FlyTheNest

Membership fees Annual
No hidden agenda just posting for anybody that might not know.


Standard £47
Reduced £23.50(retired,unemployed,working less than 16 hours,member affiliated union)
Under 27 £12
Veteran £1
Youth £1
Student £1

yahyah wrote:Well, well well.

What a surprise. Just check out the Smith and Corbyn threads that Dan kindly started.
Just what one might expect. Piss take and negative stuff posted on Smith's.
No one has done that on Corbyn's.

When people are so juvenile, and act so contrary to what Corbyn calls for....it's all a bit of a waste of time.

Am really not sure why either person thinks it is acceptable, other than to be bloody minded, childish and against the spirit of what was called for.

Methinks some of the criticism of Corbyn's more....err... vigorous supporters may have some truth.

Well done. You are trying to wind up people, you succeeded. Hope you feel very big.

Well. Certainly not what I'd hoped to see over there.


Edited to add -

If that's the way it's going to go then maybe it's best to keep it over here so that people, if so moved, don't feel obliged to play it by the book.

is it any surprise ?
Does it help the Labour party ?

What's most galling is they both hated Ed M getting badly treated, went mad about it.

yahyah wrote:Maybe best to just delete the threads Dan. Thinking people might actually respect the spirit of Corbyn was a little naive.

Must admit just checked in and I'm shocked at the posting on OS thread, truly unhelpful.

HindleA wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... CMP=twt_gu

Bradford free school fraud sparks calls for public inquiry
Teaching union demands investigation after trio leading academy praised by David Cameron are convicted of fraud

I'm amazed that the DfE is allowed to get away with what is clearly blatant lies over their "swift action".

The DfE’s own audit investigation report into the school’s finances in May 2013 found invoices had been fabricated to claim £10,800 of public money through rent.

It reported this to Action Fraud, a service handling all reports of financial crime for the police, in a call made in April 2013.

However, the call was classed as “for information only” and did not trigger a criminal investigation. Action Fraud told the DfE in September 2013 that the case had not resulted in an investigation – but the government department took no further action until seven weeks later when its own internal report was leaked.

If I were reporting this I'd name that DfE spokeswoman. Deserves to be called out as a liar.

They won't drive those of us who are ''anti- Corbyn'' away. Even those 'anti-Corbyn' people who are actually just undecided, and voted for Corbyn last time.

Am going to take Willow's advice on choosing who to vote for when she says choose the candidate, not the possible problems for the party.
Anatoly's comment about Corbyn winning may be best for the future of the party in some ways had some sway over my thoughts on how to vote, but to vote for Corbyn again carries too much baggage it seems.

So, the silliness is just counterproductive. One less vote for Corbyn much more likely now.

Corbyn would be so proud. Just the sort of thing he wants his supporters to do ?

I'm off, not flouncing but getting ready for a GP appointment in town. Feel very saddened not angry.

Lovely to see LetsSkip here this morning. More rain for your lovely cottage garden plants.
Come back soon.

I'm voting for Smith, but fully realise that many of those sticking with Corbyn have genuine and legitimate reasons for doing so.

It would just be nice if some people accepted that the opposite was also true.

Dear Refitman -

It was very nice of you to set up the two new sections for people to post stuff about the two campaigns. Thank you.

I thought they were there for people to put up links etc. to policies or whatever. Can't see any so far.

People post interesting, uninteresting, funny, and unfunny, pictures etc. in this thread all the time. I see no point in doing the same on another two threads; and as we hash out arguments here too, there's not much point having two more threads where the exercise is repeated, IMHO.

As we now have them, at the request of a member who was quite specific regarding what she wanted them for, can we please use them as intended or not at all? Just today one poster has remarked about how civilised it is here compared to other places on the web. He's right.

Now then - I have had my "when-is-a-flounce-not-a-flounce" episodes, invariably occasioned by concern trolling which has one purpose ie. to set people here against each other; but having dedicated space to post compare-and-contrast policies etc. is a good idea and it would be a shame if we allowed it to disintegrate into another bunfight.
Perhaps if Ohso posted the Corbyn policy lists she posted in the main thread the other day on the Corbyn thread it would be helpful; ditto anyone who has lists or information on Smith's policies.

Pax, people.

Afternoon all

Just to say that I think that the two new threads are a good idea. What I would like to see is the proposed policies with some discussion about implementation and how they might link to each other.

I thought one of Ed 's strengths was that he tried to integrate his policy thinking, ultimately an approach that was completely subverted by the media and a lot of political pundits shouting out about what are you going to cut to pay for it. For me that drowned out what can be saved, but worse it left every policy in a silo to be attacked mindlessly on budget arguments alone. If all that is reported/attacked are wish lists we can hardly complain that people expect meaningless miracles from their votes.

Not sure if that's a possible way to make the next few weeks more useful in having some say in what is happening in the Labour party, but I think it would make it more useful (and interesting) for me.

I have posted Owen Smith's News and Updates from his web site

http://www.owen2016.com/blog" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

....in the Owen Smith thread, in the spirit the thread was started in
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=992" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'm limited to just my phone, while I'm at work. I will have a proper look/tidy when I get home.

That's why I just posted links to information from Owen Smith, Ohso.
There is no discussion there.

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



Homing in on the housing crisis: where did it all start to go wrong?

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... -year-olds" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Alcohol consumption and harm among under 18 year olds

AnatolyKasparov wrote:I'm voting for Smith, but fully realise that many of those sticking with Corbyn have genuine and legitimate reasons for doing so.

It would just be nice if some people accepted that the opposite was also true.

Indeed.

These are two MPs I want to contribute to the fight v the Tories.

fedup59 wrote:Afternoon all

Just to say that I think that the two new threads are a good idea. What I would like to see is the proposed policies with some discussion about implementation and how they might link to each other.

I thought one of Ed 's strengths was that he tried to integrate his policy thinking, ultimately an approach that was completely subverted by the media and a lot of political pundits shouting out about what are you going to cut to pay for it. For me that drowned out what can be saved, but worse it left every policy in a silo to be attacked mindlessly on budget arguments alone. If all that is reported/attacked are wish lists we can hardly complain that people expect meaningless miracles from their votes.

Not sure if that's a possible way to make the next few weeks more useful in having some say in what is happening in the Labour party, but I think it would make it more useful (and interesting) for me.

Yes - they were a good idea, and still would be if people would, as I sort of suggested earlier, play it by the book; but if only some people adhere to the spirit of the threads then those people are effectively playing with one hand tied behind their back. I enjoy the cut and thrust over here and I respond, or not, as the fancy takes me (or if I'm specifically asked to) but, as a point for the collation of information and the like, the other threads won't work if they're misused and I might as well read only the posts over here.

Inadvertent duplication of article provided earler by Ephemerid caused by not always seeing properly and glasses misplaced somewhere in house but not found yet.

Freedomofthepress wrote:

fedup59 wrote:Afternoon all

Just to say that I think that the two new threads are a good idea. What I would like to see is the proposed policies with some discussion about implementation and how they might link to each other.

Not sure if that's a possible way to make the next few weeks more useful in having some say in what is happening in the Labour party, but I think it would make it more useful (and interesting) for me.

Okay, I am just going to be honest here.

Just to say that I think that the two new threads are a good idea.

I disagree

What I would like to see is the proposed policies with some discussion about implementation and how they might link to each other.

As many are beginning to realise Owen Smith's proposed policies seem to have been lifted from Jeremy Corbyn's policies and hence they will link together like glue.

As has been pointed out yesterday by Robert, I think, by voting for OS, you are supporting the PLP and you are putting your trust in someone to deliver something he will most likely not deliver. Come a General Election, all you will hear from the Blairites is, we have to get the Tory vote so policies will be reformed and softened to appeal to the Tory voter. We will also hear from the likes of Tristram Hunt about how Labour needs to get back the Working Class vote and again policies will be soften to appeal to a large demographic.

A vote for Jeremy Corbyn on the other hand is a voting for someone with principle and backbone. What we know about Jeremy Corbyn is "the man ain't for turning".

I am also being a bit cheeky and including a little video for Ohsocynical and Rebecca.

[youtube]Xm_7FLKRS4Y[/youtube]

I hope it works.


Edited as Youtube didn't work.

I've put links in the Owen Smith thread to his policy position perhaps you could do the same for Jeremy? So far this is all I can find from him policy wise.

http://www.jeremyforlabour.com/policies" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I think its kind of obvious that any Labour leader candidate will be standing on similar policy platform but it seems to me (unless you have better links) that Owen has set out more detail so far.

Liz Kendalls policy platform - just to compare.
Jobs
Help build a "living wage society" by extending remit of low pay commission
Allow online ballots for strikes
Restore tax credits and boost public sector pay
Boost wages for carers

Transport & environment
Take "serious action" on climate change and increase the number of green jobs

Health & education
Acknowledges role for private sector in NHS
Give people the right to choose their own carer
Improve care for those with learning disabilities
Extend early years education by reversing the inheritance tax cut
Reinstate support for poorer students

Housing
Build 200,000 homes a year by 2020
Ban letting agents fees
Introduce a register of private landlords

Economy and Benefits
Aim for economic surplus
Scrap the work programme and give councils the power to provide alternatives

My personal opinion: the Smith/PLP tactic is to have as little policy difference as is possible with Corbyn so the choice the voters face is one of personality*.

The election then becomes one of a choice between, 'who do you believe is telling you the truth' on one side and 'who do you believe has the best chance of delivering'

Seems to me the former is a fight that Smith can't win and the latter, Corbyn.

Ultimately, then, it's which of those two choices is the more important to you. The one of your heart of the one of your head.

* Personally, I find this to be just one more example of the shabby tactics the Smith camp and the PLP are willing to deploy that leaves me hoping that he loses and loses badly. I do not want this man leading the Labour Party. He isn't fit to do it.

Edit: correcting an autowrong error.

Can anyone give a link to JC's policy statements please? I have searched and apart from the wish lists Eoin Clerk had been pushing (not one of which is on JC's web site) the only hint at policy I can find is on his web site here, and I don't find it inspiring at all.
http://www.jeremyforlabour.com/policies" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

More than willing to be proved wrong, if anyone can provide links to actual announced proposed policies please do.

AngryAsWell wrote:Can anyone give a link to JC's policy statements please? I have searched and apart from the wish lists Eoin Clerk had been pushing (not one of which is on JC's web site) the only hint at policy I can find is on his web site here, and I don't find it inspiring at all.
http://www.jeremyforlabour.com/policies" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

More than willing to be proved wrong, if anyone can provide links to actual announced proposed policies please do.

I'm not sure the investment bank is a new idea for Labour, I think it was in the 2015 manifesto, and Ed Miliband was looking into regional investment banks on the German model a couple of years ago:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21779956" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The opposition have already set out plans if they return to power to create a British Investment Bank, focused on providing long-term funding for small and medium sized business, particularly start-ups.

But Mr Miliband has gone further, calling for a network of lenders in every major region of England based on the Sparkassen model in Germany. The banks would have a civic duty to promote local growth and only lend to firms operating in their area.

It's a good idea and I imagine Labour will be sticking to some form of investment bank, whoever is leader.

The "mandatory collective bargaining" sounds more bespoke Corbyn to me, but unfortunately there are no details on the site you link to, so I'm not sure if it's actually a policy as such.

Willow904 wrote:

AngryAsWell wrote:Can anyone give a link to JC's policy statements please? I have searched and apart from the wish lists Eoin Clerk had been pushing (not one of which is on JC's web site) the only hint at policy I can find is on his web site here, and I don't find it inspiring at all.
http://www.jeremyforlabour.com/policies" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

More than willing to be proved wrong, if anyone can provide links to actual announced proposed policies please do.

I'm not sure the investment bank is a new idea for Labour, I think it was in the 2015 manifesto, and Ed Miliband was looking into regional investment banks on the German model a couple of years ago:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21779956" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The opposition have already set out plans if they return to power to create a British Investment Bank, focused on providing long-term funding for small and medium sized business, particularly start-ups.

But Mr Miliband has gone further, calling for a network of lenders in every major region of England based on the Sparkassen model in Germany. The banks would have a civic duty to promote local growth and only lend to firms operating in their area.

It's a good idea and I imagine Labour will be sticking to some form of investment bank, whoever is leader.

The "mandatory collective bargaining" sounds more bespoke Corbyn to me, but unfortunately there are no details on the site you link to, so I'm not sure if it's actually a policy as such.

Yes you are quite right, the British Investment Bank was one of Ed M's policies from 2015, along with the regional banks for local investment. Both are good ideas and hopefully will be retained in the Labour Manifesto whoever wins.

AngryAsWell wrote:Can anyone give a link to JC's policy statements please? I have searched and apart from the wish lists Eoin Clerk had been pushing (not one of which is on JC's web site) the only hint at policy I can find is on his web site here, and I don't find it inspiring at all.
http://www.jeremyforlabour.com/policies" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

More than willing to be proved wrong, if anyone can provide links to actual announced proposed policies please do.

I have done some digging. It seems Corbyn and McDonell's industrial policy is going to based on the work of the Institute of Employment Right's 'Manifesto for Labour'.

http://labourlist.org/2016/07/owen-smit ... -campaign/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A spokesperson for the Jeremy for Labour campaign said the leadership launched the Institute of Employment Rights’ Manifesto for Labour Law on 28 June, including a policy to reinstate the Ministry of Labour.

“We welcome Owen’s focus on equality of outcome, re-industrialisation and workers’ rights – and his support for policies announced in recent months by Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell,” the Corbyn campaign said.

http://www.ier.org.uk/manifesto" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

On 28 June 2016, the Institute of Employment Rights launched at its Manifesto for Labour Law at Westminster with Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell and Shadow Minister for Trade Unions Ian Lavery alongside leaders from several major trade unions.

The 25 policy recommendations were warmly welcomed by John and Ian, who stated that they would form the blueprint for Labour's official position on workers' rights in post-EU Britain.

I think you might have to buy the book to find out what the 25 recommendations actually are, however.

Anyone familiar with Cardiff politics ?

A female Labour councillor has defected to Plaid, blaming a culture of bullying and sexism, and that David Hagendyk has failed to act.
There is no mention of the right/left/centre political persuasion of the Labour males, just allegations that they bait female councillors.

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/polit ... g-11695584" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/fac ... rbyn/23170" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

yahyah wrote:http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/fac ... rbyn/23170

Thank you
Do we know how many of those duplicated policies were also Ed Millibands ?

https://leftfootforward.org/2016/08/our ... -a-crisis/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Our prime ministers aren’t building houses – that’s why there’s a crisis

More on Resolution Foundation findings.

Didn't realise LeftFootFoward was still going. Thanks for the reminder HA.

Lost Soul wrote:

yahyah wrote:http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/fac ... rbyn/23170

Thank you
Do we know how many of those duplicated policies were also Ed Millibands ?

I find it puzzling that it seems as if a new leader is supposed to put forward a completely clean slate of policies. There are things that will be the result of consensus, or coming out of previous ideas.
What's wrong with that, not sure why the knives are out for Smith about 'stealing' Corbyn's ideas ?

Right.

I've been through the two new threads and had a tidy. I have moved a few posts from one to the other and a couple have ended up here. Anything that doesn't relate directly to the policies and opinions of the candidates has been deleted (including the discussion about what the threads are for). I have added the following to my starting posts, just to remind everyone what they are for:

This should be used as a facts and reference depository (like the Troll Busters thread). Only post articles and facts relating to the leadership campaign that would help someone undecided vote for this candidate. I would encourage some discussion of the posts, but it should be kept on topic and not involve abuse from or about either candidate.

I want to emphasise that the two Leadership threads should be for positive posting. As we have all seen, with the way things have gone with Corbyn, attacking a person and their position often just entrenches the opinions of those supporting that person. I would encourage the belief that you should win over people with polite and persuasive arguments and I would hope we are all able to do that.

Oh, while my brain is still functioning properly, and the gin hasn't fully kicked in, a thought on people announcing they are taking a break/leaving. I know that some people on here have health problems and a lot of members on here (including me) have worried in the past when posters have disappeared for extended periods. Taking this into consideration, a mention of a break from the boards isn't necessarily a bad thing.

refitman wrote:Oh, while my brain is still functioning properly, and the gin hasn't fully kicked in, a thought on people announcing they are taking a break/leaving. I know that some people on here have health problems and a lot of members on here (including me) have worried in the past when posters have disappeared for extended periods. Taking this into consideration, a mention of a break from the boards isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Thanks for all you do Dan

Many thanks for all your work, refitman.

citizenJA wrote:Many thanks for all your work, refitman.

Seconded.

https://walkersrambles.wordpress.com/20 ... heres-why/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



I've been a Guardian reader for 40 years, but no longer. Here’s why.

Senior councillors fear the UK Government will not keep its promise to maintain up to £60m in annual EU funding and say the Brussels office will remain essential in its quest to bring in cash from other areas.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 66951.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

farcical ridiculousness

I see that the Graun is still pushing the "a Corbynista threw a brick through AE's office window" meme at regular intervals.

That just isn't good enough.

"The paper so loathed Labour's left-wing champion Aneurin Bevan "and the hate-gospellers of his entourage" that it called for Attlee's post-war Labour government to be voted out of office.The newspaper opposed the creation of the National Health Service as it feared the state provision of healthcare would "eliminate selective elimination" and lead to an increase of congenitally deformed and feckless people."

yahyah wrote:

Lost Soul wrote:

yahyah wrote:http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/fac ... rbyn/23170

Thank you
Do we know how many of those duplicated policies were also Ed Millibands ?

I find it puzzling that it seems as if a new leader is supposed to put forward a completely clean slate of policies. There are things that will be the result of consensus, or coming out of previous ideas.
What's wrong with that, not sure why the knives are out for Smith about 'stealing' Corbyn's ideas ?

If Owen Smith becomes leader and tries implementing almost any of his expressed so far policies he'll be slaughtered in the the media and by the hard right of the PLP and party machine in exactly the same way Gordon Brown, Ed Miliband and Jeremy Corbyn have been. On the positive side for the right, Smith would appear to support Israel right or wrong and replacing Trident with something equally expensive if not more so.

The crowds of dozens to a few hundred who turn out to hear him will be proof that he's so far-left and so unelectable that a new leader is needed. One even less popular with the members and supporters who are widely known to be racist, sexist, homophobic freedom deniers and puppets of Putin and ISIS.

Maybe I'm being too suspicious and he's genuine.

But to be honest, every time I see Smith or anything he says I can't help but think "here is a wealthy man who made his money by arguing passionately, forcefully and convincingly for whatever his employers and paymasters told him to."

The whole Labour thing reminds me of a leadership election in the Musician's Union in the 90s. The members elected a new "not establishment" leader and the Union full-time officers and paid staff immediately refused point-blank to work with him. All kinds of unprovable assertions and allegations flew everywhere and court action was threatened.

The eventual outcome was a new leader, establishment approved, elected by a new election in which the previous leader could not stand. Followed by the closure of all the geographical-based branches and the effective muzzling of the membership outside the few workplace branches (mostly orchestral and west-end theatres/recording studios) and the regional committees. Regional Committees which are elected on the rule that candidates must not make any political statements at all in their few allowed paragraphs of printed election speil and, with no branches, most members have no idea who the candidates even are or why they should or should not be supported.

This was a couple of years after the Union advised members to vote for Blair in the Labour leadership election...

http://blog.shelter.org.uk/2016/08/fall ... t-schemes/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Falling homeownership won’t be stopped by current schemes

http://www.carersuk.org/news-and-campai ... -allowance" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Protect Attendance Allowance
We are campaigning to protect Attendance Allowance from proposed changes that could impact on the financial support older disabled people and their carers receive in the future.


"We strongly disagree with the proposal to devolve Attendance Allowance to local authorities. We have a number of concerns about the possible consequences.

Currently, Attendance Allowance is a national entitlement. This means that demand for Attendance Allowance is matched by funding.

Under the new proposals, local authorities could have a fixed budget and local responsibility for funding the demand – which we know is growing with our increasingly ageing population.

We think this local responsibility and freedom over how to use funds could lead to a postcode lottery. Local authorities could be given the freedom to set their own eligibility criteria for Attendance Allowance, while others may choose not to provide a similar payment to Attendance Allowance at all, and/or subject any help to the social care rationing system. "

http://www.carersuk.org/for-professiona ... -on-carers" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Here's a pendant,zimmer frame and commode-needs met"

Hiding in here.

Self-sufficient local government: 100% business rates retention

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultat ... -retention" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You can e-mail response.

AnatolyKasparov wrote:

citizenJA wrote:Many thanks for all your work, refitman.

Seconded.

Thirded. At least.

HindleA wrote:https://walkersrambles.wordpress.com/20 ... heres-why/



I've been a Guardian reader for 40 years, but no longer. Here’s why.

" The paper’s campaigning work is well known and rightly so."

He obviously missed the infamous exchange a very few years ago between CiFfers pushing for more articles on Disability in general and the WCA in particular, when Jessica wrote --

" We are not a campaigning newspaper "

Patrick Butler, Dawn and others are still going, but there's no sign that the Bosses are giving their work anything like 'campaigning' status and support .

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/ ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Hungry, scared, and no closer to safety: child refugees failed by Britain
Three months after the UK government promised sanctuary to lone child refugees

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

The fake cures for autism that can prove deadly
A campaigner is battling against the dangerous poisons being sold to parents online that claim to treat the condition

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... ican-party" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



'Unfit to be president': Obama hammers Trump with harshest comments yet