Saturday 30th and Sunday 31st July 2016

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 12:45 pm

Chris John Ball ‏@cjball_london 4h4 hours ago
Dear @OwenSmith_MP have no problems with you reaching out to members but at 4.00 AM Sunday! Thanks for waking me, need phone near as a carer

Here's another instance. His campaign was sending identical 'we support Owen Smith' Tweets from all over the world. I wonder if they've outsourced these phone calls to a country on a different timeline?

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 12:49 pm

55DegreesNorth wrote:
tinybgoat wrote:
ephemerid wrote:I was asleep at 02.30 this morning, unusually for me as insomnia is a constant thing in my life, when I got a text message.

It was from the Owen Smith campaign. At 02.30 in the morning. I gather from Twitter that a few people have had these untimely messages.

I would like to know where they got my mobile number from. I am not a Labour Party member.
I have never had a single communication from Corbyn's campaign or from Momentum.

I am not impressed.
I got one of those, with the option to reply
YES,NO,NOT SURE, or STOP, (am currently a member of said tufty club, so suppose I shouldn't be too surprised), but I tried replying and message won't send.
Could get really irritating, but think there's a blocking filter somewhere on phone.
There is, if it's an iPhone. I blocked him yesterday.

I dread early hour phone calls. In the past it's invariably been bad news. They throw me into a right panic. ...

Post by **refitman** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 12:59 pm

Oh dear. May's judgement has to be called into question.

liam-fox-faces-questions-over-charity-he-set-up-to-help-mili
https://www.buzzfeed.com/jamesball/liam ... .oqmZ0rYM7" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 1:02 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Welfare Central #1 ‏@Welfare_Central 3h3 hours ago

Like @LabourEoin #WeAreHisMedia and we demand to know why @OwenSmith_MP is waking voters up in the early hours with unwanted text messages!

Sleep deprivation, classic cult behaviour,
Bloody Corbynistas!...oh, hang on.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 1:18 pm

refitman wrote:Oh dear. May's judgement has to be called into question.

liam-fox-faces-questions-over-charity-he-set-up-to-help-mili
https://www.buzzfeed.com/jamesball/liam ... .oqmZ0rYM7" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Cameron, Osborne and their cabinet treated the country like a free sweet shop. Now under May it's the same old faces only shuffled into different positions.

There's no reason to expect any different.

As far as I remember, The Independent's investigation into Cameron's 'Big Society' which 'lost' millions quietly died the death.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 1:25 pm

Count yourself lucky with the text thing,Owen Smith is so despetate he offered to get into bed with me.Discretion,means I will not reveal the outcome.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 1:30 pm

Just to be on the safe side and fear it becomes part of the #WeAreHisMedia thing.It isn't true.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 1:35 pm

Glad you clarified that tbh, at the moment few things are not believable

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 1:38 pm

http://whatdoesborisowe.co.uk/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 1:43 pm

HindleA wrote:Count yourself lucky with the text thing,Owen Smith is so despetate he offered to get into bed with me.Discretion,means I will not reveal the outcome.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 1:57 pm

Have we had this?

Right-to-buy policy is scrapped in Scotland

Housing associations welcome move after more than 30 years of scheme allowing social housing tenants to buy homes (Guardian)

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... al-housing

Post by **refitman** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 2:25 pm

I see Nick Cohen is moving further into the lunatic fringe. The last couple of paragraphs of his latest column are offensive to say the least (although unfortunately predictable).

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

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 2:54 pm

Hinkley offers a useful guide to May’s plans for Cameron’s legacy
Andrew Rawnsley

"The new regime at Number 10 instinctively treats any legacy from the Cameron-Osborne government as a dodgy bequest of the most suspect provenance. It was the reverse of helpful for the Hinkley deal that its most eager sponsor in the previous cabinet was Mr Osborne. That in itself made it suspect in the eyes of Mrs May. The former chancellor was also the keenest champion of a third runway at Heathrow so I would not be betting on that happening. She has already junked his deficit reduction plan and downgraded his focus on the Northern Powerhouse.

It will take a while before we get the full measure of how Mrs May will perform as prime minister. But we now have a useful, early rule of thumb for predicting how she will act. Imagine what George Osborne would do in any given situation and assume that Theresa May will do the opposite."

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

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 3:13 pm

Jeremy Corbyn Facing Backlash From Unions, Momentum Activist And Shadow Business Minister Over Hinkley C Nuclear Opposition
Medway Momentum co-founder backs Owen Smith in protest

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/j ... 2daa4a43c5" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 3:30 pm

Britain Elects ‏@britainelects Jul 30
Scottish voters / On a choice between a Scotland...

In the EU and not part of the UK: 37%

Part of the UK and not in the EU: 46%

(via YouGov)

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 3:34 pm

Revealed: The High Street firms that used benefits claimants for free labour
Government fought in the courts for four years to keep the companies' identities a secret.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 63646.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 3:46 pm

At 22.00hrs tonight, BBC4 are showing "Cathy Come Home".

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 4:06 pm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b007492r" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

thatchersorphan · Post by **thatchersorphan** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 4:45 pm

@ AngryAsWell Just finished reading Friday and I noticed your post on Sharon Hodgson on why she resigned (because McDs neurodiversity manifesto stepped on her toes) Thing is it wasn't specifically a children thing according to https://twitter.com/IamMrJ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; who I'm going to copy paste a lot,as typing hurts slightly more than grabbing chunks using the mouse)
Jonathan Hume ‏@IamMrJ Jul 29 I mean, i think she's forgetting that autism != 'children'. but you can judge for yourself.
tl;dr she should have had a role (for obvious reasons) but for her to demand the lead is kind of playing into myths (eg 'only children')
when the proposed policies would have been for autistic adults too (eg improving access to assessment as an adult, accommodations @ work?)
Also, she.. doesn't explain how McD's ND manifesto "undermined" the SEN review. She just.. claims it did.
Basically it feels like she thinks autism = children and thus McD stepped onto 'her turf' but it just proves she SHOUDLNT have taken lead?
I think it's quite telling how initial reaction was to be aggrieved, to claim they'd been undermined rather than complemented.
"Oh, a neurodiversity team would really work well with what we're doing on this!" vs "Oi, my turf, fuck off"
Perhaps someone should tell Sharon about the huge problems with disability/etc support being cut off as soon as someone turns 16?
Disabled children get support that then doesn't carry over as adult (eg accom. at work) because children are Acceptable Disableds

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 4:53 pm

Favourite for Ukip leader Steven Woolfe misses application deadline

MEP and migration spokesman could be out of leadership race but insists he is still a candidate

Too many paragraphs worthy of quoting here - so I've left it up to you to read it (or not).

The Peter Jewell "hold the fort for a while " bit especially caught my eye, though.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... tion-exclu

Edited - typo

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 5:16 pm

: Cosb5owUEAENey5.jpg (95.47 KiB) Viewed 6430 times

Sorry I don't have the link as to where this quote comes from or by who...If I find it I'll post it.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 5:21 pm

: CotENxGVMAAI9UR.jpg (60.14 KiB) Viewed 6419 times

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 5:38 pm

thatchersorphan wrote:@ AngryAsWell Just finished reading Friday and I noticed your post on Sharon Hodgson on why she resigned (because McDs neurodiversity manifesto stepped on her toes) Thing is it wasn't specifically a children thing according to https://twitter.com/IamMrJ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; who I'm going to copy paste a lot,as typing hurts slightly more than grabbing chunks using the mouse)
Jonathan Hume ‏@IamMrJ Jul 29 I mean, i think she's forgetting that autism != 'children'. but you can judge for yourself.
tl;dr she should have had a role (for obvious reasons) but for her to demand the lead is kind of playing into myths (eg 'only children')
when the proposed policies would have been for autistic adults too (eg improving access to assessment as an adult, accommodations @ work?)
Also, she.. doesn't explain how McD's ND manifesto "undermined" the SEN review. She just.. claims it did.
Basically it feels like she thinks autism = children and thus McD stepped onto 'her turf' but it just proves she SHOUDLNT have taken lead?
I think it's quite telling how initial reaction was to be aggrieved, to claim they'd been undermined rather than complemented.
"Oh, a neurodiversity team would really work well with what we're doing on this!" vs "Oi, my turf, fuck off"
Perhaps someone should tell Sharon about the huge problems with disability/etc support being cut off as soon as someone turns 16?
Disabled children get support that then doesn't carry over as adult (eg accom. at work) because children are Acceptable Disableds

Its called communication, why on earth did he not discuss with all relevant shadow minsters his idea before announcing it out of the blue. From education to health to adult mental health departments, all should have been consulted, if only to see where the new ministry would fit or overlap on their brief. It's not the right or wrong of the decision it's the total lack of communication from the top team down to those who would be responsible for preparing the policy.
Quote
Without consulting me, John had announced his support for a Shadow Neurodiversity Minister and an autism manifesto. My office picked up John’s announcement on Twitter, and subsequently raised the issue with him, requesting an opportunity to meet to discuss the matter further. After receiving no response, my team made several more attempts to reach out to John’s office, which were all met with no answer.

The combination of silence from John’s office and the large number of inquiries from external bodies and the media, left me with no option but to contact Jeremy’s office directly. Instead of support and an offer to resolve the problem, we were simply acknowledged with the sentence, “I appreciate the point”, and then told to expect an apology and clarification later, which never arrived. Indeed, nobody ever reached out to discuss the matter with me.
http://www.sharonhodgson.org/sharon_wri ... n_smith_mp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Picked up on Twitter.
That is no way to run a Shadow Cabinet.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 5:50 pm

Owen Jones

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Jones is one of the more self indulgent members of the left. He clearly never thought Corbyn would win, and has been pretty much alarmed since the start that he did.

Here he says, rightly, that Labour is on the brink of annihilation. But, ever the loyalist, he can't quite bring himself to say what the obvious conclusion is.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 5:57 pm

: Cosm1CYVMAEPDgW.png (89.48 KiB) Viewed 6386 times

Andy Burnham showing he's more principled than many in the PLP.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 6:00 pm

What's going on in the Labour party is distressing. No one is winning.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 6:02 pm

Andy Burnham: ‘I am ready to leave Westminster and devote myself to Manchester’

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... -interview" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 6:05 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:Owen Jones

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Jones is one of the more self indulgent members of the left. He clearly never thought Corbyn would win, and has been pretty much alarmed since the start that he did.

Here he says, rightly, that Labour is on the brink of annihilation. But, ever the loyalist, he can't quite bring himself to say what the obvious conclusion is.

Well, he may not draw the "obvious conclusion" because he is not convinced it would make things better - and may actually make them still worse.

What he really wants, as quite a few do, is a competent version of Corbyn without the baggage. He may yet take the view that, if so, the least worst option is sticking with Jez for another couple of years in the hope such a person may yet emerge.

One thing is for sure - Blairites don't have an answer to most of the questions he raises either.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 6:08 pm

: CotDfJ6VIAMq-VV.jpg (160.73 KiB) Viewed 6359 times

The @guardian accusing Jeremy of withdrawing from something he never agreed to.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ing-debate

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 6:15 pm

This is unbelievable. The government is handing over the running of its discrimination helpline to G4S.

You read that right. G4S stands accused of assaulting children in a UK young offenders’ unit, of torturing prisoners in South Africa, of putting the life of an unborn child at risk while deporting a wheelchair-using pregnant woman, of ‘unlawfully killing’ a man who was being deported to Angola, and of ripping off British taxpayers to the tune of millions.

And now the government wants the company to run a helpline to support those facing discrimination or human rights abuses.

https://actions.sumofus.org/a/don-t-han ... &source=tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 6:16 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
CotDfJ6VIAMq-VV.jpg

The @guardian accusing Jeremy of withdrawing from something he never agreed to.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ing-debate

The Guardian article doesn't actually say that Jeremy Corbyn has "withdrawn" from an event that he'd previously agreed to attend but rather that he refused to agree to attend at all. Which is fair enough on his part - if perhaps not wise.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 6:22 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
Well, he may not draw the "obvious conclusion" because he is not convinced it would make things better - and may actually make them still worse.

What he really wants, as quite a few do, is a competent version of Corbyn without the baggage. He may yet take the view that, if so, the least worst option is sticking with Jez for another couple of years in the hope such a person may yet emerge.

One thing is for sure - Blairites don't have an answer to most of the questions he raises either.

As far as I can see Jones is all critique and no answers.

I don't think it will make things better in the sense of win power in 2020. But Labour is not in that fight. it is now in a fight to survive as a viable opposition party.

As for Blairites, get over it. The 4.5% lost for good in 2015. That is over. Why you insist on wanting to re-run the fights of 2010 is beyond me. The choice is not between J Corbyn and D Miliband. D Miliband is not coming back, and nor is anybody like him, to lead Labour ever again. You won, well done. Look forward, not forever back.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 6:23 pm

Dr. Chris Jones ‏@dr_chris_jones 1h1 hour ago

Map Salford Quays showing how close MediaCity (BBC, ITV) was to #Corbyn rally at Lowry, yet not 1 camera crew at it!

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 6:46 pm

PorFavor wrote:
ohsocynical wrote:
CotDfJ6VIAMq-VV.jpg

The @guardian accusing Jeremy of withdrawing from something he never agreed to.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ing-debate

The Guardian article doesn't actually say that Jeremy Corbyn has "withdrawn" from an event that he'd previously agreed to attend but rather that he refused to agree to attend at all. Which is fair enough on his part - if perhaps not wise.

I read on another blog, that the Party has been handing him bookings to appear on TV, expecting him to drop previous commitments which he's refused to do.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 6:58 pm

"Because the leadership is so vilified and attacked by the media, it is easy to become defensive. But that defensiveness can
turn into intolerance towards any criticism. Look: I’ve spent my entire adult life in socialist politics, and trying to popularise it
as best as possible, and I campaigned for Jeremy Corbyn, and I’m not being attacked as a Blairite, crypto-Tory and
Establishment stooge.

The gap in values, outlooks and priorities between members and the wider public becomes ever harder to bridge. A movement
becomes united by a total loyalty to the leadership, rather than over policies and beliefs. But a movement will only win over
people by being inclusive, optimistic, cheerful even, love-bombing the rest of the population. A belief that even differences
of opinion on the left can’t be tolerated — well, that cannot bode well."

- Owen Jones

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thank you, Owen Jones. Hostility isn't being directed at Tory government or people who'll never vote Labour. Hostility is directed
at Labour MPs and Labour party members from people who're supposed to be on the same team. How's that supposed to work?

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 7:02 pm

An alternative view to that of Jones is Paul Mason today.

https://medium.com/mosquito-ridge/labou ... .hctmud2b6" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Some will find that more congenial. For myself, I think Mason is turning into David Icke.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 7:06 pm

A row broke out today in the local party of one of Labour’s best-known MPs after it formally backed Owen Smith for leader over Jeremy Corbyn.

Grassroots members in Chuka Umunna’s Streatham seat claimed they were “locked out” of the vote to decide the nomination. The decision was instead taken by the party’s general committee, with Mr Smith winning the support of 44 delegates compared with 14 for Mr Corbyn.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics ... 07496.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 7:32 pm

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... t-so-toxic" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

How did the language of politics get so toxic?

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 7:34 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... nniversary" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Fifty years on and a new generation of Cathys have nowhere to call home
Campbell Robb

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 8:05 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
PorFavor wrote:
ohsocynical wrote:
CotDfJ6VIAMq-VV.jpg

The @guardian accusing Jeremy of withdrawing from something he never agreed to.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ing-debate

The Guardian article doesn't actually say that Jeremy Corbyn has "withdrawn" from an event that he'd previously agreed to attend but rather that he refused to agree to attend at all. Which is fair enough on his part - if perhaps not wise.
I read on another blog, that the Party has been handing him bookings to appear on TV, expecting him to drop previous commitments which he's refused to do.

Does the Labour Party have a list of Jeremy Corbyn's commitments and is simply ignoring them (which isn't really on) - or are they just taking a stab in the dark, I wonder? And I also wonder how all-time consuming are his previous commitments. Is he booked up end to end - in which case, he should consider re-organising himself. I, for one, would like to see him in action and the only way I'm likely to see it is via the TV.

Edited - typo

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 8:20 pm

There was also criticism over a proposed CBE for Will Straw, the chief executive of the failed cross-party pro-EU campaign, who is also the son of the former home secretary Jack Straw and a former Labour parliamentary candidate. (Guardian)

I despair of the Guardian's (lack of) ability to frame a straightforward sentence.

Oh, I almost forgot - the article:

Theresa May called on to stop culture of honours for No 10 'cronies' (Guardian)

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... s-david-ca

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 8:25 pm

UK interest rates set to be cut by Bank of England on Thursday

Bank will publish latest inflation report and growth forecasts this week, as downgrade of Britain’s economic prospects is expected (Guardian)

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... -forecasts

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 8:31 pm

How can Corbyn have ‘bottled’ a hustings he never agreed to attend?

http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2016/07/3 ... to-attend/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 8:32 pm

Chernobyl could be reinvented as a solar farm, says Ukraine
Ministers create presentation to show how idle land around nuclear disaster site can be used to produce renewable energy
"The move to solar reflects a new energy reality involving plunging renewable energy costs and escalating costs of nuclear power. Hours of sunshine in the Chernobyl area compare favourably with southern Germany, one of the largest solar producers in the world."

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

sputnikkers · Post by **sputnikkers** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 8:48 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote: ...
That is no way to run a Shadow Cabinet.
It's not ideal of course, but this sort of thing happens all the time in government. It's a common thing for people to tread on others' departmental toes. We just don't usually get to hear about it.

Really? I think it is worse than that as a systemic fault, symptomatic of making policy up on the hoof because it seems to fit a particular world view. On the information I've seen so far (links from here only) it seems to be gesture politics made out of blithe ignorance of reality as it stands.
The salient part for me, is Sharon Hodgson's claim:

My office and I spent months preparing for a Labour Party review into special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) to feed into Labour’s manifesto for the 2020 General Election. I identified the issues we needed to address; I raised questions in the chamber; I met stakeholders to discuss the review, and my staff put together a briefing for the wider PLP and the Leadership Office, and worked to get media coverage

So a review that must take into account the recent legislation from September 2014, introducing Education, Health and Care (EHC) plans which are replacing 'statements'.

I have helped in a personal-private capacity in the initial writing and construction of a few of these bringing together, compiling and aggregating into one document, the work of the multi-agency approach that is necessary for complex needs cases. I realise that others have identified problems but the good in theory is that EHC is updated and follows the students through to the age of 25. I'm sure (hope!) Sharon Hodgson was responding to this fundamental reform and its implications for young adults in her review. The EHC can/might/will potentially stop after 16 in a variety of situations (University, changes in assessment etc.) but clients could still have access to other disability benefits in part replacement - so coordination of policy is crucial across different departments.

Now it would seem that Sharon Hodgson's own work would indeed be undermined by 'fragmenting' responsibility both at the school and crucial move into young adulthood stage, where new improvements should hopefully be realised. At the very least this 'shadow' development needed to be acknowledged and incorporated within an holistic approach at the younger ages within Sharon Hodgson's review? That part does at least appear incompetent, probably is out of ignorance and disrespectful to a colleague's work that you haven't bothered to look at yet when a problem's been flagged up. It's not stepping on her toes that is really the problem when it should be fundamental to the review or unfair or not worth doing.

Ironically, I assume the 'shadow' minister's brief is to liaise across the various real departments? If not, what? There are, of course, lots of people with lots of different individuals with from simple to complex needs who should receive ongoing special attention. However, an overall framework needs to be consistent in attending to such diverse needs. We have a brilliant socialist solution to a similar problem in the NHS with NICE who have to decide (who dies!) how resources are allocated fairly across a whole range of different situations but with some room to adjust at local level. Then Cameron comes along with his 'special' Cancer Drugs Fund and undermines some of the fairness, equal consideration part, competing for scarce resources - because ... well ... 'Cancer'!.

I used to mock the Tories for John Redwood as 'Shadow Minister for Deregulation'. I didn't mind him doing the same job without the title - well I did, but ... Labour are presenting a big enough attack vector to the Tories now without this kind of thing - although, like Cameron, they might go for a large, well publicised and marketed special interest lobby.

Similarly, "WIN" first and then, if appropriate, and fitting into your policy reviews, appoint someone('s') to do the liaison job(s) for autism and/or different special/related needs. Otherwise it might be a nice, kind hearted, gentle, touchy-feely one but it is (and doing this makes it more likely that will remain) just a gesture.

Please don't make me list the over a hundred 'recognised' currently eligible different SEN conditions (people can do their own research - like McDonnell should have done) that might need some, equal or more consideration of a named? 'shadow minister'!

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 9:02 pm

Muslims attend mass in France and Italy after priest killing

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europ ... SKCN10B0T8" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 9:06 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:OK, I'll say it. The Owen Jones article has done what hundreds of Corbyn attacking posts on here have not, and just about finally convinced me that the Corbyn leadership not only isn't working now but probably can't work.

This does not answer the question of what I should do next or what Labour should do next. I am, however, convinced that the answer to that question is not 'vote for Owen Smith'.

So what now?

I don't know.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 9:12 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:OK, I'll say it. The Owen Jones article has done what hundreds of Corbyn attacking posts on here have not, and just about finally convinced me that the Corbyn leadership not only isn't working now but probably can't work.

This does not answer the question of what I should do next or what Labour should do next. I am, however, convinced that the answer to that question is not 'vote for Owen Smith'.

So what now?

Give Owen a fair hearing before deciding ?

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 9:34 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote:
RobertSnozers wrote:OK, I'll say it. The Owen Jones article has done what hundreds of Corbyn attacking posts on here have not, and just about finally convinced me that the Corbyn leadership not only isn't working now but probably can't work.

This does not answer the question of what I should do next or what Labour should do next. I am, however, convinced that the answer to that question is not 'vote for Owen Smith'.

So what now?
Give Owen a fair hearing before deciding ?
I feel I have. He's running a poor campaign, he's inexperienced, and his background is deeply problematic. Moreover, the notion that a change of leader will fix Labour's problems is pie in the sky. I feel those who think Smith will turn things around are as deluded as those who think Corbyn can be PM. Nor will it deal with the fact that the PLP and the membership are essentially two different parties.

There are a few weeks to go yet, I really want to see the debates on TV, I think there are 3 to come (?) so might get a better idea of his metal.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sun 31 Jul, 2016 9:39 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:
So what now?

There is no satisfactory answer to that question.

Sorry,