Monday 5th September 2016

Post by **refitman** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 7:09 am

Morning all.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 7:15 am

Hello.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 7:27 am

That time again? (Monday)

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 7:31 am

For understatement of my lifetime:

Referring to David Cameron’s decision to hold a referendum, he said: “It was a terrible misjudgment and miscalculation. I would have preferred us to stay in and continue to work for change in Europe, which was beginning to happen at a faster pace.”
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ted-brexit" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

it was much worse than that

danesclose · Post by **danesclose** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 7:32 am

Good morning all:

Rowson on May & the G20 summit:

: Rowson.jpg (192.14 KiB) Viewed 10459 times

Steve Bell's If is also amusing today:

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

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 7:41 am

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/cr ... 25166.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
More Poles attacked in Harlow (where Arek Jóźwik was murdered.)

I take it the "decent people" behind this are the voice of Brexit Britain.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 7:48 am

Glad to hear the focus group interpretation is that Brexit means Brexit.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 7:54 am

Good morfternoon.

RogerOThornhill posted this last night but here it is again for your delight and delectation -

Theresa May refuses to commit to Brexit pledges on NHS and immigration

Her decision not to endorse the key planks of the Vote Leave manifesto may anger some of the electorate who thought they were voting for firm pledges made by politicians now senior in May’s government, such as Boris Johnson. (Guardian)

Anyway - about that referendum re-run . . . .

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... on-and-nhs

Edited - typo

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 8:00 am

Corbyn suggests members get a say in shadow cabinet membership

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

That'll work.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 8:05 am

SpinningHugo wrote:Corbyn suggests members get a say in shadow cabinet membership

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

That'll work.

The MPs choosing could be interesting given how many have said they won't serve under Corbyn's leadership!

You do it, no you do it!

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 8:14 am

StephenDolan wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:Corbyn suggests members get a say in shadow cabinet membership

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

That'll work.
The MPs choosing could be interesting given how many have said they won't serve under Corbyn's leadership!

You do it, no you do it!

I suspect there could be a few volunteers for shadow Chancellor. Corbyn really would have to start discussing policy with MPs outside his camp if that came to pass.
I tend to sympathise with Ed's position that a shadow leader needs to be able to choose their team. But also MPs need to be able to choose their leader. Ed Balls comments about the change to leadership elections is strange as Ed's new system allowed just that. Why MPs nominated someone they felt unable to serve under remains unfathomable to me and ranks alongside the poor oversight of the EU referendum proposals - opposition failed to challenge the question, the timescale of the debate or any of it that I remember. Are MPs getting thicker or something?

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 8:15 am

StephenDolan wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:Corbyn suggests members get a say in shadow cabinet membership

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

That'll work.
The MPs choosing could be interesting given how many have said they won't serve under Corbyn's leadership!

You do it, no you do it!

The point of that proporals is to give the MPs back control of the shadow cabinet. They'd all serve then, and attempt to run it ignoring JC.

Which is why he opposes it.

Ad why he has put forward this crackpot 'members decide' alternative.

Balls said MPs should serve in the shadow cabinet yesterday I see. Interesting as to the way the wind is blowing.

Appear to cooperate, try to remove again in two years?

Won't work of course, but then nothing will. Death throes now.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 8:45 am

MPs to urge ban on UK arms sales to Saudi Arabia

After four attacks on hospitals and many civilian deaths in Yemen, MPs are pressing the arms control committee to suspend weapons sales to Saudi Arabia

Fresh calls for a UK ban on arms sales to Saudi Arabia are due to be made this week when the powerful all-party select committee on arms export controls meets to finalise a report expected to be deeply critical of the 18-month Saudi-led bombing campaign in Yemen.

A cross-party push will be made for the committee to urge the UK to suspend its multibillion-pound arms sales to Saudi Arabia in a move that would infuriate Riyadh, unnerve arms manufacturers and embarrass the Conservative government. (Guardian)

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/ ... udi-arabia

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 8:50 am

Morning all.

My birthday today so help yourselves to some cake.

At the ripe old age of 57 I don't need to work, in the process of getting my doctorate, strong likelihood of post-doctoral study, and getting very interested in a local history project after going to a "trace your house history" event run by the local library.

Life is good. So please don't spoil it by banging on about Corbyn and the leadership eh?

Oh, and it's raining for the first day back at school...

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 8:55 am

If anyone wants something to wile away the hours, there's some fantastic maps available here. And yes, I know it says Scotland but England and Wales are available too. I found a wonderfully detailed one of my area from the early 60s that I spent ages poring over last night.

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

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 8:55 am

Happy Birthday Dr R!

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 8:59 am

RogerOThornhill wrote:Morning all.

My birthday today so help yourselves to some cake.

At the ripe old age of 57 I don't need to work, in the process of getting my doctorate, strong likelihood of post-doctoral study, and getting very interested in a local history project after going to a "trace your house history" event run by the local library.

Life is good. So please don't spoil it by banging on about Corbyn and the leadership eh?

Oh, and it's raining for the first day back at school...

that's the kind of high quality showing off that brings out the

in me

fedup59 · Post by **fedup59** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 9:03 am

Happy birthday Roger, hope you have a great day.

Local project sounds fascinating. I've done a few community based studies but generally starting from the current people living in the community with their history and that of the overall community as the context in which to understand their views. Do you have any details or contacts for more information?

Cake is wonderful, thanks.

Morning all.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 9:08 am

Prospects for a Red-Green alliance

https://www.buzzfeed.com/marieleconte/t ... ns9dM3vz7E" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Penultimate paragraph is why it might happen sometime I suppose.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 9:15 am

Answers to questions 2, 3 and 8 are the most interesting

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/09/02/8- ... dership-e/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(Answers of Corbyn supporters to question 2 evidence of paranoia, IMO).

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 9:18 am

https://www.buzzfeed.com/robinedds/what ... ou4ogL3ZRa" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Like all the best people, there's definitely more north in you than south. But you've probably spent enough time in the company of southerners to make you see that they're not *all* bad. Wherever you end up, the north will always be your home, but there's a lot more of the world you still need to see before you head home to buy a massive house for less than £200k...

I admit to having a) done the survey and b) recognised the outcome (according to this I'm 65% northerner)

Enter PaulfromYorkshire, chased by a whippet.

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 9:26 am

Good morning

I like to see how certain Labour politicians are able to leave their past behind them and seen to be taken as oracles for the future

Old Man Kinnock (who I do have some modicum of respect for, well did) who managed to lose two elections including 1992

Mandelson who was sacked twice from cabinet for shady goings on

Ed Balls who managed to lose his own seat and failed to land a glove on Osborne over such a ridiculous policy such as austerity. Also he was at least significantly to blame for Labour being blamed for the financial crisis due to the false perception of 'overspending'

Until those people and their supporters start to show some humility and a modicum of responsibility then I think those of us who (in some cases reluctantly) support Corbyn are fully entitled to ignore what they say

The malaise within Labour started long before September 2015 but reading some people on here you would not begin to believe that was the case

We lost in 2010 and 2015 and struggled in 2005...there was no indication of any real soul searching about that from those in charge.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 9:27 am

@RogerOThornhill

Happy birthday!

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 9:32 am

Vaz

Corbyn now saying it should be seen as a private matter and left alone.

Not sure about that give how he seems to have paid.

Updated for linked report

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics ... 36496.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 9:38 am

Sorry Roger....didn't see your post

Happy birthday

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 9:40 am

tinyclanger2 wrote:
https://www.buzzfeed.com/robinedds/what ... ou4ogL3ZRa" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Like all the best people, there's definitely more north in you than south. But you've probably spent enough time in the company of southerners to make you see that they're not *all* bad. Wherever you end up, the north will always be your home, but there's a lot more of the world you still need to see before you head home to buy a massive house for less than £200k...
I admit to having a) done the survey and b) recognised the outcome (according to this I'm 65% northerner)

Enter PaulfromYorkshire, chased by a whippet.

I'm 63% northerner. I think it's broken

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 9:45 am

Oh and happy birthday RogerOThornhill!

Though I did think it was traditional to bring doughnuts, rather than cake on your own birthday. Or is that a West Country Northern thing? We do like to do things differently here in the West Country North.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 9:47 am

I thought the West Country was Basque anyway?

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 9:53 am

howsillyofme1 wrote: The malaise within Labour started long before September 2015 but reading some people on here you would not begin to believe that was the case

Yes. It began in 2007.

Being serious, it really began on 11 September 2001. The subsequent Iraq War was the beginning of the end for a Labour party that could win. That is only becoming apparent now.

Someone on twitter was posting a future History GCSE question of "Did Ed Miliband destroy the Labour party?". I think my answer would be that he sped up its demise (in the sense of its no longer being a party of government, it won't disappear), but that the real villain was Blair. He was the one who killed the prospects for the kind of politics he represented.

A few days ago when I was moaning about Corbyn appearing on and taking money from Iranian State TV, a regime that murders people for being gay, some replied what about Blair taking money from some equally unsavoury regimes after leaving office? My view? An awful thing to have done, by at a minimum giving the impression of personal greed trumping principle he has harmed the very causes he should be defending.

Blair is like Corbyn in that he is so certain of his own personal rectitude that it leads him into doing some truly dumb things.

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 9:53 am

Happy birthday Roger, cake looks lush.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 9:54 am

Willow904 wrote:Oh and happy birthday RogerOThornhill!

Though I did think it was traditional to bring doughnuts, rather than cake on your own birthday. Or is that a West Country Northern thing? We do like to do things differently here in the West Country North.

At our place the lazy ones just bought doughniuts, and the even lazier ones (like me) got their other halves to bake some cakes...

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 9:56 am

RogerOThornhill wrote:
Willow904 wrote:Oh and happy birthday RogerOThornhill!

Though I did think it was traditional to bring doughnuts, rather than cake on your own birthday. Or is that a West Country Northern thing? We do like to do things differently here in the West Country North.
At our place the lazy ones just bought doughniuts, and the even lazier ones (like me) got their other halves to bake some cakes...

I once managed to get an Italian colleague to bake a cake for me ... (even put a reminder in outlook)

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 9:56 am

I see the latest financial numbers are again showing the acute effects of Brexit are not appearing, and more importantly, not hurting

The chronic effects will not be felt for a while, and possibly not until we see A50 invocation, with a lag

The failure of there to be an acute effect is undermining the arguments for second referenda or rowing back on Brexit

When the, likely inevitable, downturn happens will it be blamed on Brexit or will the press spin it differently?

It is ironic that in order for us to have a chance of changing people's minds we need to see a sharp effect, but that would need A50 to be invoked (in my view) which the Remain camp are completely against and which also starts the countdown to Exit which will be difficult to stop

Seems more and more likely to me that we are on our way out

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 9:58 am

V interesting on whether the PLP can unilaterally re-instate shadow cabinet elections.

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

They no doubt will, and the interesting question is what happens next after Corbyn wins? Can he ignore? Do we have two shadow cabinets?

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 10:10 am

1m ago 10:07
No 10 says points-based immigration system 'will not work and is not an option'

Speaking to reporters on her flight to China Theresa May appeared to rule out introducing a points-based immigration system. (See 9.33am.) Downing Street has now gone even further and ruled out the idea unequivocally. (Politics Live, Guardian)

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 10:12 am

PorFavor wrote:
1m ago 10:07
No 10 says points-based immigration system 'will not work and is not an option'

Speaking to reporters on her flight to China Theresa May appeared to rule out introducing a points-based immigration system. (See 9.33am.) Downing Street has now gone even further and ruled out the idea unequivocally. (Politics Live, Guardian)

So what are they planning given that migration from non-EU countries outstrips those from the EU IIRC?

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 10:12 am

perhaps we could arrange for an ice age barrier to break, leading to a megaflood and the separation of Britain from the nasty foreigners who had just populated it. then we could stop any immigration at all

... oh

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 10:12 am

tinyclanger2 wrote:I thought the West Country was Basque anyway?

We're the Northern Basque!

Actually, probably not. Interestingly enough, North East Somerset was coal mining country back in the days of Victorian mine owners and sending kids down pits. The last pit closed in 1973, so we weren't involved in the miners' strike, but pigeon fancying is a popular local hobby and pockets of Labour support persist where the old social clubs are still going, despite most industry (primarily printing, though shoe and bootmaking were also common) leaving in recent decades. So there are echoes of the industrial north in my corner of the West Country, but that echo is getting fainter all the time.

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 10:13 am

SpinningHugo wrote:
howsillyofme1 wrote: The malaise within Labour started long before September 2015 but reading some people on here you would not begin to believe that was the case

Yes. It began in 2007.

Being serious, it really began on 11 September 2001. The subsequent Iraq War was the beginning of the end for a Labour party that could win. That is only becoming apparent now.

Someone on twitter was posting a future History GCSE question of "Did Ed Miliband destroy the Labour party?". I think my answer would be that he sped up its demise (in the sense of its no longer being a party of government, it won't disappear), but that the real villain was Blair. He was the one who killed the prospects for the kind of politics he represented.

A few days ago when I was moaning about Corbyn appearing on and taking money from Iranian State TV, a regime that murders people for being gay, some replied what about Blair taking money from some equally unsavoury regimes after leaving office? My view? An awful thing to have done, by at a minimum giving the impression of personal greed trumping principle he has harmed the very causes he should be defending.

Blair is like Corbyn in that he is so certain of his own personal rectitude that it leads him into doing some truly dumb things.

Let's be very clear about this, I was not complaining merely about Blair's post premiership grasping love of gold, but to his corrupt shutting down of an investigation into illegal arms sales whilst in office - arms which are now being used to murder children - something you claimed there was no evidence of, until Blair's own words andmultiple reports pproved - yet again - the mendacity of your contribution.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 10:16 am

jesus wept.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 10:25 am

Temulkar wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
howsillyofme1 wrote: The malaise within Labour started long before September 2015 but reading some people on here you would not begin to believe that was the case

Yes. It began in 2007.

Being serious, it really began on 11 September 2001. The subsequent Iraq War was the beginning of the end for a Labour party that could win. That is only becoming apparent now.

Someone on twitter was posting a future History GCSE question of "Did Ed Miliband destroy the Labour party?". I think my answer would be that he sped up its demise (in the sense of its no longer being a party of government, it won't disappear), but that the real villain was Blair. He was the one who killed the prospects for the kind of politics he represented.

A few days ago when I was moaning about Corbyn appearing on and taking money from Iranian State TV, a regime that murders people for being gay, some replied what about Blair taking money from some equally unsavoury regimes after leaving office? My view? An awful thing to have done, by at a minimum giving the impression of personal greed trumping principle he has harmed the very causes he should be defending.

Blair is like Corbyn in that he is so certain of his own personal rectitude that it leads him into doing some truly dumb things.

Let's be very clear about this, I was not complaining merely about Blair's post premiership grasping love of gold, but to his corrupt shutting down of an investigation into illegal arms sales whilst in office - arms which are now being used to murder children - something you claimed there was no evidence of, until Blair's own words andmultiple reports pproved - yet again - the mendacity of your contribution.

I don't recall our having any conversation about this, but we must have done if you say so.

But, for the sake of argument, let us assume that all you say is true. A disgusting way to behave.

Now, how does that make Corbyn's appearance on and payment from Iranian State tv ok?

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 10:29 am

Ignore lists.

There for a reason.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 10:44 am

Willow904 wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:Corbyn suggests members get a say in shadow cabinet membership

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

That'll work.
The MPs choosing could be interesting given how many have said they won't serve under Corbyn's leadership!

You do it, no you do it!
I suspect there could be a few volunteers for shadow Chancellor. Corbyn really would have to start discussing policy with MPs outside his camp if that came to pass.
I tend to sympathise with Ed's position that a shadow leader needs to be able to choose their team. But also MPs need to be able to choose their leader. Ed Balls comments about the change to leadership elections is strange as Ed's new system allowed just that. Why MPs nominated someone they felt unable to serve under remains unfathomable to me and ranks alongside the poor oversight of the EU referendum proposals - opposition failed to challenge the question, the timescale of the debate or any of it that I remember. Are MPs getting thicker or something?

Labour right wingers supported the changes as they thought it would benefit them. Now its clear they don't, they don't.

Its part of a more general malaise amongst them, though - they don't have any compelling vision to win people over, just one short term tactical "fix" after another.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 10:46 am

Seems as if a great many of those who voted "Out" have been stitched up like a kipper . . . .

(They haven't done any of the rest of us any favours, mind. I feel like a rat in a trap.)

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 10:54 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
Willow904 wrote:
StephenDolan wrote: The MPs choosing could be interesting given how many have said they won't serve under Corbyn's leadership!

You do it, no you do it!
I suspect there could be a few volunteers for shadow Chancellor. Corbyn really would have to start discussing policy with MPs outside his camp if that came to pass.
I tend to sympathise with Ed's position that a shadow leader needs to be able to choose their team. But also MPs need to be able to choose their leader. Ed Balls comments about the change to leadership elections is strange as Ed's new system allowed just that. Why MPs nominated someone they felt unable to serve under remains unfathomable to me and ranks alongside the poor oversight of the EU referendum proposals - opposition failed to challenge the question, the timescale of the debate or any of it that I remember. Are MPs getting thicker or something?
Labour right wingers supported the changes as they thought it would benefit them. Now its clear they don't, they don't.

Its part of a more general malaise amongst them, though - they don't have any compelling vision to win people over, just one short term tactical "fix" after another.

Indeed. There's no discernible attempt to win over the membership etc. Stating the obvious, 1997 is approaching 20 years ago. Times have changed.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 10:55 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
Willow904 wrote:
StephenDolan wrote: The MPs choosing could be interesting given how many have said they won't serve under Corbyn's leadership!

You do it, no you do it!
I suspect there could be a few volunteers for shadow Chancellor. Corbyn really would have to start discussing policy with MPs outside his camp if that came to pass.
I tend to sympathise with Ed's position that a shadow leader needs to be able to choose their team. But also MPs need to be able to choose their leader. Ed Balls comments about the change to leadership elections is strange as Ed's new system allowed just that. Why MPs nominated someone they felt unable to serve under remains unfathomable to me and ranks alongside the poor oversight of the EU referendum proposals - opposition failed to challenge the question, the timescale of the debate or any of it that I remember. Are MPs getting thicker or something?
Labour right wingers supported the changes as they thought it would benefit them. Now its clear they don't, they don't.

Its part of a more general malaise amongst them, though - they don't have any compelling vision to win people over, just one short term tactical "fix" after another.

You mean in the same way that others opposed the change because they thought it wouldn't favour them, but now support it?

the Labour right (indeed everyone who is not a paid up Corbyn supporter) is doomed longterm within Labour. The Campaign group won and will be in charge for the foreseeable future.

I'd be surprised if many of the PLP went back to serve under Corbyn. They'd look like idiots now. How could they go in front of Andrew Neil?

I think this is going to be the next battleground. They'll reinstate the elections and Corbyn will refuse to recognise it. We'll then have a row over who is the shadow cabinet.

What fun!

Professor O'Hara is, as usual good on this kind of thing

http://publicpolicypast.blogspot.co.uk/ ... ation.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

see penultimate paragraph.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 11:04 am

StephenDolan wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:
Willow904 wrote: I suspect there could be a few volunteers for shadow Chancellor. Corbyn really would have to start discussing policy with MPs outside his camp if that came to pass.
I tend to sympathise with Ed's position that a shadow leader needs to be able to choose their team. But also MPs need to be able to choose their leader. Ed Balls comments about the change to leadership elections is strange as Ed's new system allowed just that. Why MPs nominated someone they felt unable to serve under remains unfathomable to me and ranks alongside the poor oversight of the EU referendum proposals - opposition failed to challenge the question, the timescale of the debate or any of it that I remember. Are MPs getting thicker or something?
Labour right wingers supported the changes as they thought it would benefit them. Now its clear they don't, they don't.

Its part of a more general malaise amongst them, though - they don't have any compelling vision to win people over, just one short term tactical "fix" after another.
Indeed. There's no discernible attempt to win over the membership etc. Stating the obvious, 1997 is approaching 20 years ago. Times have changed.

i would have thought Owen Smith has made considerable efforts to do so, and the evil Bitterite PLP selected him as their standard bearer to try to do so?

Times have indeed changed. Just not in a good way for the party that was once a party of government.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 11:05 am

Happy Birthday Roger.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 11:07 am

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

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

Childcare charity 4Children goes into administration

One of the country’s biggest childcare charities, which provided thousands of low-income families with nursery, after-school clubs and parenting services, has collapsed.

4Children, which was the government’s official Early Years strategic partner, went into administration after a rapid corporate expansion fuelled by private loans unravelled in the face of government cuts.

Charity leaders blamed the collapse of 4Children, a respected and nationally recognised charity, on an increasingly tight financial environment for charities delivering council-funded services and described it as a a warning sign to ministers about the sustainability of children’s services in a competitive public sector marketplace.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Mon 05 Sep, 2016 11:09 am

Yes, he has. The problem is that because of how so many of Corbyn's opponents have behaved, many don't trust him.

(either that he genuinely believes in the programme he has set out, or that the "dark forces" in the party would ever allow him to implement it)

As I said yesterday, the "scorched earth" tactics of the Bitterites have proved as disastrous *and* counter-productive as many of us predicted.