Monday 26th September 2016

[refitman]

Morning all.

[SpinningHugo]

I really don't get the likes of S Kinnock

https://inews.co.uk/opinion/columnists/ ... migration/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

No wing of Labour seems to want to represent me.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

This is much better from Labour, in particular McDonnell and Thornberry.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -mcdonnell" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

With May on the back foot from the pig share's comments on her Brexit stance, show how Labour will help protect the vulnerable from the (albeit idiotic IMO) referendum result.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

I really don't get the likes of S Kinnock

https://inews.co.uk/opinion/columnists/ ... migration/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

No wing of Labour seems to want to represent me.

Morning.

I find this a very revealing comment. And one that could be written by folk from all over the political spectrum.

Should a political party seek to be a coalition of fragmented "wings" representing different demographics (if you like)?

Or, should it seek to articulate a set of high level values, that can then be interpreted in different contexts in different ways?

My approach would be the latter, but that's just my view.

[SpinningHugo]

I really don't get the likes of S Kinnock

https://inews.co.uk/opinion/columnists/ ... migration/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

No wing of Labour seems to want to represent me.

Morning.

I find this a very revealing comment. And one that could be written by folk from all over the political spectrum.

Should a political party seek to be a coalition of fragmented "wings" representing different demographics (if you like)?

Or, should it seek to articulate a set of high level values, that can then be interpreted in different contexts in different ways?

My approach would be the latter, but that's just my view.

I loathe all talk of values. It is just motherhood and apple pie that everyone rational has to sign up to. Give me some specifics (eg do you want to end freedom of movement) and I'll be able to tell if we are on the same side.

The likes of Umunna etc aren't Blairites, at least not as I understand that term. Their proposals are not evidence based.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

I really don't get the likes of S Kinnock

https://inews.co.uk/opinion/columnists/ ... migration/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

No wing of Labour seems to want to represent me[/ib].

Morning.

I find this a very revealing comment. And one that could be written by folk from all over the political spectrum.

Should a political party seek to be a coalition of fragmented "wings" representing different demographics (if you like)?

Or, should it seek to articulate a set of high level values, that can then be interpreted in different contexts in different ways?

My approach would be the latter, but that's just my view.

I loathe all talk of values. It is just motherhood and apple pie that everyone rational has to sign up to. Give me some specifics (eg do you want to end freedom of movement) and I'll be able to tell if we are on the same side.

The likes of Umunna etc aren't Blairites, at least not as I understand that term. Their proposals are not evidence based.

That's a good example actually. I think wanting freedom of movement is a value. And I agree with it.

I think wanting an "interventionist" government, as McDonnell is saying today, is also a value. I agree with that too.

I can also see there are some conflicts between these two, which is where a strong party will find common ground and compromise and succeed in articulating a clear path.

[RogerOThornhill]

Morning all. Feels like the first day of autumn here today - long sleeve shirt on and as I;m into the library to start work on my thesis corrections, I won't be around much later.

A party has to have values otherwise how do people know what you stand for - so you have to articulate them clearly. Otherwise you end up where the LibDems are now with a majority of people polled not knowing what they're for.

Angela Rayner is turning out - albeit by accident rather than by design - to be a bit of a star.

The Tories are letting the country down on apprenticeships funding

http://feweek.co.uk/2016/09/22/the-tori ... s-funding/

And with her background she is the ideal person to lead the Labour stance on grammar schools.

[SpinningHugo]

Freedom of movement is not a value. It has a very detailed technical meaning within the single market.

(As an aside, McDonnell talking of having g access to but not being in the single market is awful bullshit.)

By contrast wanting an "interventionist" government is, without more, just vague wibble. Interventionist how? Give me some examples.

[SpinningHugo]

Morning all. Feels like the first day of autumn here today - long sleeve shirt on and as I;m into the library to start work on my thesis corrections, I won't be around much later.

A party has to have values otherwise how do people know what you stand for - so you have to articulate them clearly. Otherwise you end up where the LibDems are now with a majority of people polled not knowing what they're for.

Angela Rayner is turning out - albeit by accident rather than by design - to be a bit of a star.

The Tories are letting the country down on apprenticeships funding

http://feweek.co.uk/2016/09/22/the-tori ... s-funding/

And with her background she is the ideal person to lead the Labour stance on grammar schools.

The problem with values is (usually) that they are ones so vague that Liam Fox would have no problem signing up to them. (See Ed Miliband).

[yahyah]

This is much better from Labour, in particular McDonnell and Thornberry.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -mcdonnell" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

With May on the back foot from the pig share's comments on her Brexit stance, show how Labour will help protect the vulnerable from the (albeit idiotic IMO) referendum result.

He was quite good on Radio 4 earlier. Calmed some of my worry about Labour's response to Brexit proceedings. Actually hearing people speak rather than reading a mediated report is useful.

[HindleA]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... dApp_Tweet" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Our immoral housing policy is set up to punish the poor
Matt Wilde

[yahyah]

@danesclose

Thanks.
Just read last night's posts. We've corrected 60 across now - it was Tanya [Tucker & Donnelly] not Tommy as my OH thought.

[yahyah]

Something to cheer us up Paul.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ed ... my-8915068" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[StephenDolan]

Something to cheer us up Paul.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ed ... my-8915068" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Morning all.

Great news if it happens.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

Miliband back on energy and climate change would make a very great deal of sense actually. Fingers crossed.

[yahyah]

Carwyn Jones is no lightweight as Welsh Labour leader.
He's won out against Corbyn for a vote for Wales and Scotland to be represented on the NEC.

[StephenDolan]

Carwyn Jones is no lightweight as Welsh Labour leader.
He's won out against Corbyn for a vote for Wales and Scotland to be represented on the NEC.

A good thing but I'm cynically wondering if this is to ensure the collegiate system of the shadow cabinet returns?

[Willow904]

Something to cheer us up Paul.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ed ... my-8915068" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Doesn't cheer me up. Just makes me more depressed:

"Of course we've got to speak to Remainers... but we, the Labour Party , have got to speak to the people who voted to Leave as much if not more because they feel their voice has not been heard in politics."

The majority of people who voted to leave were Tory or Ukip voters and many of those who weren't are likely to want similar things - hard Brexit and an end to immigration. Ed's making the same mistake as Corbyn. There may be some truth to the idea that people let down by neoliberal economics voted "out" because our national political choices have left some communities behind, but identifying this and resolving to change our neoliberal economics for the better, although a good policy, is not the same as listening to people who voted out. They have identified immigration as the cause of their problems and want immigration fixed as a result. And you can't give them what they want and keep pro-EU, pro single market voters at the same time. You have to choose one side or the other, hard Brexit or soft, and make your case for it. Although I didn't agree with Owen Smith on everything, I think he was right to be honest and upfront about his desire to remain in the single market. I really don't think you can fudge this issue and hope you can hold on to both leave and remain voters, both hard and soft Brexit voters.

[citizenJA]

Good-morning, everyone.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

Something to cheer us up Paul.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ed ... my-8915068" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Doesn't cheer me up. Just makes me more depressed:

"Of course we've got to speak to Remainers... but we, the Labour Party , have got to speak to the people who voted to Leave as much if not more because they feel their voice has not been heard in politics."

The majority of people who voted to leave were Tory or Ukip voters and many of those who weren't are likely to want similar things - hard Brexit and an end to immigration. Ed's making the same mistake as Corbyn. There may be some truth to the idea that people let down by neoliberal economics voted "out" because our national political choices have left some communities behind, but identifying this and resolving to change our neoliberal economics for the better, although a good policy, is not the same as listening to people who voted out. They have identified immigration as the cause of their problems and want immigration fixed as a result. And you can't give them what they want and keep pro-EU, pro single market voters at the same time. You have to choose one side or the other, hard Brexit or soft, and make your case for it. Although I didn't agree with Owen Smith on everything, I think he was right to be honest and upfront about his desire to remain in the single market. I really don't think you can fudge this issue and hope you can hold on to both leave and remain voters, both hard and soft Brexit voters.

If Labour can use this opportunity to start to forge a more socialist EU I for one will be delighted. Freedom of movement should be a right, not a means of redistribution of resource. Governments should be able to intervene, with EU support, to keep workers where they want to live and not leave them having to follow the Euro.

Labour has an opportunity now to soft oppose the EU and say what it really wants. It will have strong support in many of the southern EU states and probably elsewhere too. This does not mean to be anti-European per se, but to be anti the neoliberal institution it has sadly become, not least because of the way the hated Euro was established.

[AnatolyKasparov]

The point is that when Ed M says something like that, I can actually hope it means something more than witless pandering a la Chuka?

[citizenJA]

Labour government would ban fracking in UK

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... -this-year" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Good!

[Willow904]

The point is that when Ed M says something like that, I can actually hope it means something more than witless pandering a la Chuka?

Ed's approach is similar to Corbyn's and both are better than Reeves and Umunna's blunt call for restrictions on immigration, but both ignore the basic fact that you are either in the single market or you are out. You either accept freedom of movement or you accept being poorer as a country. "Listening to leave voters" is akin to listening to the Daily Mail and Express for the most part. Genuine Lexit supporters, like Corbyn, are likely to be a very small minority. I'm not especially keen on our economic future being decided by people who agree with everything they read in the right wing press, even if they are genuine working class voices, their words come straight from the likes of Murdoch. If this is "democracy", its shit and we'll all be the worse off for it.

[AnatolyKasparov]

I really don't get the likes of S Kinnock

https://inews.co.uk/opinion/columnists/ ... migration/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

No wing of Labour seems to want to represent me.

Morning.

I find this a very revealing comment. And one that could be written by folk from all over the political spectrum.

Should a political party seek to be a coalition of fragmented "wings" representing different demographics (if you like)?

Or, should it seek to articulate a set of high level values, that can then be interpreted in different contexts in different ways?

My approach would be the latter, but that's just my view.

I loathe all talk of values. It is just motherhood and apple pie that everyone rational has to sign up to. Give me some specifics (eg do you want to end freedom of movement) and I'll be able to tell if we are on the same side.

The likes of Umunna etc aren't Blairites, at least not as I understand that term. Their proposals are not evidence based.

That was the problem with the recent D Miliband piece that was predictably praised by the usual suspects. Lots of airy stuff about "values" and not much concrete.

Judging by what you say here, you might find Chris Dillow's latest piece about "Blairites" of some interest?

[StephenDolan]

Thornberry's speech reads well, anyone view it?

http://press.labour.org.uk/post/1509545 ... ortfall-in" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[PaulfromYorkshire]

The point is that when Ed M says something like that, I can actually hope it means something more than witless pandering a la Chuka?

Ed's approach is similar to Corbyn's and both are better than Reeves and Umunna's blunt call for restrictions on immigration, but both ignore the basic fact that you are either in the single market or you are out. You either accept freedom of movement or you accept being poorer as a country. "Listening to leave voters" is akin to listening to the Daily Mail and Express for the most part. Genuine Lexit supporters, like Corbyn, are likely to be a very small minority. I'm not especially keen on our economic future being decided by people who agree with everything they read in the right wing press, even if they are genuine working class voices, their words come straight from the likes of Murdoch. If this is "democracy", its shit and we'll all be the worse off for it.

But Willow freedom of movement has become the alternative to being workless in Greece and elsewhere rather than an aspiration to build a strong multicultural Europe.

Freedom of movement as a human right yes please. Freedom of movement as a capitalist tool to drive down wages across the contienent, no thank you.

[citizenJA]

I loathe all talk of values.

(cJA edit)

Politics, policy are values manifested.

[citizenJA]

The point is that when Ed M says something like that, I can actually hope it means something more than witless pandering a la Chuka?

Ed's approach is similar to Corbyn's and both are better than Reeves and Umunna's blunt call for restrictions on immigration, but both ignore the basic fact that you are either in the single market or you are out. You either accept freedom of movement or you accept being poorer as a country. "Listening to leave voters" is akin to listening to the Daily Mail and Express for the most part. Genuine Lexit supporters, like Corbyn, are likely to be a very small minority. I'm not especially keen on our economic future being decided by people who agree with everything they read in the right wing press, even if they are genuine working class voices, their words come straight from the likes of Murdoch. If this is "democracy", its shit and we'll all be the worse off for it.

But Willow freedom of movement has become the alternative to being workless in Greece and elsewhere rather than an aspiration to build a strong multicultural Europe.

Freedom of movement as a human right yes please. Freedom of movement as a capitalist tool to drive down wages across the contienent, no thank you.

As much as I agree with the freedom of movement distinctions you've made, it'll be rendered moot if government take the UK out of the EU.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

Ed's approach is similar to Corbyn's and both are better than Reeves and Umunna's blunt call for restrictions on immigration, but both ignore the basic fact that you are either in the single market or you are out. You either accept freedom of movement or you accept being poorer as a country. "Listening to leave voters" is akin to listening to the Daily Mail and Express for the most part. Genuine Lexit supporters, like Corbyn, are likely to be a very small minority. I'm not especially keen on our economic future being decided by people who agree with everything they read in the right wing press, even if they are genuine working class voices, their words come straight from the likes of Murdoch. If this is "democracy", its shit and we'll all be the worse off for it.

But Willow freedom of movement has become the alternative to being workless in Greece and elsewhere rather than an aspiration to build a strong multicultural Europe.

Freedom of movement as a human right yes please. Freedom of movement as a capitalist tool to drive down wages across the contienent, no thank you.

As much as I agree with the freedom of movement distinctions you've made, it'll be rendered moot if government take the UK out of the EU.

I know. I just don't think agonising over the result of the referendum is likely to be fertile for Labour or anyone really. Let's leave the Tories to deal with the fall-out. I think Labour, Greens, Lib Dems, SNP, Plaid can and should be making positive cases for how we can best engage with Europe in the future, regardless of whether the Tories actually succeed in Brexiting.

Time will change everything. There may end up being a second referendum without Labour having to call for it. We may leave then ask to go straight back in. Brexit may simply be deemed too hard and kicked into the long grass. For me, the important is to discuss what the EU should be and worry about getting there once we can control it. And if the broad left can do this, we may end up bringing parts of the EU with us, helping get the transformation of the EU that people are crying out for. Then it will make sense to call to scrap Brexit, or for a second referendum.

[AngryAsWell]

David Allen Green ‏@DavidAllenGreen 3h3 hours ago
For Leavers who tell Remainers to "over it" I have set out 19 hurdles and respectfully invite them to get over those

The many hurdles of Brexit – a short summary post

http://jackofkent.com/2016/09/the-many- ... mary-post/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[HindleA]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37427990" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Concentrix: 'Suicidal calls' made to tax credits firm

[Willow904]

The point is that when Ed M says something like that, I can actually hope it means something more than witless pandering a la Chuka?

Ed's approach is similar to Corbyn's and both are better than Reeves and Umunna's blunt call for restrictions on immigration, but both ignore the basic fact that you are either in the single market or you are out. You either accept freedom of movement or you accept being poorer as a country. "Listening to leave voters" is akin to listening to the Daily Mail and Express for the most part. Genuine Lexit supporters, like Corbyn, are likely to be a very small minority. I'm not especially keen on our economic future being decided by people who agree with everything they read in the right wing press, even if they are genuine working class voices, their words come straight from the likes of Murdoch. If this is "democracy", its shit and we'll all be the worse off for it.

But Willow freedom of movement has become the alternative to being workless in Greece and elsewhere rather than an aspiration to build a strong multicultural Europe.

Freedom of movement as a human right yes please. Freedom of movement as a capitalist tool to drive down wages across the contienent, no thank you.

And how do you achieve that? Inside the EU we had influence. Now we have nothing. Perhaps as a member of the single market we could try to build a consensus for change, but much less likely than when we were in the EU. The alternative is hard Brexit. That means being poorer as a country in the short to medium term. That means opportunities for future Tory governments to strip away workers rights, regulations and open us up to the extremes of free market economics. I can't choose between "might be's", all I can do is look at the alternatives right in front of me. Membership of the single market is the least worst option as far as I'm concerned and I can't support a party that will risk taking us fully out.

[JonnyT1234]

Brexit fears could force 15% of UK university staff to leave posts, experts warn - The Independent
https://apple.news/AslqhrPeLSsChXy7IlicVZg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Pish. Who needs experts anyway?

[PaulfromYorkshire]

Ed's approach is similar to Corbyn's and both are better than Reeves and Umunna's blunt call for restrictions on immigration, but both ignore the basic fact that you are either in the single market or you are out. You either accept freedom of movement or you accept being poorer as a country. "Listening to leave voters" is akin to listening to the Daily Mail and Express for the most part. Genuine Lexit supporters, like Corbyn, are likely to be a very small minority. I'm not especially keen on our economic future being decided by people who agree with everything they read in the right wing press, even if they are genuine working class voices, their words come straight from the likes of Murdoch. If this is "democracy", its shit and we'll all be the worse off for it.

But Willow freedom of movement has become the alternative to being workless in Greece and elsewhere rather than an aspiration to build a strong multicultural Europe.

Freedom of movement as a human right yes please. Freedom of movement as a capitalist tool to drive down wages across the contienent, no thank you.

And how do you achieve that? Inside the EU we had influence. Now we have nothing. Perhaps as a member of the single market we could try to build a consensus for change, but much less likely than when we were in the EU. The alternative is hard Brexit. That means being poorer as a country in the short to medium term. That means opportunities for future Tory governments to strip away workers rights, regulations and open us up to the extremes of free market economics. I can't choose between "might be's", all I can do is look at the alternatives right in front of me. Membership of the single market is the least worst option as far as I'm concerned and I can't support a party that will risk taking us fully out.

But we are still a member and will be for ages. We haven't left yet. That's the (huge) space we can work in. Talk about what we want, even if seems unattainable right now. And as things evolve take the opportunities that come along. Wait for the mood to change. It will.

[JonnyT1234]

David Allen Green ‏@DavidAllenGreen 3h3 hours ago
For Leavers who tell Remainers to "over it" I have set out 19 hurdles and respectfully invite them to get over those

The many hurdles of Brexit – a short summary post

http://jackofkent.com/2016/09/the-many- ... mary-post/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hurdle 20: the enormous cost of exiting the EU in terms of time, resource and money. It's going to paralyse the apparatus of the state - legal and civil - for years.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

David Allen Green ‏@DavidAllenGreen 3h3 hours ago
For Leavers who tell Remainers to "over it" I have set out 19 hurdles and respectfully invite them to get over those

The many hurdles of Brexit – a short summary post

http://jackofkent.com/2016/09/the-many- ... mary-post/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hurdle 20: the enormous cost of exiting the EU in terms of time, resource and money. It's going to paralyse the apparatus of the state - legal and civil - for years.

Well exactly. People will be sick to death of Brexit before we get anywhere near leaving

[HindleA]

http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/bristol-re ... 5ujti4v.99" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Bristol residents start pants protest to show council what they think of MetroBus roadworks

[HindleA]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

'I feel ashamed in a way I never did before': your stories of PIP assessment

[HindleA]

Values

[AnatolyKasparov]

Values

As in Tesco?

[tinybgoat]

Ed's approach is similar to Corbyn's and both are better than Reeves and Umunna's blunt call for restrictions on immigration, but both ignore the basic fact that you are either in the single market or you are out. You either accept freedom of movement or you accept being poorer as a country. "Listening to leave voters" is akin to listening to the Daily Mail and Express for the most part. Genuine Lexit supporters, like Corbyn, are likely to be a very small minority. I'm not especially keen on our economic future being decided by people who agree with everything they read in the right wing press, even if they are genuine working class voices, their words come straight from the likes of Murdoch. If this is "democracy", its shit and we'll all be the worse off for it.

But Willow freedom of movement has become the alternative to being workless in Greece and elsewhere rather than an aspiration to build a strong multicultural Europe.

Freedom of movement as a human right yes please. Freedom of movement as a capitalist tool to drive down wages across the contienent, no thank you.

And how do you achieve that? Inside the EU we had influence. Now we have nothing. Perhaps as a member of the single market we could try to build a consensus for change, but much less likely than when we were in the EU. The alternative is hard Brexit. That means being poorer as a country in the short to medium term. That means opportunities for future Tory governments to strip away workers rights, regulations and open us up to the extremes of free market economics. I can't choose between "might be's", all I can do is look at the alternatives right in front of me. Membership of the single market is the least worst option as far as I'm concerned and I can't support a party that will risk taking us fully out.

Allow freedom of movement as a right,
but protect workers rights and wage levels through
Proper enforcement of minimum wages, and probably setting different levels of minimum wage by job/industry/profession if needed.
Also by training of workforce if needed.
(I'm probably missing something & don't know if this contravenes EU rules, but no-ones explained otherwise to me, yet...)

[citizenJA]

Thornberry's speech reads well, anyone view it?

http://press.labour.org.uk/post/1509545 ... ortfall-in" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yes, bar one important thing* I liked it and hope Labour continue making clear Tory government's disastrous handling of the EU referendum is wholly Tory failure, an ongoing catastrophe without coherent plan or policy. Outlandish responses from Tory leadership, former Tory PM bunking off, currently May and her ministers acting behind closed doors, communicating little and seemingly without clear, rational plans for the UK now leaving people and country in an untenable position. Thornberry communicated this and more far better than I.

*The assumptions throughout Thornberry's speech that the UK is undoubtedly leaving the EU, Brexit is happening for sure are alarming to me and any assistance I can have from my friends here to allay my fears are most welcome. The UK leaving the EU, Brexiting, is a done deal? Is that correct?

[JonnyT1234]

Thornberry's speech reads well, anyone view it?

http://press.labour.org.uk/post/1509545 ... ortfall-in" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yes, bar one important thing* I liked it and hope Labour continue making clear Tory government's disastrous handling of the EU referendum is wholly Tory failure, an ongoing catastrophe without coherent plan or policy. Outlandish responses from Tory leadership, former Tory PM bunking off, currently May and her ministers acting behind closed doors, communicating little and seemingly without clear, rational plans for the UK now leaving people and country in an untenable position. Thornberry communicated this and more far better than I.

*The assumptions throughout Thornberry's speech that the UK is undoubtedly leaving the EU, Brexit is happening for sure are alarming to me and any assistance I can have from my friends here to allay my fears are most welcome. The UK leaving the EU, Brexiting, is a done deal? Is that correct?

It's a done deal while the Tories remain in power, yes. May's position is too weak within her party for her to be able to over ride the dominance of her wing nut right on this issue. Even if Labour had the best leader in the world, ever, and were completely united, that paltry 12 majority means that May has to do her party's bidding. And that bidding is to get out.

[citizenJA]

...freedom of movement has become the alternative to being workless in Greece and elsewhere rather than an aspiration to build a strong multicultural Europe.

Freedom of movement as a human right yes please. Freedom of movement as a capitalist tool to drive down wages across the contienent, no thank you.

As much as I agree with the freedom of movement distinctions you've made, it'll be rendered moot if government take the UK out of the EU.

I know. I just don't think agonising over the result of the referendum is likely to be fertile for Labour or anyone really. Let's leave the Tories to deal with the fall-out. I think Labour, Greens, Lib Dems, SNP, Plaid can and should be making positive cases for how we can best engage with Europe in the future, regardless of whether the Tories actually succeed in Brexiting.

Time will change everything. There may end up being a second referendum without Labour having to call for it. We may leave then ask to go straight back in. Brexit may simply be deemed too hard and kicked into the long grass. For me, the important is to discuss what the EU should be and worry about getting there once we can control it. And if the broad left can do this, we may end up bringing parts of the EU with us, helping get the transformation of the EU that people are crying out for. Then it will make sense to call to scrap Brexit, or for a second referendum.

(cJA edit)

Thank you, Paul, I've posted another message not seeing you've written this, I'm trying to keep up with the thread. Thank you for your patience.

[JonnyT1234]

This crafty loophole could get the Tories out of paying their £9 minimum wage - Mirror Online
https://apple.news/ASp2cTmJ1RIqHa2MSK93ong" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The question is, are the Tories going to be that insane?

[PaulfromYorkshire]

Thornberry's speech reads well, anyone view it?

http://press.labour.org.uk/post/1509545 ... ortfall-in" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yes, bar one important thing* I liked it and hope Labour continue making clear Tory government's disastrous handling of the EU referendum is wholly Tory failure, an ongoing catastrophe without coherent plan or policy. Outlandish responses from Tory leadership, former Tory PM bunking off, currently May and her ministers acting behind closed doors, communicating little and seemingly without clear, rational plans for the UK now leaving people and country in an untenable position. Thornberry communicated this and more far better than I.

*The assumptions throughout Thornberry's speech that the UK is undoubtedly leaving the EU, Brexit is happening for sure are alarming to me and any assistance I can have from my friends here to allay my fears are most welcome. The UK leaving the EU, Brexiting, is a done deal? Is that correct?

Thornberry says

We have been given our instructions by the British people and we must act on them.

This is nuanced and sensible IMO. We must act. Not we must leave the EU.

[StephenDolan]

Patriots pay their taxes.

A nice snappy line right there.

[adam]

*The assumptions throughout Thornberry's speech that the UK is undoubtedly leaving the EU, Brexit is happening for sure are alarming to me and any assistance I can have from my friends here to allay my fears are most welcome. The UK leaving the EU, Brexiting, is a done deal? Is that correct?

There's a good piece from earlier this month by Jack of Kent here ...
Waiting for Brexit - A Note on Contentions and Biases

... which begins...

This post sets out my personal view of Brexit, and it also sets out what I believe to be my biases and preconceptions. ...
I did not expect ever to write any more than this on the topic: I assumed, like many people, that Remain would win and Cameron would get away with his political folly. Then Remain lost and Leave won, and a spectacular political-legal-policy mess was created. And, I am afraid, I found this mess fascinating. I still do.

[AngryAsWell]

Wolfgang Schäuble offers Boris Johnson lesson on EU law
Claim of ‘no automatic trade-off’ between free movement and single market slapped down
“We’ll happily send her majesty’s foreign minister a copy of the Lisbon treaty,” Mr Schäuble joked at a news conference in Berlin after exchanging a weary glance with Michel Sapin, his French counterpart sitting nearby. “He can then read about the fact that there’s a certain connection between the single market and the four freedoms. At a pinch, I can talk about it in English.”

https://www.ft.com/content/3b1a3c3e-81b ... c15fb462f4" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[citizenJA]

Thornberry's speech reads well, anyone view it?

http://press.labour.org.uk/post/1509545 ... ortfall-in" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yes, bar one important thing* I liked it and hope Labour continue making clear Tory government's disastrous handling of the EU referendum is wholly Tory failure, an ongoing catastrophe without coherent plan or policy. Outlandish responses from Tory leadership, former Tory PM bunking off, currently May and her ministers acting behind closed doors, communicating little and seemingly without clear, rational plans for the UK now leaving people and country in an untenable position. Thornberry communicated this and more far better than I.

*The assumptions throughout Thornberry's speech that the UK is undoubtedly leaving the EU, Brexit is happening for sure are alarming to me and any assistance I can have from my friends here to allay my fears are most welcome. The UK leaving the EU, Brexiting, is a done deal? Is that correct?

It's a done deal while the Tories remain in power, yes. May's position is too weak within her party for her to be able to over ride the dominance of her wing nut right on this issue. Even if Labour had the best leader in the world, ever, and were completely united, that paltry 12 majority means that May has to do her party's bidding. And that bidding is to get out.

We don't know what May's Tory government are going to do. We haven't known what Tory government will do with the EU
referendum results because they've not told us what their plans are in a straightforward way. You're absolutely correct
about Labour's position - Labour isn't in government but opposition.