Tuesday 6th December 2016

Post by **refitman** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 7:11 am

Morning all.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 7:28 am

Morning!

Rail reforms

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/business-38182886" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Rail commuters will be able to use a pay-as-you-go smart card to travel anywhere in the country by 2018, under the railway reforms unveiled today.

Well those bits of the country that Westminster still governs anyway..

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 7:30 am

Oh and where the staff aren't on strike.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 7:40 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Oh and where the staff aren't on strike.

And those bits that Grayling hasn't completely buggered up.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 7:41 am

A Christmas story that made me smile.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style ... 56686.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Post by **adam** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 9:36 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Morning!

Rail reforms

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/business-38182886" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Rail commuters will be able to use a pay-as-you-go smart card to travel anywhere in the country by 2018, under the railway reforms unveiled today.
Well those bits of the country that Westminster still governs anyway..

There is no value or benefit to travellers in a pay-as-you-go smart card - it's just another way of buying a ticket, and of blaming travellers for the lack of facilities to buy tickets outside of main stations.

Also, and speaking as a train commuter now, I suspect - because they've talked about this before - that they will use this to replace season tickets too. It's not enough that you pay an awful lot of money for a season ticket, at least that's a predictable amount of money at a predictable time - instead they want you to pay for every journey when you make it, losing that ability to budget for your travel and losing the very small bonus of occasionally making your commute journey outside of your normal commute time.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 9:45 am

Good morfternoon.

Flex It Like "Brexit".

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 9:50 am

https://leftfootforward.org/2016/12/can ... on-brexit/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You need powers of clairvoyance to work out Labour’s Brexit policy. There is no consistency of purpose or language, leaving a mess of competing conversations. As things stand, Labour has no voice on the main political issue of the day.

There are at least four camps: The leadership, the shadow Brexit department, the reformers and the abolitionists.

An article that reflects my own doubts as to whether or not Labour will ultimately defend our membership of the single market or not. The jury remains out as it is clear that there are major differences of opinion within the party with no clear indication of which view will win out. I have little confidence in either the Corbyn left or the 'Blairite' right of the party on this issue, as many of you have probably gathered by now. But I am a little reassured that the inscrutable Keir Starmer is probably at least trying to pull the party in the right direction (from my own perspective, I appreciate for many Labour supporters remaining in the single market would involve unacceptable compromises, but I find the economic costs of leaving too great to ignore).

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 10:20 am

Cock-up on the photocopying front (Supreme Court). The Government side can't even get that right!

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 10:30 am

The alternative view of the Supreme Court proceedings yesterday, I think he's tweeting again today @RupertMyers
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 10:51 am

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Barnier says he has been preparing for the Brexit negotiations. He has visited 18 member states already, and will have visited them all by the end of January.

He is building a team of 30 officials, with solid experience in all areas.

Post by **adam** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 10:53 am

gilsey wrote:Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Barnier says he has been preparing for the Brexit negotiations. He has visited 18 member states already, and will have visited them all by the end of January.

He is building a team of 30 officials, with solid experience in all areas.

I quite like him from that article - he posed for a picture outside the 'museum of broken relationships' and tweeted about enjoying a glass of Prosecco at lunchtime after that one of Johnson's silly interjections.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 10:54 am

Michel Barnier, the European commission’s chief Brexit negotiator, is staring[sic] his press conference.

Barnier says the European commission is ready to receive notification from the UK.

He says at the start of the process (after article 50 has been triggered) the commission will have to set guidelines.

And, at the end of the negotiation, the deal will have to be agreed.

That means there will be less than 18 months for the actual talks, he says. (Politics Live, Guardian - my emphasis)

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 10:56 am

gilsey wrote:Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Barnier says he has been preparing for the Brexit negotiations. He has visited 18 member states already, and will have visited them all by the end of January.

He is building a team of 30 officials, with solid experience in all areas.

Yes - and we're still scratching around for anyone who knows anything about anything.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 11:21 am

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... tay-longer" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Len McCluskey is expected to resign this week as head of Britain’s biggest union in an effort to seek a third term in office.

The Unite general secretary told members of the union on Monday that he plans to stand down on Wednesday, union sources have claimed, sparking an election with rivals.

He must be very certain of his popularity.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 11:26 am

Can't think of anything like that going wrong recently, can you?

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 11:30 am

I found this very helpful, from the Mirror!

The decision on whether the Government or Parliament should have the power to trigger Article 50 could rest on what happened to a London hotel.

The Supreme Court is very interested in a 1920 case between the Attorney General and the De Keyser’s Royal Hotel.

In the First World War the Government used the Royal Prerogative to requisition this 300-bed hotel on the Victoria Embankment to house hundreds of troops. Crucially, they refused to pay any compensation. The hotel then took the Government to court demanding it cough up. The court ruled that the Government had abused its prerogative powers.

“If the whole ground of something which could be done by the prerogative is covered by the statute it is the statute that rules,” it judged.

The question the judges have to decide is if this sets a legal precedent.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 11:32 am

Presumably this means you can't use the Prerogative simply to avoid doing something you don't want to do.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 11:40 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Presumably this means you can't use the Prerogative simply to avoid doing something you don't want to do.

I've read it twice but I'm still unclear as to what it means, tbh

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 11:41 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:I found this very helpful, from the Mirror!
The decision on whether the Government or Parliament should have the power to trigger Article 50 could rest on what happened to a London hotel.

The Supreme Court is very interested in a 1920 case between the Attorney General and the De Keyser’s Royal Hotel.

In the First World War the Government used the Royal Prerogative to requisition this 300-bed hotel on the Victoria Embankment to house hundreds of troops. Crucially, they refused to pay any compensation. The hotel then took the Government to court demanding it cough up. The court ruled that the Government had abused its prerogative powers.

“If the whole ground of something which could be done by the prerogative is covered by the statute it is the statute that rules,” it judged.

The question the judges have to decide is if this sets a legal precedent.

Which reminds me -

Has anyone here been watching the latest Stephen Poliakoff offering (Close to the Enemy - different war, different hotel)?

As ever, I'm entranced. Stephen Poliakoff is so good at effortlessly making me (and my not being conscious of it) suspend reality - even on re-watches. It's a sort of magic spell.

Edited to add -

Suspend disbelief, even.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 11:41 am

Martin Porter QC
‏@MartinPorter6
If, in a parallel universe, I were a Supreme Court Judge I would start with these questions

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

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 11:54 am

From Wiki:

On the Attorney-General's appeal in 1920, the House of Lords unanimously affirmed the Court of Appeal's decision, rejecting the government's claim to rely on prerogative power, and holding that once the statute had been enacted the prerogative powers fell into abeyance, for the duration of the life of its provisions should the statute be replaced or amended or modified.

The compensation claim was based on an 1842 act of parliament. The judgement seems to be saying that the Royal Prerogative can't reverse or overturn something passed by parliament, in this case to override a previous provision for payment of compensation.

I'm thinking the matter of leaving the EU is a tad more complicated, but this precedent certainly doesn't seem to help May's position.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-G_v_D ... _Hotel_Ltd" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 12:05 pm

Willow904 wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... tay-longer
Len McCluskey is expected to resign this week as head of Britain’s biggest union in an effort to seek a third term in office.

The Unite general secretary told members of the union on Monday that he plans to stand down on Wednesday, union sources have claimed, sparking an election with rivals.
He must be very certain of his popularity.

Given this is part of Labour First's latest little wheeze to undermine Corbyn and start Coup 2:Revenge of the Scabs, I would say Len is likely to increase his mandate.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 12:06 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:Martin Porter QC
‏@MartinPorter6
If, in a parallel universe, I were a Supreme Court Judge I would start with these questions

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

Yes, the advisory nature of the referendum is significant in this, I think. Parliament passed an act to hold the referendum, but it didn't pass an act to put the result into practice and this is suggesting that as such the government essentially has to prove it has the right to leave the EU without a referendum or parliamentary approval in order to win its case.

In some ways it's strange May would struggle on with this, the likelihood of parliament not approving the triggering of article 50 being negligible. We're still going to stupidly leave either way so why not share the blame for the inevitable economic tsunami around a bit?

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 12:08 pm

Temulkar wrote:
Willow904 wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... tay-longer
Len McCluskey is expected to resign this week as head of Britain’s biggest union in an effort to seek a third term in office.

The Unite general secretary told members of the union on Monday that he plans to stand down on Wednesday, union sources have claimed, sparking an election with rivals.
He must be very certain of his popularity.
Given this is part of Labour First's latest little wheeze to undermine Corbyn and start Coup 2:Revenge of the Scabs, I would say Len is likely to increase his mandate.

I don't really follow. If McCluskey wanted to undermine Corbyn, why has he been supporting him?

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 12:12 pm

I think what is being implied is that anti-Corbyn/McCluskey elements have basically forced this upon him. I personally don't claim to know enough about events to comment on that.

ScarletGas · Post by **ScarletGas** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 12:13 pm

In a government of incompetents is there a minister with a track record (pun intended) of being more dangerously incompetent than Chris Grayling?

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 12:16 pm

Willow904 wrote:
Temulkar wrote:
Willow904 wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... tay-longer He must be very certain of his popularity.
Given this is part of Labour First's latest little wheeze to undermine Corbyn and start Coup 2:Revenge of the Scabs, I would say Len is likely to increase his mandate.
I don't really follow. If McCluskey wanted to undermine Corbyn, why has he been supporting him?

McClusky doesnt, it is Akehurst and co trying to unseat McClusky with procedural nonsense that has made Len press the nuclear option of resignation and re-election. As always with the scabs they underestimated their opponent and have been wrong footed.

Maybe if they invested their energies to fighting the Tories rather than scabbing their own party Labour ccould actually get on with holding the government to account.

I note the Guardian has removed the quotes from Labour sourcces that were originally in the article.

Senior Labour party figures believe it would be a "game changer" if Mr McCluskey were to be defeated by a moderate candidate.

"Deposing Len as general secretary would give us a chance of winning the next election," said one source.

"At a stroke it would remove Unite's support for Jeremy, leaving him vulnerable if there was another coup. The stakes are huge."

Scabs.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 12:18 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:I think what is being implied is that anti-Corbyn/McCluskey elements have basically forced this upon him. I personally don't claim to know enough about events to comment on that.

Only McCluskey can choose to resign, so I don't see how this has been forced on him. Resigning early specifically to run for an extra term is risky, so he must be very confident, is all I can say.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 12:21 pm

Its far from unknown for this sort of thing to happen - remember Major quitting to stand again in 1995, that didn't happen totally unprompted shall we say.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 12:33 pm

Bad news for those of you who may have got used to a "grey Brexit". Theresa May (in a speech on a boat) has just declared that it's a "red, white and blue Brexit".

Edited to add -

And she appeared to be wearing the anchor chain around her neck whilst saying it. Why does she wear jewellery to which she is so physically unsuited? I thought she said that her husband was good at choosing accessories. (Perhaps he is - but doesn't choose hers?)

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 12:36 pm

We now have "Red White and Blue' Brexit - not to mention attempting to do deal with dictatorships.

http://www.itv.com/news/2016-12-06/ther ... ue-brexit/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 12:37 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/social-care ... d-write-it" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

New manifesto for social care is essential – service users should write it
Peter Beresford

"Highlight social care as a net wealth creator, enabling service users of all ages to contribute to their maximum and have the healthiest quality of life, rather than perpetuating its image as a drain on budgets and resources, working with people who are presented as dependent and a burden."

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 12:43 pm

Guffers ‏@gavmacn 17h17 hours ago
What Nigel Farage expected to happen vs what actually happened.

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

Do read the signs the man dressed as (?) not sure what he's dressed as really....

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 12:43 pm

McCluskey will back whoever gives the best offer to his members, as is his job. It wasn't a coincidence that after his backing last time, Clive Lewis came out and backed defence policies that will keep Unite members in jobs. I think it's a mistake to see McCluskey as Jez''s bosom pal.
And even if he were he can't keep backing someone with such dire ratings.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 12:45 pm

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

The forgotten people in the grammar school debate? Disabled children
Mike Lambert

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 12:51 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:McCluskey will back whoever gives the best offer to his members, as is his job. It wasn't a coincidence that after his backing last time, Clive Lewis came out and backed defence policies that will keep Unite members in jobs. I think it's a mistake to see McCluskey as Jez''s bosom pal.
And even if he were he can't keep backing someone with such dire ratings.

He wouldnt have such dire ratings if it wasnt forthe scabs. Do you honestly think the labour membership are going to meekly vote against corbyn after they have seen the constant undermining of the leadership and deliberate failure to hold the tories to account? Coup 2: Revenge of the Scabs will end up as humilatingly for the Scabs as Coup 1: The Snivelling Lying Shit.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 12:52 pm

HindleA wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... are_btn_tw

The forgotten people in the grammar school debate? Disabled children
Mike Lambert

I don't think they've been forgotten - they're being ignored, which is rather more deliberate and calculated.

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 12:53 pm

https://www.philosophyfootball.com/stev ... s-mug.html

Our country went to the polls, and all we got was these mugs:

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 1:07 pm

Temulkar wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:McCluskey will back whoever gives the best offer to his members, as is his job. It wasn't a coincidence that after his backing last time, Clive Lewis came out and backed defence policies that will keep Unite members in jobs. I think it's a mistake to see McCluskey as Jez''s bosom pal.
And even if he were he can't keep backing someone with such dire ratings.
He wouldnt have such dire ratings if it wasnt forthe scabs. Do you honestly think the labour membership are going to meekly vote against corbyn after they have seen the constant undermining of the leadership and deliberate failure to hold the tories to account? Coup 2: Revenge of the Scabs will end up as humilatingly for the Scabs as Coup 1: The Snivelling Lying Shit.

The Labour Membership can do what they want.

A union leader is an entirely different matter. The GMB leadership took a strong anti Corbyn position and the sky didn't fall in on them. McCluskey has lots of the same interests in his union. My impression is he''s waiting for a better offer and using his leverage differently. For the overall TUC position see France O'Grady. Pro nukes pro Heathrow Expansion. These aren't people who are going to stick with the old style greeny protestCorbyn easily. They want jobs for members.

And maybe for Corbyn to have a clue on Brexit.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 1:09 pm

Momentum feuding not improving.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/st ... ntums-feud" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 1:12 pm

Do you think Labour voters are going to meekly vote for Corbyn when they repeatedly say they don't want him? Why should they? Why should Corbyn want to stay?

I think he'll stand down before 2018. McCluskey needn't worry.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 1:13 pm

Sorry, the Guardian had a piece about it yesterday, but I've not been bothering to read much online recently. All too depressing.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ber-claims" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 1:19 pm

Its basically about a certain type of hard-left activist being very set in their ways and seeing only one possible method of running things.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 1:22 pm

I've moved to Wales since I last used to post. Pro Single Market Plaid are looking attractive.

I'm sure Plaid, just like Jez, would like to dole out subsidies. But unlike him, they can see the price of that is hard Brexit and not worth it.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 1:23 pm

13:19

The BBC’s Norman Smith says a government source has accused Michel Barnier of “posturing”. (Politics Live, Guardian)

That'll help things along . . .

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 1:24 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:I've moved to Wales since I last used to post. Pro Single Market Plaid are looking attractive.

I'm sure Plaid, just like Jez, would like to dole out subsidies. But unlike him, they can see the price of that is hard Brexit and not worth it.

Welcome to Wales Tubby.

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 1:35 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Do you think Labour voters are going to meekly vote for Corbyn when they repeatedly say they don't want him? Why should they? Why should Corbyn want to stay?

I think he'll stand down before 2018. McCluskey needn't worry.

Yeah cos you're political predictions have been so accurate in the last year or so.

Do you think the british electorate are going to vote tory when brexit becomes the abject disaster we all kknow it to be? You think they will vote for May - the only tory too stupid to realise the shit britain is in, and the only one not to back out of the leadership? The tories are fucked which is one reason the scabs have to work so hard to undermine their own side.

UKIP are no threat because UKIP's leader wants to privatise the NHS. Nuttall isnt Farage, doesnt have his charisma, and is incredibly thick for someone with an MA, and a liberal resurgance in the South only helps Labour because of the lib tory maginals.

If the scabs stopped scabbing Labour would be very quickly ahead, thats why they scab, because by scabbinig the can undermine their own party and keep their snouts ini the trough. They fear a corbyn success more than a tory one, and are prepared to sacrifice the poor the weak and vulnerable, the unemployed, the immigrant, the other. They will cast them all under a bus in pursuit of power, and that is why they will lose a third time, because they are fundementally immoral. They are unfit to serve the british people, and the british people are wising up to them.

3 weeks ago Goldsmith had a 20+ lead i teh polls and a 23k majority, now hes just another trust fund kid. A racist and stupid trust fund kid at that.

Politics is in flux, your certainties are obsolete, as has been proven quite a few times recently.

Lost Soul · Post by **Lost Soul** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 1:44 pm

PorFavor wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:I found this very helpful, from the Mirror!
The decision on whether the Government or Parliament should have the power to trigger Article 50 could rest on what happened to a London hotel.

The Supreme Court is very interested in a 1920 case between the Attorney General and the De Keyser’s Royal Hotel.

In the First World War the Government used the Royal Prerogative to requisition this 300-bed hotel on the Victoria Embankment to house hundreds of troops. Crucially, they refused to pay any compensation. The hotel then took the Government to court demanding it cough up. The court ruled that the Government had abused its prerogative powers.

“If the whole ground of something which could be done by the prerogative is covered by the statute it is the statute that rules,” it judged.

The question the judges have to decide is if this sets a legal precedent.

Which reminds me -

Has anyone here been watching the latest Stephen Poliakoff offering (Close to the Enemy - different war, different hotel)?

As ever, I'm entranced. Stephen Poliakoff is so good at effortlessly making me (and my not being conscious of it) suspend reality - even on re-watches. It's a sort of magic spell.

Edited to add -

Suspend disbelief, even.

I'd settle for suspending reality...

Poliakoff is a genius. We're saving it to savour.

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Tue 06 Dec, 2016 1:53 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:I've moved to Wales since I last used to post. Pro Single Market Plaid are looking attractive.

I'm sure Plaid, just like Jez, would like to dole out subsidies. But unlike him, they can see the price of that is hard Brexit and not worth it.

Vote Plaid, but make sure you can speak Welsh, and want the union broken up. There is a reason they came 4th last year in Wales, there's a reason why they have never broken out of the prinicipality into the march. They may welcome your vote but they won't welcome you. I doubt it will take you too long to figure it out, but then again you haven't understood why Corbyn won twice, or why brexit happened, or even Trump in the US, so....