Thursday 17th September 2015

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 8:52 am

Morning each.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 8:58 am

Morning.

Peter Jukes ‏@peterjukes 13h13 hours ago
"The threats obscure a much more important fact: Rebekah Brooks has not been cleared of all criminal charges" http://www.politico.eu/article/rebekah- ... ceo-paper/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

Mark Lewis ‏@MarkLewisLawyer 10h10 hours ago
Oh there is more to come. Much more. @peterjukes @jpublik

Fingers crossed. Mark Lewis should be in a position to know.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 9:03 am

The robotic droning on about 'security', 'national security' from the Tories isn't just aimed at Corbyn, but to soften us up for M15's powers to be increased.

The head of M15 was interviewed on Today earlier. First time a live interview with someone in his role has happened.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34276525" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 9:19 am

Tory MEP:
David C Bannerman ‏@DCBMEP 6m6 minutes ago
Congrats to @BBCr4today on Andrew Parker MI5 Head interview. M15/6 should have all powers they need to protect lives http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34276525" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

& I noticed the 10,000 increase in unemployment got hardly a whisper on the BBC yesterday, or on the parts I listened to/viewed.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 9:20 am

Mohammed Ansar ‏@MoAnsar 50m50 minutes ago
'If you think we cause radicalisation, phaps we should take an interest in you' threatens Andrew Parker, MI5 Director General on @BBCr4today

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 9:23 am

yahyah wrote:Morning.

Peter Jukes ‏@peterjukes 13h13 hours ago
"The threats obscure a much more important fact: Rebekah Brooks has not been cleared of all criminal charges" http://www.politico.eu/article/rebekah- ... ceo-paper/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

Mark Lewis ‏@MarkLewisLawyer 10h10 hours ago
Oh there is more to come. Much more. @peterjukes @jpublik

Fingers crossed. Mark Lewis should be in a position to know.

That's a very good article, thanks.

I thought I read recently that Cameron had been advised by Craig Oliver to go nowhere near Brooks and Brooks socially or politically - no country suppers, no shared dining tables anywhere, no shared photo opps, no meetings etc. I can see why.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 9:24 am

yahyah wrote:Tory MEP:
David C Bannerman ‏@DCBMEP 6m6 minutes ago
Congrats to @BBCr4today on Andrew Parker MI5 Head interview. M15/6 should have all powers they need to protect lives http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34276525" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

& I noticed the 10,000 increase in unemployment got hardly a whisper on the BBC yesterday, or on the parts I listened to/viewed.

The reports I heard all started with the 2.9% rise in wages and most people ever being in employment and then tacked on a but .... with the rise in unemployment.

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 9:26 am

yahyah wrote:The robotic droning on about 'security', 'national security' from the Tories isn't just aimed at Corbyn, but to soften us up for M15's powers to be increased.

The head of M15 was interviewed on Today earlier. First time a live interview with someone in his role has happened.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34276525" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I feel so much safer knowing that with new ways of communicating we need new manners of eavesdropping, yahyah. 'And there was me thinking it were rude to listen in to others' conversations. Still safety first I hear... and if you've nothing to hide you've nothing to fear.

I feel so much better now thank you but cannot help but wonder what Mrs. Blurt, was it (?) had to hide, let alone what Dave and Rebekah were up to. Some of the DWP data wouldn't go amiss for that matter and if I remember correctly we only saw a draft of the NHS reforms risk register.

Now I get it, I understand exactly what they mean by nothing to hide, nothing to fear. There is nothing like uncovering the truth now, is there?

sputnikkers · Post by **sputnikkers** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 9:28 am

ICYMI - Thought the following might be of interest to some here who might want to spread the word via other Internet media. Should come up at the top of the Google Search Home Page (until donated?) or directly via https://onetoday.google.com/page/refugeerelief?c=GB:

To double the impact of your contribution, Google will match the first €5 million in donations globally, until together we raise €10 million for relief efforts.

Your donation will go directly to Network for Good and will then be distributed to four non-profits providing aid to refugees and migrants. These non-profits are helping deliver essential assistance – including shelter, food and water and medical care – and looking after the security and rights of people in need. Google will cover all processing fees so that 100% of your donation goes to where it is needed most.

[Up to £3.74 million "pledged" (total?) so don't know exactly when the 'matching' pledge runs out]

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 9:29 am

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 03550.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The real problem, though, was that after 10 minutes of calm exchanges between the main party leaders, everything went back to the “yah-boo” of before.
Mr Cameron clashed angrily with the SNP’s Westminster Leader, Angus Robertson, telling him the SNP were “frit” and shouting “you” – momentarily forgetting the Commons convention of referring to members in the third person.

I only caught the beginning of PMQs so didn't see the SNP questions, so found this interesting. I struggle to see how Cameron got away with pretending he enjoyed the calmer style if he dumped it the minute he didn't have to worry about insulting Marie or Paul. It also suggests the moment Cameron is properly put on the spot he will always respond with bluster, which sadly remains effective for him.

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 9:31 am

@yahyah

Now, now, yahyah, please show some intelligence, will you? Who wants to know about those with nothing to do?

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 9:34 am

Willow904 wrote:http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 03550.html
The real problem, though, was that after 10 minutes of calm exchanges between the main party leaders, everything went back to the “yah-boo” of before.
Mr Cameron clashed angrily with the SNP’s Westminster Leader, Angus Robertson, telling him the SNP were “frit” and shouting “you” – momentarily forgetting the Commons convention of referring to members in the third person.
I only caught the beginning of PMQs so didn't see the SNP questions, so found this interesting. I struggle to see how Cameron got away with pretending he enjoyed the calmer style if he dumped it the minute he didn't have to worry about insulting Marie or Paul. It also suggests the moment Cameron is properly put on the spot he will always respond with bluster, which sadly remains effective for him.

They played a clip on the Parliament report on Radio 4.
A shouty blustering Cameron, followed by a calm Angus Robertson saying something like civilised PMQs didn't last long. Can't remember the exact words.

The Parliamentary reporter also claimed Corbyn got more cheers from the SNP than from his own MPs when he started speaking.

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 9:38 am

@Willow904

It embarrasses me to admit that I cannot remember who it was yesterday evening that pointed out that the most popular thing on iPlayer were PMQs. You could always add to the interest, Willow, should you wish. Just saying.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 9:41 am

utopiandreams wrote:@Willow904

It embarrasses me to admit that I cannot remember who it was yesterday evening that pointed out that the most popular thing on iPlayer were PMQs. You could always add to the interest, Willow, should you wish. Just saying.

Twas Hobiejoe.

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 9:42 am

Before I upset anybody today, you may be pleased to learn that I have other things to do, not least activities that GCHQ had better not know. Going offline for a bit.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 9:43 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:
yahyah wrote:Morning.

Peter Jukes ‏@peterjukes 13h13 hours ago
"The threats obscure a much more important fact: Rebekah Brooks has not been cleared of all criminal charges" http://www.politico.eu/article/rebekah- ... ceo-paper/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

Mark Lewis ‏@MarkLewisLawyer 10h10 hours ago
Oh there is more to come. Much more. @peterjukes @jpublik

Fingers crossed. Mark Lewis should be in a position to know.
That's a very good article, thanks.

I thought I read recently that Cameron had been advised by Craig Oliver to go nowhere near Brooks and Brooks socially or politically - no country suppers, no shared dining tables anywhere, no shared photo opps, no meetings etc. I can see why.

& interesting that Murdoch let go of the chance to reclaim £25m in court expenses rather than have the court examine News International to see if they had brought it on themselves.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 9:43 am

yahyah wrote:
Willow904 wrote:http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 03550.html
The real problem, though, was that after 10 minutes of calm exchanges between the main party leaders, everything went back to the “yah-boo” of before.
Mr Cameron clashed angrily with the SNP’s Westminster Leader, Angus Robertson, telling him the SNP were “frit” and shouting “you” – momentarily forgetting the Commons convention of referring to members in the third person.
I only caught the beginning of PMQs so didn't see the SNP questions, so found this interesting. I struggle to see how Cameron got away with pretending he enjoyed the calmer style if he dumped it the minute he didn't have to worry about insulting Marie or Paul. It also suggests the moment Cameron is properly put on the spot he will always respond with bluster, which sadly remains effective for him.
They played a clip on the Parliament report on Radio 4.
A shouty blustering Cameron, followed by a calm Angus Robertson saying something like civilised PMQs didn't last long. Can't remember the exact words.

The Parliamentary reporter also claimed Corbyn got more cheers from the SNP than from his own MPs when he started speaking.

And Mhairi Black sent out a very good tweet about PMQs in support of Corbyn and his questions and attacking the Tories for sniggering at them. She said something like at least he's representing real people unlike the DWP ... spot on.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 9:44 am

utopiandreams wrote:Before I upset anybody today, you may be pleased to learn that I have other things to do, not least activities that GCHQ had better not know. Going offline for a bit.

They can still watch you <tin foil hat firmly on>

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 9:46 am

utopiandreams wrote:Before I upset anybody today, you may be pleased to learn that I have other things to do, not least activities that GCHQ had better not know. Going offline for a bit.

In that case I think we could say we are hotly anticipating your return UD.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 9:47 am

Daily Mail Comments
‏@BestoftheMail
Wonder what's more traitorous - not singing during a national anthem or hacking the phones of the Royal Family? #hypocrites

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 9:57 am

@yahyah

Had better not take my phone to the toilet with me then, yahyah.

@rebeccariots2

Surely not, rr2, it's time I cooled down a little... or as students used to tell me at college, to which I could only stare blankly, "You really need to chill out , Sir."

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 10:17 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Daily Mail Comments
‏@BestoftheMail
Wonder what's more traitorous - not singing during a national anthem or hacking the phones of the Royal Family? #hypocrites

Oooh, catty! Viscount Rothermere taking a swipe at the upstart Australian? As a Labour supporting republican it's hard to know who to cheer on! Perhaps just hope they both manage to land a punch?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 10:20 am

Willow904 wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:
Daily Mail Comments
‏@BestoftheMail
Wonder what's more traitorous - not singing during a national anthem or hacking the phones of the Royal Family? #hypocrites
Oooh, catty! Viscount Rothermere taking a swipe at the upstart Australian? As a Labour supporting republican it's hard to know who to cheer on! Perhaps just hope they both manage to land a punch?

I'm not sure who runs that twitter account. I had assumed it wasn't really the Daily Mail ... is it?

Post by **refitman** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 10:31 am

Hello sputnikkers!

*waves*

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 10:52 am

Sarah Champion, even?

Yeah, that's very good news. She is a bit of a hero of mine after seeing off UKIP so well in both the 2012 by-election and the GE.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 11:49 am

yahyah wrote:Morning.

Peter Jukes ‏@peterjukes 13h13 hours ago
"The threats obscure a much more important fact: Rebekah Brooks has not been cleared of all criminal charges" http://www.politico.eu/article/rebekah- ... ceo-paper/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

Mark Lewis ‏@MarkLewisLawyer 10h10 hours ago
Oh there is more to come. Much more. @peterjukes @jpublik

Fingers crossed. Mark Lewis should be in a position to know.

Why do these people believe they are above the law? Do they think they have enough power and/or enough money to buy themselves out of trouble?

Remembering the state Rebekah Brooks was in when she was being interviewed outside the Court, [and I don't think that was put on] if it were you or I we'd be keeping a very low profile, or at least making damn sure we weren't in that position again if we could possibly help it.

What on earth drives these people?

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 11:56 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Sarah Champion, even?

Yeah, that's very good news. She is a bit of a hero of mine after seeing off UKIP so well in both the 2012 by-election and the GE.

I would have been strongly tempted to vote for her if she'd been standing as leader.

nickyinnorfolk · Post by **nickyinnorfolk** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 12:23 pm

I didn't see it, but apparently the BBC's Chief Tory Stooge (AKA Laura Kuenssberg) was asking JC a load of irrelevant nonsense about whether he'd kneel to her Maj. Not surprisingly, the Daily Heil felt moved to reproduce LK's effort verbatim. That's the level the supposedly impartial BBC has plunged to.

Meanwhile, the MSM has also latched onto news that JC had a 'fling' with Diane Abbott way back in the 70s. Interestingly, Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson has tweeted that

Does anyone really think DAs promotion is due to a 40 y.o. fling rather than the lifetime of friendship & shared activism since? Come on.
8:37 AM - 17 Sep 2015

Quite a sensible reaction from RD. At least she's one Scottish Tory with some integrity. [Stares hard at boot faced Ms Kuenssberg ...

]

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 12:26 pm

I suspect that Abbott knew this was coming and that why she has been lying low for a bit (including missing that HoC tax credits vote on Tuesday evening)

Of course, it is no surprise to anybody who read her profile in Private Eye soon after she was first elected in 1987

ScarletGas · Post by **ScarletGas** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 12:38 pm

Richard Murphy (like his thought processes or not) on Daily Politics giving Andrew Neil the sort of assertive responses and questioning of figures I would like Labour to adopt in their dealings with the media/press.

But who the hell is Lady Prosser,a Labour Peer, who seems to be doing nothing but damning Corbyn with feint praise.

Just looked up her Wikipedia entry. Obviously did a lot of good work as a Trades Union official and rose to become treasurer of the Labour Party so entitled to her voice.

Oh, Oh the foreword of her autobiography was written by one Anthony Blair. That does not invalidate her opinions but I think it does, in my view,add a little colour to them.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 12:40 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Willow904 wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:
Oooh, catty! Viscount Rothermere taking a swipe at the upstart Australian? As a Labour supporting republican it's hard to know who to cheer on! Perhaps just hope they both manage to land a punch?
I'm not sure who runs that twitter account. I had assumed it wasn't really the Daily Mail ... is it?

No idea, in my innocence just assumed so!

ScarletGas · Post by **ScarletGas** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 12:47 pm

nickyinnorfolk wrote:I didn't see it, but apparently the BBC's Chief Tory Stooge (AKA Laura Kuenssberg) was asking JC a load of irrelevant nonsense about whether he'd kneel to her Maj. Not surprisingly, the Daily Heil felt moved to reproduce LK's effort verbatim. That's the level the supposedly impartial BBC has plunged to.

Meanwhile, the MSM has also latched onto news that JC had a 'fling' with Diane Abbott way back in the 70s. Interestingly, Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson has tweeted that

Does anyone really think DAs promotion is due to a 40 y.o. fling rather than the lifetime of friendship & shared activism since? Come on.
8:37 AM - 17 Sep 2015
Quite a sensible reaction from RD. At least she's one Scottish Tory with some integrity. [Stares hard at boot faced Ms Kuenssberg ... ]

Interesting that La Kuenssberg asked Corbyn if he would kneel before the Queen if/when invited on to the Privy Council .

The reply, if I remember correctly, was "let me think about that" to which LK replied "so that's a no then"

Obviously has a problem listening to the actual answer rather than the one she wants.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 12:51 pm

Nigel Dodds on the Daily Politics commenting on John McDonnell and his stance on the IRA. I personally feel Corbyn is just about defendable on his past attitudes to the IRA but McDonnell has made comments that are much more difficult to defend. This isn't about smears, this is about McDonnell's actual views, which will not be acceptable to many people, myself included. I'm afraid for me, McDonnell's appointment in such a prominent role continues to prevent me from getting behind Jeremy Corbyn. He shows commendable loyalty to his old friend, but I fear it will come at a high cost to the party.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 12:52 pm

Only fair to point out that McDonnell has changed - and his some respects apologised for - certain of his past views on this topic?

He is on QT tonight - whatever else happens it is unlikely to be dull. Might just be tempted to take a look myself.......

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 12:59 pm

Wow.

I've just started reading the written evidence given to the Edu Select Committee about their nvestigation into regional Schols Commissioners...and I have to say this one, from someone brought into advise the Kemnal Academy Trust (TKAT) based in south and south east, makes for very interesting reading.

http://data.parliament.uk/writteneviden ... 18948.html

2. When I revisited them earlier in 2015, it was evident they had not been able to implement this model. One reason was that they had been under pressure from the RSC to take on specific failing schools, even schools as distant as Cornwall and Manchester, and although they had resisted those geographical extremes, it was evident that their expansion had not followed my controlled expansion model focused on successful schooling. In 2015, at 41 schools, their capacity to deliver improved standards in all their schools was now being seriously questioned by the department and by Ofsted. I believe the original “stepping stone” model I recommended remains a viable strategy for MATs charged with delivering sustainable school improvement.

3. In March and April 2015, I personally carried out over 30, lengthy interviews. Everyone I spoke to who was part of this trust spoke frankly, professionally and demonstrated a remarkable unity of purpose. It quickly became clear that in the few months leading up to my review, the relationship between the trust, Ofsted and the RSC was not conducive to improving schools and I realised a key deliverable for my team was to change that.

a) In the words of a board member I interviewed, the relationship between the trust and the department was “classically dysfunctional”. He estimated that the CEO was spending 7/10 her time managing that relationship. As someone whose career had been outside education, he found the situation “unbelievable” and asked me, “What on earth is going on?” I think these comments are worth quoting verbatim because they illustrate the differences in thinking between business and education, differences which lie at the heart of why efforts at performance managing schools by RSCs remains problematic.

Whoops.

Not exactly the "yes, the RSCs are all doing a great job" that the DfE likes to tell everyone. Doesn't say which RSC though - either Dominc Herrington who used to be Director of the Academies group at the DfE, or Tim Coulson who was director of education at Essex CC.

Some juicy stuff for the committee though...

nickyinnorfolk · Post by **nickyinnorfolk** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 1:01 pm

ScarletGas wrote:
nickyinnorfolk wrote:I didn't see it, but apparently the BBC's Chief Tory Stooge (AKA Laura Kuenssberg) was asking JC a load of irrelevant nonsense about whether he'd kneel to her Maj. Not surprisingly, the Daily Heil felt moved to reproduce LK's effort verbatim. That's the level the supposedly impartial BBC has plunged to.

Meanwhile, the MSM has also latched onto news that JC had a 'fling' with Diane Abbott way back in the 70s. Interestingly, Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson has tweeted that

Does anyone really think DAs promotion is due to a 40 y.o. fling rather than the lifetime of friendship & shared activism since? Come on.
8:37 AM - 17 Sep 2015
Quite a sensible reaction from RD. At least she's one Scottish Tory with some integrity. [Stares hard at boot faced Ms Kuenssberg ... ]
Interesting that La Kuenssberg asked Corbyn if he would kneel before the Queen if/when invited on to the Privy Council .

The reply, if I remember correctly, was "let me think about that" to which LK replied "so that's a no then"

Obviously has a problem listening to the actual answer rather than the one she wants.

It's a sub Paxman style of interviewing, which boils down to the idea that politicians are uniformly evasive and won't give a straight answer, therefore have to be forced to say yes or no. It's simple minded and insulting to the viewing public. It also fails to take into account that Corbyn is a different kind of politician. He's not like - for example - Michael Howard, who was deliberately slippery about his role in scapegoating a subordinate for his own screw ups (the infamous interview with Paxo over Derek Lewis's sacking). Corbyn recognises that sometimes issues are complex and not black and white. He's also scrupulously honest, which in these days of so called 'post truth' politics is very confusing for the likes of LK.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 1:08 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Only fair to point out that McDonnell has changed - and his some respects apologised for - certain of his past views on this topic?

He is on QT tonight - whatever else happens it is unlikely to be dull. Might just be tempted to take a look myself.......

It's fair to point out he may have changed his views, but it's not as though he was a naive young 20-something when he said that IRA terrorists should be honoured, when he praised their "bravery". Whatever motivation he now ascribes to his words, you have to accept that for some people they are impossible to forgive and it's hard to have any sort of trust or faith in the man who uttered them. McDonnell in a more minor role I could overlook, but his appointment as Chancellor leaves me unable to fully support Corbyn's leadership. I simply can't feel comfortable with someone with such poor judgement being in charge of Labour's economic policy.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 1:13 pm

I understand where you are coming from.

My own view is that JC felt obliged to stick with his long time ally in "return" for compromising on other things. It was symbolic as much as anything.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 1:37 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:I understand where you are coming from.

My own view is that JC felt obliged to stick with his long time ally in "return" for compromising on other things. It was symbolic as much as anything.

Symbolic of the fact that McDonnell has failed in his own attempts at leadership twice before and has had to settle for being the power behind the throne? Every time I try to be optimistic about Corbyn, I keep coming back to these doubts, that McDonnell is the one really in charge, because it was his ambition behind Corbyn's bid and he is someone I find hard to trust. I know others won't agree with or understand my point of view, but I'm just trying to explain the dismay that I feel at how Corbyn's leadership has so far developed and why I can't share others optimism and excitement. An article I saw from a link on twitter where McDonnell and Corbyn gave an interview before the election where they openly plotted to undermine Ed Miliband's government if Labour won hasn't exactly helped either.

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 1:51 pm

A post by Billy Bragg I saw on Facebook

Having voted for Jeremy Corbyn in the leadership race via my membership of the Musicians Union, I went along to my first Labour Party branch meeting in Bridport last night.

The room was packed, with some standing at the back, many of us attending for the first time. After welcoming newcomers, the chair informed us that the branch now has over 200 members, which is not bad for a Tory safe seat in a rural area. He was impressed by the number of young people who had joined and stated his hope was that, in a year’s time, someone in their twenties would be chairing our meetings.

Once the brief formalities were over, we began discussing how the party would be changing in the light of Corbyn's commitment to giving party members a greater say in making policy. It was agreed that, rather than send someone to speak for us at General Committee meetings, they should be open to all members to come along and make contributions.
With party conference just 10 days away, our Constituency Labour Party delegate was present to hear our views on the issues that we felt were important. We discussed affordable housing, the NHS and the renewal of Britain’s nuclear weapons.
The chair also proposed that we began reaching out to other parties that might share our aims and, as a result, we agreed to invite the local Green Party to send a delegate along to address our next meeting.

We also heard that, on some occasions in the past, leafleting had been done by the chair alone, for lack of available volunteers. It was hoped that this would change with the new influx and that the party would be able to get its message out locally. I felt this was the most crucial part of the meeting. If we hope to overcome the torrent of abuse and misinformation directed towards Corbyn’s leadership, then we have to become active.

In the past few weeks, we have overturned the all-powerful Blairite machine within the party and served notice to the political class that we demand different solutions to the problems that our society faces. However, to have voted for Jeremy Corbyn without now engaging in his struggle – our struggle – is to reduce your participation to little more than a Facebook like.

Of course we can take part in the argument online, but if we really want to achieve the fundamental change that Corbyn offers, then we have to get out there and talk to the people who don’t agree with us, to convince them of our case for a fairer society. If we don’t do that, then the nay-sayers who claim Corbyn is unelectable will have been proved right. And if that happens - if we are unable to counter the lies and smears put about by the Tories and their allies – we will have no one to blame but ourselves.

I’m not prepared to sit at my keyboard and watch helplessly while that happens, so last night I came home and joined the Labour Party

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 1:54 pm

Written evidence from Robert Hill (ex-policy adviser to Blair and others and, interestingly, the author of the RSA's "The Missing Middle" report which set out the idea of schools commissioners before the DfE realised they needed them.)

http://data.parliament.uk/writteneviden ... 18836.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The interesting bit - apart from noting that RSCs look like becoming pseudo-local authority education departments- is at the end.

The legal basis for operating something akin to this system will soon potentially exist as the Government’s Cities and Local Government Devolution Bill contains clauses that would allow the Secretary of State for Education to delegate, subject to certain conditions, the functions she exercises through Regional Schools Commissioners to the new elected mayors and the combined authorities[12].

The agenda established by the Cities and Local Government Devolution Bill also provides two other helpful pointers for the future evolution of RSCs. First in the medium term it would be more sensible to align the boundaries of the RSC regions with economic sub-regions as the links between education, skills and the economy become more entwined. Such an arrangement would encourage curriculum models and progression routes that supported the local economy and worked across the school/further and higher education divide.

Second, the devolution agenda could also help with improving the accountability making RSCs accountable to city mayors as they are established. Where city regions or combined authorities are not in place then local authority cabinet members for a group of local authorities might apply to the Secretary of State to be given a greater role in steering the work of RSCs and holding them to account.

*sharp intake of breath*

Not a surprise since his report called for school commissioners to be locally accountable not to the DfE but I can't see Morgan liking that idea at all.

Giving up some of her power? No, definitely not. It should happen though - even staunch Tories should feel uneasy about the power that the DfE now has over all schools - especially if they think "what happens if Labour were elected?"

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 1:57 pm

Willow904 wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:I understand where you are coming from.

My own view is that JC felt obliged to stick with his long time ally in "return" for compromising on other things. It was symbolic as much as anything.
Symbolic of the fact that McDonnell has failed in his own attempts at leadership twice before and has had to settle for being the power behind the throne? Every time I try to be optimistic about Corbyn, I keep coming back to these doubts, that McDonnell is the one really in charge, because it was his ambition behind Corbyn's bid and he is someone I find hard to trust. I know others won't agree with or understand my point of view, but I'm just trying to explain the dismay that I feel at how Corbyn's leadership has so far developed and why I can't share others optimism and excitement. An article I saw from a link on twitter where McDonnell and Corbyn gave an interview before the election where they openly plotted to undermine Ed Miliband's government if Labour won hasn't exactly helped either.

I would be interested to see a link to that piece you mention at the end there.

Whatever else you say about Corbyn and McDonnell, it wasn't them or even their wing of the party doing most of the undermining of Ed *before* the election - was it?

Rebecca · Post by **Rebecca** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 2:00 pm

Willow904 wrote:Nigel Dodds on the Daily Politics commenting on John McDonnell and his stance on the IRA. I personally feel Corbyn is just about defendable on his past attitudes to the IRA but McDonnell has made comments that are much more difficult to defend. This isn't about smears, this is about McDonnell's actual views, which will not be acceptable to many people, myself included. I'm afraid for me, McDonnell's appointment in such a prominent role continues to prevent me from getting behind Jeremy Corbyn. He shows commendable loyalty to his old friend, but I fear it will come at a high cost to the party.

Am not sure which party you actually support,so this question might be pointless,but if you are a Labour supporter and feel unable to support the party leader,who do you support?If that makes sense.(Does to me anyway).

Rebecca · Post by **Rebecca** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 2:12 pm

Private education is dangerous.
My son went to private school from 13.It was very good for him tbh.However,he rang me yesterday,quite aghast that Corbyn had not sung the n.a.Oh rubbish,said I.Why should he?I wouldn't.Who even knows the words?
Well,everybody,said son,perplexed.
Nonsense,said I.You don't.
Then he recited all bloody verses.So,that's where the money went.

Rebecca · Post by **Rebecca** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 2:48 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:
Rebecca wrote:Private education is dangerous.
My son went to private school from 13.It was very good for him tbh.However,he rang me yesterday,quite aghast that Corbyn had not sung the n.a.Oh rubbish,said I.Why should he?I wouldn't.Who even knows the words?
Well,everybody,said son,perplexed.
Nonsense,said I.You don't.
Then he recited all bloody verses.So,that's where the money went.
Even the second verse? Crikey. I was in the Scout movement for many years and must have sung the blasted dirge more times than I can count, but we only ever sang the first and third verses, to the best of my recollection. I could probably recite the third verse at a push... thy choicest gifts in store/on her be pleased to pour/long may she reign.... er... something something and ever give us cause/to sing with heart and voice/ God save etc etc... Going to have to look it up now.

The second verse is the one about scattering her enemies and frustrating their knavish tricks but I'm not sure if I ever sang it.

If your money went on rote-learning the national anthem, that's another good reason I can think of for scrapping all private education!

Edit: May she defend our laws! That's it.

Second verse, rarely sung, is:

O Lord our God arise,
Scatter her enemies,
And make them fall:
Confound their politics,
Frustrate their knavish tricks,
On Thee our hopes we fix:
God save us all.

I doubt if they sat down and learnt all the words as such,probably more like the way I knew loads of hymns by heart from singing them at catholic school.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 2:51 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:I would be interested to see a link to that piece you mention at the end there.

Whatever else you say about Corbyn and McDonnell, it wasn't them or even their wing of the party doing most of the undermining of Ed *before* the election - was it?

Only if you are suggesting that Tom Watson is not from that wing of the party. That man was as reliable a Rentagob as the loathsome Danczuk and far more damaging imo.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 3:02 pm

Rebecca wrote:
Willow904 wrote:Nigel Dodds on the Daily Politics commenting on John McDonnell and his stance on the IRA. I personally feel Corbyn is just about defendable on his past attitudes to the IRA but McDonnell has made comments that are much more difficult to defend. This isn't about smears, this is about McDonnell's actual views, which will not be acceptable to many people, myself included. I'm afraid for me, McDonnell's appointment in such a prominent role continues to prevent me from getting behind Jeremy Corbyn. He shows commendable loyalty to his old friend, but I fear it will come at a high cost to the party.

Am not sure which party you actually support,so this question might be pointless,but if you are a Labour supporter and feel unable to support the party leader,who do you support?If that makes sense.(Does to me anyway).

I've been a Labour supporter all my life, because I believe in the Labour movement, the union movement and co-operative movements globally and feel ordinary people can only stand up for themselves through solidarity, but I'm also fundamentally a social democrat and as such my politics are probably closer to David Owen than Jeremy Corbyn because I don't like extremes in any direction. After many years of meaning to, I finally joined the Labour party because I liked Ed Miliband and liked the direction he was taking the party in. It seems I was the only one! I have to say, my antipathy to Corbyn is hard to explain. I broadly support his aims, I guess I'm just doubtful about his means of getting there. I've just never been a fan of the populist approach, I guess. The conformity of Corbyn fans on twitter, with their identical "I voted for Corbyn" sashes rather alarms me. I can't really explain why. I think it's the way it kind of excludes those who didn't.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 3:05 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:I would be interested to see a link to that piece you mention at the end there.

Whatever else you say about Corbyn and McDonnell, it wasn't them or even their wing of the party doing most of the undermining of Ed *before* the election - was it?
Only if you are suggesting that Tom Watson is not from that wing of the party. That man was as reliable a Rentagob as the loathsome Danczuk and far more damaging imo.
This was my concern, I have to say. As long as he's inside the tent and pissing out, so to speak...

My concern is that in or out of the tent he will piss where he wants (so to speak). I think Corbyn will be an interesting leader, but he'll have to do it with one eye constantly on Watson who will stab him in the back at the first opportunity; Corbyn's election is A Good Thing, Watson's is not and makes me exceedingly nervous.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 3:09 pm

Hi there, my friend

I share similar misgivings to others here about Watson, which is why I was originally going to put him last out of the 5.

However he had a strong campaign, and unlike some from the Labour right actually showed some awareness of what was needed if what was looking likely to happen did happen (and, of course, it did) Thus I relented and put him 3rd (still made no difference as my top choice went to - who else? - Stella)

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Thu 17 Sep, 2015 3:14 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Hi there, my friend

I share similar misgivings to others here about Watson, which is why I was originally going to put him last out of the 5.

However he had a strong campaign, and unlike some from the Labour right actually showed some awareness of what was needed if what was looking likely to happen did happen (and, of course, it did) Thus I relented and put him 3rd (still made no difference as my top choice went to - who else? - Stella)

Stella got my first choice, Ms Eagle my second. Watson got squat from me .... oh, apart from a rude email when he spammed me asking for support.

Not a permanent return on my part. My home PC has died, which makes my internet access infrequent (work and library only); but the atmosphere here has been hostile for some time, and my infrequent viewing during the leadership election did not suggest to me that my reasons for leaving were invalid.