may well have permitted some magnaminity to fellow passengers if indeed the train was overcrowded.

    Train travel can be quite cheap if pre-booked, but very expensive for those disorganised enough to just turn up and go. A simplification of ticket prices is long overdue.
    Yes and no. I once saw the ticket inspector leave a tourist couple visibly angry after he explained how they could have saved around £100 on their pre-booked tickets. As you say, simplification is needed but until then it is not quite as simple as just booking in advance.
  • Options
    RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 2,977
    Any idea what Owen Smith is playing at this morning with Brexit?

    Seems to have taken the heat off Corbyn and traingate
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,983
    Mr. Borough, really? Super.

    Mr. Root, watching two idiots have a slap fight can be amusing, but to a lesser extent when it's to be Leader of the Opposition.

    Consider this: Ed Miliband towers above both contenders.

    Ed "I was defeated by a sandwich" Miliband. Ed "my campaign approach was inspired by Amenhotep III" Miliband.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    IanB2 said:



    On Corbyn, I don't blame him for not taking reserved but vacant seats - long distance trains are often full of these and it can be very annoying - but in his position he would have been sensible not to risk a "Corbyn stole my seat" story getting legs if someone turned up and found him sitting there. So the issue is whether and why he marched past the alleged unreserved seats?

    probably because he naively assumed he could find an unreserved block of 4 to allow him to sit with his team
    Nah. Even if the train had been empty he would have still sat in the corner and made his protest.
    Indeed, it was a pre-planned attack on train companies on the day the fare rises were announced to push his nationalisation crusade.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,981
    edited August 2016
    Charles said:

    IanB2 said:



    On Corbyn, I don't blame him for not taking reserved but vacant seats - long distance trains are often full of these and it can be very annoying - but in his position he would have been sensible not to risk a "Corbyn stole my seat" story getting legs if someone turned up and found him sitting there. So the issue is whether and why he marched past the alleged unreserved seats?

    probably because he naively assumed he could find an unreserved block of 4 to allow him to sit with his team
    You always can but it requires arriving early enough to be at the front of the hordes trying to get on the train... You used to need a little bit of knowledge to work out what platform the train would be leaving from nowadays some of the train apps give the information away far earlier than others..

    Personally its not an issue but then I'm happy to waste 30 minutes and catch the next train if the first one is full and I've not got a reserved seat..
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,007
    kle4 said:

    Smith is talking about blocking Brexit again I see, so that should stop people talking about this train story. I'd say that was an error, taking the focus off Corbyn at best showing himself not to be above spinning like a normal politician, but I guess it is not as though such a story had much further to run even in silly season, and smith still needs to win votes not just undermine Corbyn support, and going for the much more remain labour selectorate is necessary.

    Though curiously, like the Isis remarks, it's one area I expect most Tories will feel Corbyn once again comes across as more sensible. Until any bad effects become much more incontestable and immediate, I don't know that among the wider remain backers there is any desire to push for EuroRef 2, this time get it right. And we know how leave supporters including labour ones will react.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37167253

    Labour members overwhelmingly backed Remain, even more so than Labour voters, so this is actually a shrewd move by Smith in terms of the Labour leadership. In terms of the general election rather less so but his promise to demand a new referendum or a general election on the BREXIT terms will benefit a Smith led Labour if we get anything approaching hard BREXIT in which case he is trying to ensure Labour rather than the LDs capitalise, if we get soft Brexit than UKIP will capitalise in which case it would not look so shrewd a move in terms of Labour voters amongst the white working class
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607

    MaxPB said:

    Excellent, my copy of Stiglitz's new book has arrived. I'm told it is the best he's written.

    I am envious. I plan to read it when I actually get some time.
    I'll try not to post any spoilers in that case! I got it because it seemed quite pertinent to Brexit and understanding the underlying reasons for it.
  • Options
    John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503

    MaxPB said:

    Excellent, my copy of Stiglitz's new book has arrived. I'm told it is the best he's written.

    I am envious. I plan to read it when I actually get some time.
    It's now on my Kindle. Once I've hacked back a bit of the undergrowth in the jungle garden, I'll give it a shot.
  • Options
    perdixperdix Posts: 1,806

    Moses_ said:

    Mr Paul

    Let's get one thing straight once and for all. Thatcher did not destroy the coal industry. Labour and Wilson closed twice as many mines in half the time taken by Thatcher. It is also said Thatcher destroyed industry however a quick check will show the decline was worst before and after her premiership.

    It matters not its keeps getting said this is what happened just google it for 30 seconds and you will see for yourself.

    Is it correct that Thatcher turned more Grammar schools into Comprehensives than any other education secretary?
    It is my understanding that Local Authorities were given the option of closing Grammar Schools. It was not by central government decision.

  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,226
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Excellent, my copy of Stiglitz's new book has arrived. I'm told it is the best he's written.

    I am envious. I plan to read it when I actually get some time.
    I'll try not to post any spoilers in that case! I got it because it seemed quite pertinent to Brexit and understanding the underlying reasons for it.
    Well, whatever the pros and cons of Brexit, the Euro is clearly a disaster. Let's raise a statue to Gordon Brown and Ed Balls for keeping us out of that madness.
  • Options
    John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503

    Any idea what Owen Smith is playing at this morning with Brexit?

    Seems to have taken the heat off Corbyn and traingate

    He's playing to his current gallery (Labour members [90% remain]) while destroying Labour's electoral chances in the English shires, the North and Wales. Other than that, it's a fantastic plan. If Corbyn is a lunatic, Smith is a simpleton.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,983
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Excellent, my copy of Stiglitz's new book has arrived. I'm told it is the best he's written.

    I am envious. I plan to read it when I actually get some time.
    I'll try not to post any spoilers in that case! I got it because it seemed quite pertinent to Brexit and understanding the underlying reasons for it.
    Well, whatever the pros and cons of Brexit, the Euro is clearly a disaster. Let's raise a statue to Gordon Brown and Ed Balls for keeping us out of that madness.
    It is indeed a disaster. I'd give the statue to a certain Mr Hague who managed to make Euroscepticism a mainstream issue, paving the way for our vote to leave!
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,983
    Mr. Borough, Tiberius' miserliness meant tax rises were unnecessary. That doesn't make him a great leader, any more than King John's bean-counting prowess made up for his manifold failures.

    You might as well erect a statue to Blair. If he'd been against the euro, Brown would've pushed for entry.

    As for Balls, a statue for him is not an absolutely bloody brilliant idea.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    Locally known as Bruce?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,007

    Moses_ said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SkyNews
    Jeremy Corbyn is to pledge cash for "patients not contractors" as he sets out plans to "renationalise" the NHS https://t.co/3VunPd1bYG

    .......and right on q Labour return to its "safe space" of the NHS when under attack. Of course Andy Burnham a Labour health minister still remains the only minister ever to privatise an NHS hospital.
    As was pointed out recently by another poster Labour also introduced more private services within the NHS than the Tories ever did.

    Even their NHS "safe space" is becoming an inconvenient truth.
    The Conservatives are the same with military matters. It is the Tories who have hacked our armed forces to bits, both now and under Mrs Thatcher, yet it is Labour seen as weak on defence. Nixon and China.
    I agree the 2010 defence review was a disgrace.

    The Labour 1998 defence review was actually quite good, but it was never funded to implement it properly and ended up in the usual place of continued salami slicing.
    The 2010 defence review was done by Hammond, now our Chancellor. The Autumn statement will show where else his axe will fall. He has a certain amount of form.
    Osborne effectively ringfenced defence in the last Autumn Statement alongside the NHS, healthcare reform will eventually require insurance of some form to be taken out by the middle-class
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited August 2016
    Another day, another locally known as Dave story

    UK woman stabbed to death at Australian backpackers' hostel
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-37171751
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,190
    MaxPB said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    IanB2 said:



    On Corbyn, I don't blame him for not taking reserved but vacant seats - long distance trains are often full of these and it can be very annoying - but in his position he would have been sensible not to risk a "Corbyn stole my seat" story getting legs if someone turned up and found him sitting there. So the issue is whether and why he marched past the alleged unreserved seats?

    probably because he naively assumed he could find an unreserved block of 4 to allow him to sit with his team
    Nah. Even if the train had been empty he would have still sat in the corner and made his protest.
    Indeed, it was a pre-planned attack on train companies on the day the fare rises were announced to push his nationalisation crusade.
    The irony, of course, is that train being busy kind of undermines the accusation that the fares are too high.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,007

    Moses_ said:

    Mr Paul

    Let's get one thing straight once and for all. Thatcher did not destroy the coal industry. Labour and Wilson closed twice as many mines in half the time taken by Thatcher. It is also said Thatcher destroyed industry however a quick check will show the decline was worst before and after her premiership.

    It matters not its keeps getting said this is what happened just google it for 30 seconds and you will see for yourself.

    Is it correct that Thatcher turned more Grammar schools into Comprehensives than any other education secretary?
    Shirley Williams started the process and Thatcher in her latter years was a staunch grammar supporter
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,007
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Excellent, my copy of Stiglitz's new book has arrived. I'm told it is the best he's written.

    I am envious. I plan to read it when I actually get some time.
    I'll try not to post any spoilers in that case! I got it because it seemed quite pertinent to Brexit and understanding the underlying reasons for it.
    Well, whatever the pros and cons of Brexit, the Euro is clearly a disaster. Let's raise a statue to Gordon Brown and Ed Balls for keeping us out of that madness.
    It is indeed a disaster. I'd give the statue to a certain Mr Hague who managed to make Euroscepticism a mainstream issue, paving the way for our vote to leave!
    Though ironically Hague backed Remain, he just opposed the Euro
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,335

    Moses_ said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SkyNews
    Jeremy Corbyn is to pledge cash for "patients not contractors" as he sets out plans to "renationalise" the NHS https://t.co/3VunPd1bYG

    .......and right on q Labour return to its "safe space" of the NHS when under attack. Of course Andy Burnham a Labour health minister still remains the only minister ever to privatise an NHS hospital.
    As was pointed out recently by another poster Labour also introduced more private services within the NHS than the Tories ever did.

    Even their NHS "safe space" is becoming an inconvenient truth.
    The Conservatives are the same with military matters. It is the Tories who have hacked our armed forces to bits, both now and under Mrs Thatcher, yet it is Labour seen as weak on defence. Nixon and China.
    I agree the 2010 defence review was a disgrace.

    The Labour 1998 defence review was actually quite good, but it was never funded to implement it properly and ended up in the usual place of continued salami slicing.
    The 2010 defence review was done by Hammond, now our Chancellor. The Autumn statement will show where else his axe will fall. He has a certain amount of form.
    Fox was defence secretary. Osborne Chancellor and Danny Alexander Chief Sec.

    At the time Hammond was transport secretary.
    He did conduct the second round of cuts when he took over in Oct 2011, but it is useful to be reminded of the uselessness of the Brexiteer Liam Fox.
    Fox wanted a freeze, Osborne wanted 10%+ real term cuts.

    They settled on an 8% cut, and with the huge £38bn black hole to fill as well that was enough to result in our capability being reduced by about a third.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    tlg86 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    IanB2 said:



    On Corbyn, I don't blame him for not taking reserved but vacant seats - long distance trains are often full of these and it can be very annoying - but in his position he would have been sensible not to risk a "Corbyn stole my seat" story getting legs if someone turned up and found him sitting there. So the issue is whether and why he marched past the alleged unreserved seats?

    probably because he naively assumed he could find an unreserved block of 4 to allow him to sit with his team
    Nah. Even if the train had been empty he would have still sat in the corner and made his protest.
    Indeed, it was a pre-planned attack on train companies on the day the fare rises were announced to push his nationalisation crusade.
    The irony, of course, is that train being busy kind of undermines the accusation that the fares are too high.
    Additionally, if Corbyn wanted to stack the deck, why not use the peak service or, cunningly, the first off-peak service which is always busy. That would have ensured a busy train and few to no available seats. I think the issue is that Corbyn is a blockheaded thicko.
  • Options
    John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Excellent, my copy of Stiglitz's new book has arrived. I'm told it is the best he's written.

    I am envious. I plan to read it when I actually get some time.
    I'll try not to post any spoilers in that case! I got it because it seemed quite pertinent to Brexit and understanding the underlying reasons for it.
    Well, whatever the pros and cons of Brexit, the Euro is clearly a disaster. Let's raise a statue to Gordon Brown and Ed Balls for keeping us out of that madness.
    It is indeed a disaster. I'd give the statue to a certain Mr Hague who managed to make Euroscepticism a mainstream issue, paving the way for our vote to leave!
    It's worth noting that the consensus is that the reason the {Merkel, Hollande, Renzi} statement concentrated on defence & security is because they can't agree on anything else.

    Merkel won't support Renzi's plans for Italian banks, nor will she countenance relaxation of the Euro's fiscal rules to satisfy Hollande. The Germans just aren't minded to complete EMU. It's paralysing the EU, not just the Eurozone.
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,855
    Morning all :)

    Far be it from me to add to the already voluminous knowledge of train travel displayed on here so I probably won't. I'm not convinced by aspects of the Virgin story - there do look to be a lot of Reserved seats in the clip I've seen though there are seats not reserved as well.

    Corbyn wasn't travelling alone and presumably wanted somewhere they could all be together - not unreasonably. I don't think the whole affair has done either Corbyn or Branson any favours (I remember Branson famously refusing to endorse Blair on election night in 1997) and unfortunately it's obscured some much more interesting questions about transport in the UK in the 21st Century which are worth debate.

    It would be nice to hear the Transport Secretary talking about how we are going to have a world-class integrated transport system instead of the usual Union bashing.

    Owen Smith's comment about Brexit which is being spun fairly predictably by the usual suspects is actually worth considering. Those of us who voted LEAVE did so for a multitude of reasons and with a multitude of expectations and aspirations.

    May clearly wants Brexit to fail as she's put the Three Stooges in charge of the process - Curly, Mo and Larry are having as much fun tearing lumps out of each other as in getting the job done and that's not helpful.

    Simply leaving May and the Government to get on with it isn't helpful either - there needs to be proper informed debate and scrutiny and a much clearer and more widespread understanding of the consequences of certain actions and decisions.

    We already have the Express and other LEAVE supporters jumping up and down saying there's nothing to worry about and the good times will be here forever now we've left the EU (which of course we haven't). Carney's financial methadone settled the markets but there's a cost and consequences to that and indeed the whole emphasis of policy since June 24th has been to kick the can containing the adverse effects down the road.
  • Options
    RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 2,977
    John_M said:

    Any idea what Owen Smith is playing at this morning with Brexit?

    Seems to have taken the heat off Corbyn and traingate

    He's playing to his current gallery (Labour members [90% remain]) while destroying Labour's electoral chances in the English shires, the North and Wales. Other than that, it's a fantastic plan. If Corbyn is a lunatic, Smith is a simpleton.
    Mind you, not sure this leadership election was ever about winning the next general election. More about attempting to win back control of the party.

    Though both candidates doing pretty long term damage.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,007
    John_M said:

    Any idea what Owen Smith is playing at this morning with Brexit?

    Seems to have taken the heat off Corbyn and traingate

    He's playing to his current gallery (Labour members [90% remain]) while destroying Labour's electoral chances in the English shires, the North and Wales. Other than that, it's a fantastic plan. If Corbyn is a lunatic, Smith is a simpleton.
    If we get hard BREXIT then Smith's position would boost Labour in the cities and suburbs, if we get soft Brexit it risks losing further Labour voters to UKIP but yes this is mainly about appealing to the pro EU Labour membership
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,549
    tlg86 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    IanB2 said:



    On Corbyn, I don't blame him for not taking reserved but vacant seats - long distance trains are often full of these and it can be very annoying - but in his position he would have been sensible not to risk a "Corbyn stole my seat" story getting legs if someone turned up and found him sitting there. So the issue is whether and why he marched past the alleged unreserved seats?

    probably because he naively assumed he could find an unreserved block of 4 to allow him to sit with his team
    Nah. Even if the train had been empty he would have still sat in the corner and made his protest.
    Indeed, it was a pre-planned attack on train companies on the day the fare rises were announced to push his nationalisation crusade.
    The irony, of course, is that train being busy kind of undermines the accusation that the fares are too high.
    Stop thinking and get with the narrative.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    HYUFD said:

    Moses_ said:

    Mr Paul

    Let's get one thing straight once and for all. Thatcher did not destroy the coal industry. Labour and Wilson closed twice as many mines in half the time taken by Thatcher. It is also said Thatcher destroyed industry however a quick check will show the decline was worst before and after her premiership.

    It matters not its keeps getting said this is what happened just google it for 30 seconds and you will see for yourself.

    Is it correct that Thatcher turned more Grammar schools into Comprehensives than any other education secretary?
    Shirley Williams started the process and Thatcher in her latter years was a staunch grammar supporter
    No. This relates to Mrs Thatcher's spell as Education Secretary in the Heath government, not her time as Prime Minister, so Shirley Williams came after Thatcher, not before. It was Tony Crosland who kicked things off, but it is true that Mrs Thatcher closed most grammar schools. This was originally used as a point against Shirley Williams and the Labour government rather than Mrs Thatcher.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Labour's chances at the next election are being chuffed to bits.
This discussion has been closed.