Tuesday 11th August 2015

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 12:17 pm

Liz Kendall shows her red side
http://leftfootforward.org/2015/07/liz- ... -red-side/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Kendall implies that as prime minister she would mandate elected worker representation on company boards

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 12:17 pm

TobyLatimer wrote:Difficult to find those hats - searching the t'internet for a 'Lenin style workers cap' brought little joy. Turns out they are Breton caps, oodles of them on ebay.

Now if only my beard growth would get a move on .....

Try putting your feet, after removing all feathers, in a "gro-bag".

onebuttonmonkey · Post by **onebuttonmonkey** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 12:24 pm

Completely off-topic, but something I hope you may be interested in.

The UK’s proposed 10-year max jail term for file sharing must be stopped
http://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-policy/20 ... e-stopped/
Op-ed: Fortunately, it's not too late to object to the copyright change—here's how.

The UK government is using some dishonest claims to push through an unnecessary and deeply worrying change to copyright law. If the tweak to the law goes ahead, the maximum jail time for online copyright infringement will be the same as offline—10 years—even if you don't gain financially. Fortunately, it's not too late to do something about it: the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) is seeking consultation about the change until the end of this week, and it's easy to write in and object.

Disclaimers:
1) I know there's no shortage of things the government is doing dishonestly and this is by no means the worst.
2) I'm not an illegal file-sharer. The problem is that neither, really, are some of those who may be penalised by a proposed change that its own independent review document has no evidence to support should be done.

You will, however, find a chapter examining the most serious cases of online copyright infringement in the UK. Almost without exception, these consist of a single person running a server providing access to unauthorised content in some way, often purely via links. There's not a gang to be seen, and precious little money, either. In other words, the UK government presents zero evidence that organised crime is a major concern in online copyright infringement, despite invoking it as the main reason why the penalties for copyright infringement should be made more harsh.

There's a link through to the open rights group that makes it easy for you to make a response by the end of the week. If you have five minutes and think that laws based on fiction and lobbying are a bad thing, then please do try and take the time to fill it in.

Cheers.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 12:27 pm

Yvette Cooper is now on R5 - if anyone is interested.

DonutHingeParty · Post by **DonutHingeParty** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 12:41 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:Liz Kendall shows her red side
http://leftfootforward.org/2015/07/liz- ... -red-side/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Kendall implies that as prime minister she would mandate elected worker representation on company boards

As someone who's already a member of a works Consultative Committee, there's already a hefty chunk of legislation enshrining the right of employee consultation for any significant restructures or changes to terms and conditions; this is also backed up by EU legislation.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/24/contents" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2006 ... ction/made" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Again, rebranding the norm and the timid as the dramatic and bold. That's what Cameron does. It's not what we should do.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 12:46 pm

DonutHingeParty wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote:Liz Kendall shows her red side
http://leftfootforward.org/2015/07/liz- ... -red-side/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Kendall implies that as prime minister she would mandate elected worker representation on company boards
As someone who's already a member of a works Consultative Committee, there's already a hefty chunk of legislation enshrining the right of employee consultation for any significant restructures or changes to terms and conditions; this is also backed up by EU legislation.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/24/contents" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2006 ... ction/made" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Again, rebranding the norm and the timid as the dramatic and bold. That's what Cameron does. It's not what we should do.

I'm not saying it good, bad or indifferent I'm trying to make a point that other candidates ARE engaging in the debate.
I'll give up now.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 1:01 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:Yvette Cooper is now on R5 - if anyone is interested.

Thanks - and yes I am\was interested. Unfortunately, the BBC on-line radio whatsit let me down. I'll have to try to catch it later. Meanwhile - what did you make of it? (I think I mentioned here that I was originally thinking of voting for YC - but she went off (or never came to) the boil for me.)

Edited to add

I would be very happy to hear something from someone in the running (other than Jeremy Corbyn) that makes me want to vote for them.

Edited again

"k" for "l"

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 1:16 pm

TobyLatimer wrote:Difficult to find those hats - searching the t'internet for a 'Lenin style workers cap' brought little joy. Turns out they are Breton caps, oodles of them on ebay.

Now if only my beard growth would get a move on .....

Didn't Donovan wear one, and Dylan ?

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 1:25 pm

Am just dipping in before gardening -

Has anyone seen any poll on public attitudes/likelihood to vote Labour etc, re the leadership contenders ?

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 1:39 pm

AngryAsWell wrote: I'm not saying it good, bad or indifferent I'm trying to make a point that other candidates ARE engaging in the debate.
I'll give up now.

Please don't, AAW - I have been criticising the lack of policy from some, so if they're announcing them I'd like to know what they are.

Everyone here knows the issues I have with Cooper, but that doesn't mean that I don't want to know what her policies are.
If she has something new to offer, I'd love to hear it - if it isn't reported, could you post it here? Thank you.

I am a persuadable person - after all, I was a liberal for decades and I'm relatively new to Labour. If I truly think, when the candidates give us their policies, that if I am sufficiently impressed by their vision I could reconsider who I intend to support.

I have to go to bed for a while now - insomnia's a bugger, zero zeds at all last night. Hoping to get some rest now - it's Show's birthday today and I want to be vaguely conscious when I give him his cake. (It's chocolate gattox with cream. 2,800 KCal per glance)

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 1:44 pm

Morfters all. All day breakfasts seem to be the order of the day so I've brought in a selections of field, chesnut, and portabella mushrooms from the fields and sheds - and an armful of black- and white-puddings - to add to the offerings...

So. Japan has fired up the Sendai nuclear plant this morning:
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ ... a-disaster

And, last night, the BBC showed Jim Al-Khalili's new programme, "Inside Sellafield." Made for genuinely interesting viewing. Still leaves me thinking that we've enough on our plates continuing to try to find a safe method of storage (for at least one thousand generations!) of all the existing nuclear waste from both the UK and around the world, without adding more to it - however 'safe' modern nuclear plants are in comparison with older models, barring 'accidents':
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0 ... sellafield

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 1:45 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:Liz Kendall shows her red side
http://leftfootforward.org/2015/07/liz- ... -red-side/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Kendall implies that as prime minister she would mandate elected worker representation on company boards

A policy that was, of course, very much favoured by that discredited leftie E S Miliband. Has anybody informed Liz of this?

It is a shame about her, though. When she originally put herself forward as a candidate the weekend after the GE it was with a fairly genuine sounding "unity candidate" pitch - rather like Creasy, almost "post Blairite". Then the anointed MSM and Blairite darling Chuka withdrew (for reasons that still remain pretty obscure) and things all went slightly haywire as she (or rather her clueless campaign people) made a mad rush for "his" votes.

Undoubtedly her lowest point was seeming to wholeheartedly endorse Osborne's transparently politically cynical and breathtakingly economically illiterate stunt that we should legislate to have BUDGET SURPLUSES FOREVER - which would basically remove any point in the Labour party existing. Never mind Jezza taking us back to 1983, any Labour leader with that platform would return us straight to 1931.

Next month is going to be a bruising experience for her. I wish her no ill, and hope she gets over it quickly - she still has something to contribute if she wants to.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 1:46 pm

ephemerid wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote: I'm not saying it good, bad or indifferent I'm trying to make a point that other candidates ARE engaging in the debate.
I'll give up now.
Please don't, AAW - I have been criticising the lack of policy from some, so if they're announcing them I'd like to know what they are.

Everyone here knows the issues I have with Cooper, but that doesn't mean that I don't want to know what her policies are.
If she has something new to offer, I'd love to hear it - if it isn't reported, could you post it here? Thank you.

I am a persuadable person - after all, I was a liberal for decades and I'm relatively new to Labour. If I truly think, when the candidates give us their policies, that if I am sufficiently impressed by their vision I could reconsider who I intend to support.

I have to go to bed for a while now - insomnia's a bugger, zero zeds at all last night. Hoping to get some rest now - it's Show's birthday today and I want to be vaguely conscious when I give him his cake. (It's chocolate gattox with cream. 2,800 KCal per glance)

Seconded! And Happy Birthday to Show

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 1:49 pm

Oh, and please stick around @pk1 - we miss your voice when you're not here!

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 1:57 pm

Glad I have left twitter, it isn't an indication of what is going on, too much of an echo chamber, must admit I did laugh at Campbell telling Diane Abbot "you're talking crap, and not for the first time". How many times I have thought the same thing?! A few, I tell you.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 2:00 pm

letsskiptotheleft wrote:Glad I have left twitter, it isn't an indication of what is going on, too much of an echo chamber, must admit I did laugh at Campbell telling Diane Abbot "you're talking crap, and not for the first time". How many times I have thought the same thing?! A few, I tell you.

Brilliant, I have wanted to say that to her for ages, glad somebody has.

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 2:04 pm

yahyah wrote:
TobyLatimer wrote:Difficult to find those hats - searching the t'internet for a 'Lenin style workers cap' brought little joy. Turns out they are Breton caps, oodles of them on ebay.

Now if only my beard growth would get a move on .....
Didn't Donovan wear one, and Dylan ?

Yes, it featured on Dylans debut

: BobDylan-bobdylan.jpg (24.24 KiB) Viewed 7246 times

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 2:04 pm

mikems wrote:Can I just say that everyone I disagree with is an idiot? But that I don't need to say why, or offer anything but put-downs and pompous assertions?

And everything these people remember, have experienced or thought is wrong and unelectable.

And history is exactly as the tory media says it is, and saying anything different means you are 'profoundly mistaken' or 'deeply wrong' or whatever other piece of dismissive rhetoric, not backed with reasoned argument, natch, that I can think of on the spur of the moment.

That's what debate in the labour movement is all about, after all.

Just seems to be the flavour round here, with some of us.

Well given you seem to believe the 83 and 87 elections never discussed unilateral nuclear disarmament you can carry on saying anything you want.

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 2:05 pm

And the Beatles ....

: beatles-bretons.jpg (8.15 KiB) Viewed 7246 times

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 2:09 pm

Well it says rather a lot that even whilst Corbyn looks set to win the national leadership - with overwhelming support in the capital - Diane Abbott's chances of winning Labour nomination for London Mayor are about as good as Kendall's in the current bunfight (even that is maybe being a tad generous)

Just to show that Twitter idiots aren't confined to one faction, however, some Kendall supporter distinguished themselves after the YouGov poll came out by contrasting JC's showing now with DA's in 2010 - and showing this "proved" many of his backers were racist and sexist.

I mean, seriously, where to start........???!!!???!?

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 2:15 pm

Temulkar wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:Blair too was perceived as authentic in 1997. If you can fake authenticity you have it made.

Corbyn now 1/3, Burnham as long as 10/3

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/bri ... our-leader" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is going to make 79-83 look like a period of calm stability.
Maybe the party should expel the factionalists who keep bleating about 'splits' and a 'coup' in defiance of the memberships demoratically expressed desire. Or is that just OK when the boot is on the other foot?

Every time I hear the blairite faction speak I am reminded of Militant.

The issue isn't the Blairite faction it is the mainstream parliamentary party. Corbyn didn't even have enough support to get onto the ballot, a couple of muppets put him on it and are now regretting it.

Never put up a candidate you don't want to win. Note I am not saying those MPs who genuinely support Corbyn are muppets, they put up a candidate that they want to win.

What I think will happen is he will either lose a winnable by election or get hammered in the locals in May. At which point he will be invited to resign.

If of course he passes both tests with flying colours registering big wins and a surge in the polls he will be hailed as a saviour. In which case the hats may be back in stock so I can buy one.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 3:19 pm

But the .The man in the coonskin cap,in the big pen
Wants eleven dollar bills but you only got ten
...Don't follow leaders, watch the parkin' meters

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 3:21 pm

Mixing up the medicine ...

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 3:29 pm

I'm on the sofa swearing about the Government

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 3:29 pm

TechnicalEphemera wrote:
Temulkar wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:Blair too was perceived as authentic in 1997. If you can fake authenticity you have it made.

Corbyn now 1/3, Burnham as long as 10/3

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/bri ... our-leader" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is going to make 79-83 look like a period of calm stability.
Maybe the party should expel the factionalists who keep bleating about 'splits' and a 'coup' in defiance of the memberships demoratically expressed desire. Or is that just OK when the boot is on the other foot?

Every time I hear the blairite faction speak I am reminded of Militant.

The issue isn't the Blairite faction it is the mainstream parliamentary party. Corbyn didn't even have enough support to get onto the ballot, a couple of muppets put him on it and are now regretting it.

Never put up a candidate you don't want to win. Note I am not saying those MPs who genuinely support Corbyn are muppets, they put up a candidate that they want to win.

What I think will happen is he will either lose a winnable by election or get hammered in the locals in May. At which point he will be invited to resign.

If of course he passes both tests with flying colours registering big wins and a surge in the polls he will be hailed as a saviour. In which case the hats may be back in stock so I can buy one.

I think he may do quite well initially. So, there should be a honeymoon period of novelty. The frontbench will be all new faces, and that will also be novel.

Eventually he'll say something offensive about Putin or Israel though, and the proposals about tax gaps and funding stuff through 'people's quantitative easing' will be properly examined, and Labour will fall of a cliff.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 3:40 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:
TechnicalEphemera wrote:
Temulkar wrote:Maybe the party should expel the factionalists who keep bleating about 'splits' and a 'coup' in defiance of the memberships demoratically expressed desire. Or is that just OK when the boot is on the other foot?

Every time I hear the blairite faction speak I am reminded of Militant.

The issue isn't the Blairite faction it is the mainstream parliamentary party. Corbyn didn't even have enough support to get onto the ballot, a couple of muppets put him on it and are now regretting it.

...Or that Progress has been successful in its entryist plot to force its own candidates onto the party mainstream? The ability of a leader to work with the party's MPs is crucial, but putting that ahead of other considerations is the tail wagging the dog. When you get a different mainstream in the parliamentary party to the membership, you have a problem, to a greater or lesser extent. Ask Nick Clegg.

The PLP has always been to the right of the membership. Historically, the members were kept in check by the unions, who were predominantly to the right of the labour movement.

This has all changed. Two profound factors are in play

(1) The decline of union membership. This has been sharp, and does not show signs of reversal (contrary to the claims of some).

(2) Union membership is now dominated by public sector workers, who have been screwed over by a pay freeze, supported by the Labour opposition 2010-15. They have moved sharply to the left, and that isn't going to reverse. Bill Morris is long gone. Alan Johnson's CWU now describes Blairites as a virus.

If Benn had not lost his seat, he may well have been elected leader by the members in 1983. It is for this reason that the MPs were supposed to act as a gateway. They were supposed to act as a screening process, ruling out the candidates who were not sensible.

They probably would not have nominated Corbyn in order to 'widen the debate' if Abbott had not also been nominated, thanks to David Miliband, in 2010 for the same reason.

So, the conclusion is that it is all David Miliband's fault.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 3:46 pm

PM Q's sometime in the future:

P.M :Longtermeconomicplanbollox
Leader of the Opposition sings :Idiot wind, blowing every time you move your teeth
You’re an idiot, Dave
It’s a wonder that you still know how to breathe

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 3:50 pm

HindleA wrote:PM Q's sometime in the future:

P.M :Longtermeconomicplanbollox
Leader of the Opposition sings :Idiot wind, blowing every time you move your teeth
You’re an idiot, Dave
It’s a wonder that you still know how to breathe

Or alternatively - and this could apply to an awful lot of Tories...

I wish that for just one time you could stand inside my shoes
And just for that one moment I could be you
Yes, I wish that for just one time you could stand inside my shoes
You'd know what a drag it is to see you

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 4:02 pm

Camface - I would answer, but I'm Tangled Up In Blue.

That wouldn't happen, he never answers unless it's from a Tory stooge worshiping the ground he floats on.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 4:04 pm

The Sun in "Oh, we appear to have made something up. Never mind, no-one will see the correction so all good then eh?

We have an utterly poisonous media at times...

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 4:26 pm

Right. I'm getting ready to run away from the keyboard as I write this ... but Peter Hain seemed to articulate the position Labour is in re the leadership contest very clearly in his Radio 4 interview today. He's voting for Yvette Cooper but says he understands that a big part of Corbyn's popularity is that the other candidates are found to be pretty underwhelming and uninspiring. He said they - the other candidates and a lot of the PLP presumably - have seriously underestimated / not understood Labour membership and supporters' level of disillusion with politics and politicians as we've known it. He said there is clearly a need for something different that challenges more clearly the status quo. In particular he said that the other three candidates needed to challenge the Conservative narrative about Labour crashing the economy and stick up for the way Labour had run the economy prior to the banking crisis.

He said this in a way that wasn't dismissing Corbyn or the other candidates - or seeking to divide the party. He said there was still time for them to turn their campaigns around but they'd better act quickly.

Now - do I need to run?

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 4:38 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:Right. I'm getting ready to run away from the keyboard as I write this ... but Peter Hain seemed to articulate the position Labour is in re the leadership contest very clearly in his Radio 4 interview today. He's voting for Yvette Cooper but says he understands that a big part of Corbyn's popularity is that the other candidates are found to be pretty underwhelming and uninspiring. He said they - the other candidates and a lot of the PLP presumably - have seriously underestimated / not understood Labour membership and supporters' level of disillusion with politics and politicians as we've known it. He said there is clearly a need for something different that challenges more clearly the status quo. In particular he said that the other three candidates needed to challenge the Conservative narrative about Labour crashing the economy and stick up for the way Labour had run the economy prior to the banking crisis.

He said this in a way that wasn't dismissing Corbyn or the other candidates - or seeking to divide the party. He said there was still time for them to turn their campaigns around but they'd better act quickly.

Now - do I need to run?

No. I'd stay put.

Peter Hain has got it about right - but should he really need to be saying this to explain away the shortcomings of people you'd hope had more than a little political nous? I find that a tad depressing, and it doesn't engender confidence.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 5:02 pm

mikems wrote:Can I just say that everyone I disagree with is an idiot?

Brought this to mind from a week or so ago:
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/soci ... 3082378916" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
we all know/are someone ...

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 5:13 pm

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... ing-crisis" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sex abuse charity funding crisis sees up to 10,000 in UK wait a year for help
Support groups and charities face closure due to financial constraints and more people coming forward in wake of historical sex abuse cases

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 5:14 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:
mikems wrote:Can I just say that everyone I disagree with is an idiot?
Brought this to mind from a week or so ago:
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/soci ... 3082378916" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
we all know/are someone ...

Ha! Thanks for that.

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 5:16 pm

Afternoon all

Car survived the yearly service without too much pain (although still had winter tyres on and we have hit almost 40C here so expected a bollocking but none came) - we only have MOT every 3 years here as well

Have to agree with Hain, and also PorFavor's follow up

I don't care who wins (although don't like Kendall very much) but I do expect some things from them:

Ban anyone in the SC (or MP) saying that Labour overspent
Formulate some simple messages that help explain the position on why we think austerity does not work
Highlight every single lie, misrepresentation and falsification of numbers loudly and consistently

No Labour MP should be supporting austerity as being suggested by Osborne, anyone who does should be out of the Parliamentary Party - this has no place in Labour philosophy. When he changes tack, which he will - make sure Labour are given some of the credit. One of the great errors of the last Parliament was letting him completely change direction and get away with it

I would even go for something big as well - a senior member of the SC (not the leader though) calling one of the liars in Government a liar in the house (probably tone it down and say that the information given is false, and the speaker is either ignorant or knowingly speaking untruths) - if the consequence is a ban then so be it. Of course the powder should be kept dry but we know that IDS lies and fiddles the numbers consistently so we shouldn't have to wait too long

This Government is hubristic and thinks it can get away with anything. It can because Labour let them and the media don't want to know. The only way out is to make the media take notice and if Labour are right then that will be more difficult to hide

I know it is a bit confrontational but at the moment we are slipping into a habit of proposing policies 'a little bit better than the Tories'

This is an example

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

Oh look the Tories are going to stop benefits for 4 years so we will just stop them for 2!!! What is the difference in principle between these two policies?

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 5:38 pm

I keep catching a glimpse of the Guardian header below,

Army tries to defuse wartime bomb keeping east Londoners out of homes

and misreading it as "Amy tries to . . . . ".

so please forgive me if I use you all as a means to (hopefully) exorcise that particular recurring thingy.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 5:42 pm

Remember when the Telegraph used to be a serious broadsheet ?
Not any more, that's for sure.

'Russia welcomes Comrade Corbyn in leadership contest'.

My lap top's playing up and the Telegraph article is stuck, but the bit I've read does not say that the Russian spokesperson called Corbyn 'comrade'.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 5:46 pm

The Telegraph is also showing a clock which says it is:

Days until new Labour leader announced
31 : 05 : 13 : 04
Days Hrs Mins Secs

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 5:54 pm

Andy Burnham says he would scrap 5% tax on women's sanitary products.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/08 ... _hp_ref=uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Good to hear, Labour should have done it years ago.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 5:58 pm

PorFavor wrote:
tinyclanger2 wrote:
mikems wrote:Can I just say that everyone I disagree with is an idiot?
Brought this to mind from a week or so ago:
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/soci ... 3082378916" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
we all know/are someone ...
Ha! Thanks for that.

I thought you,d like it.

edited to fail to correct Manc apostrophe

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 6:07 pm

yahyah wrote:Andy Burnham says he would scrap 5% tax on women's sanitary products.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/08 ... _hp_ref=uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Good to hear, Labour should have done it years ago.

IIRC the EU rules on VAT are that once you've got a tax on something you can reduce it but it can't go below 5% which is probably why this and the VAT on utilities are stuck on that rate.

Of course, you can lobby the EU to get it changed which is probably why it's not been done before.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 6:10 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
yahyah wrote:Andy Burnham says he would scrap 5% tax on women's sanitary products.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/08 ... _hp_ref=uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Good to hear, Labour should have done it years ago.
IIRC the EU rules on VAT are that once you've got a tax on something you can reduce it but it can't go below 5% which is probably why this and the VAT on utilities are stuck on that rate.

Of course, you can lobby the EU to get it changed which is probably why it's not been done before.

Isn't there a zero rate any more?

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 6:11 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
yahyah wrote:Andy Burnham says he would scrap 5% tax on women's sanitary products.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/08 ... _hp_ref=uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Good to hear, Labour should have done it years ago.
IIRC the EU rules on VAT are that once you've got a tax on something you can reduce it but it can't go below 5% which is probably why this and the VAT on utilities are stuck on that rate.

Of course, you can lobby the EU to get it changed which is probably why it's not been done before.

Women are half the population of Europe, someone should have sorted it a long time ago.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 6:19 pm

PorFavor wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote:
yahyah wrote:Andy Burnham says he would scrap 5% tax on women's sanitary products.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/08 ... _hp_ref=uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Good to hear, Labour should have done it years ago.
IIRC the EU rules on VAT are that once you've got a tax on something you can reduce it but it can't go below 5% which is probably why this and the VAT on utilities are stuck on that rate.

Of course, you can lobby the EU to get it changed which is probably why it's not been done before.

Isn't there a zero rate any more?

Yes there is but once you've decided to tax something you can't change it to make it zero rated only change the rate it attracts.

But I still think that there's a minimum of 5% once you've got a tax on an item.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 6:20 pm

So who decided to tax them in the first place ?

edited to add:
Yes I know it was to do with joining the EU but why the hell did no one point out that they are
not something you can do without if you are a woman of childbearing years.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 6:23 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:
TechnicalEphemera wrote:
Temulkar wrote:Maybe the party should expel the factionalists who keep bleating about 'splits' and a 'coup' in defiance of the memberships demoratically expressed desire. Or is that just OK when the boot is on the other foot?

Every time I hear the blairite faction speak I am reminded of Militant.

The issue isn't the Blairite faction it is the mainstream parliamentary party. Corbyn didn't even have enough support to get onto the ballot, a couple of muppets put him on it and are now regretting it.

...Or that Progress has been successful in its entryist plot to force its own candidates onto the party mainstream? The ability of a leader to work with the party's MPs is crucial, but putting that ahead of other considerations is the tail wagging the dog. When you get a different mainstream in the parliamentary party to the membership, you have a problem, to a greater or lesser extent. Ask Nick Clegg.

I know it was on Twitter, but there were a lot of people calling or can I say demanding, a left leaning candidate and consequently his name was put forward by a few MPs. But the demand was there.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 6:24 pm

No wonder UKIP were looking at it, bash the EU and look more female friendly at the same time.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 6:39 pm

yahyah wrote:So who decided to tax them in the first place ?

edited to add:
Yes I know it was to do with joining the EU but why the hell did no one point out that they are
not something you can do without if you are a woman of childbearing years.

It might well pre-date VAT when we had Purchase Tax. And no, I have no idea who decided what gets taxed and what doesn't...I used to do VAT returns and then be responsible for the way that VAT worked in our computer system.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 11 Aug, 2015 7:33 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
yahyah wrote:So who decided to tax them in the first place ?

edited to add:
Yes I know it was to do with joining the EU but why the hell did no one point out that they are
not something you can do without if you are a woman of childbearing years.

It might well pre-date VAT when we had Purchase Tax. And no, I have no idea who decided what gets taxed and what doesn't...I used to do VAT returns and then be responsible for the way that VAT worked in our computer system.

This is the best I've been able to come up with -

The five per cent tax on tampons has been in place for the best part of half a century, as sanitary products are considered by HM Revenue and Customs as ‘non-essential, luxury’ items. (Metro)