Friday 9th December 2016

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 8:47 pm

Danny Blanchflower ‏@D_Blanchflower 4s5 seconds ago
UK real annual earnings fall 07-15 3rd worst in @OECD
Greece -17.8%
Mexico -7.8%
UK -7.7%
Italy -1.7%
USA +5.3%
France +8.9%
Germany +9.3%

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 8:47 pm

Isn't there a bit of 'I reckon' in that last post Tubby?

Your new party doesn't seem to say much on what would happen as they are only interested in one part of the UK (albeit an important one, especially seeing my wife is from there)? It however seems to focus on a lot of investment as well

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 8:50 pm

Oh, and I loved the £500 bn figure, which is made up fantasy economics. Why not 6 trillion?

Large scale money printing only made any sense before Brexit. Now with inflation rising it was be utterly barmy.

See: another reason why Brexit matters above everything else.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 8:51 pm

The leadership have said they favour continued SM membership "given certain conditions". That may not be totally realistic, but shows they are open to persuasion possibly. Certainly more so than the increasingly block headed Reeves/Kinnock Jnr tendency, but they could well end up a marginalised minority. Well, here's hoping

I hope so too. But why aren't the leadership backing Single Market membership? What are the conditions we're going to force on to others? I didn't get it. Even before McDonnell's odd lurch.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 8:53 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:Oh, and I loved the £500 bn figure, which is made up fantasy economics. Why not 6 trillion?

It's actually only £17bn than the government's infrastructure plan, though of course that's a wish list not a promise.

However it's arrived at, scary big numbers aren't going to help. Sturgeon when she criticized austerity before the election couched it in terms of percentages, a must better idea.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 8:56 pm

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

As temperatures drop, Lily’s charity is working to keep homeless people alive
Frances Ryan

Worth repeating that my Aunt was hospitalised with hypothermia,she didn't feel cold.(back home with daily home visit)

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 8:57 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote: Not being members of the single market is hard Brexit. It is Labour policy to leave it.posting.php?mode=quote&f=4&p=139946#" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And no "access" is not the same.
Labour are nowhere near being united behind soft Brexit. We've got the Kipper-Labour (absurdly representing seats without many EU immigrants), and a group around the leadership who want to play about with 70s industrial policy and grandstanding against neo-liberalism.

I think the leadership group are by far preferable and the easier to shift to soft Brexit. But neither is up to it, so far.
The leadership have said they favour continued SM membership "given certain conditions". That may not be totally realistic, but shows they are open to persuasion possibly. Certainly more so than the increasingly block headed Reeves/Kinnock Jnr tendency, but they could well end up a marginalised minority. Well, here's hoping

(and I mean, Rachel Reeves was an economist outside of politics - she *knows* how destructive hard Brexit will be. Still, even the egregious Helen Pidd going to her constituency and finding practically nobody who would back up RR's shrieking about "rivers of blood" was a genuine LOL moment)

You have repeated thus falsehood more than once.

It is Labour policy to favour *access*.

Where is the statement where *membership* is stated to be Labour policy.

Last time I asked you produced nothing.

Mainly because it isn't true.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 8:58 pm

howsillyofme1 wrote:Isn't there a bit of 'I reckon' in that last post Tubby?

Your new party doesn't seem to say much on what would happen as they are only interested in one part of the UK (albeit an important one, especially seeing my wife is from there)? It however seems to focus on a lot of investment as well

They're behind the Single Market and could put a bit of pressure in some safe Labour seats which voted Leave. So that would be positive. But it's still a big call to vote for them to beat Labour, and I probably wouldn't do that even if there were an election tmrw.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 9:02 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:Danny Blanchflower ‏@D_Blanchflower 4s5 seconds ago
UK real annual earnings fall 07-15 3rd worst in @OECD
Greece -17.8%
Mexico -7.8%
UK -7.7%
Italy -1.7%
USA +5.3%
France +8.9%
Germany +9.3%

Striking figures there for Germany. They're often criticized for being far too timid on wage rises and dragging the Eurozone down/

Poor old Hollande must look at those UK numbers and wonder why he's scoring 4% approval and May whatever lunatic figure she's getting.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 9:02 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:

By investing £500 billion in infrastructure, manufacturing and new industries backed up by a publicly-owned National Investment Bank and regional banks we will build a high skilled, high tech, low carbon economy that ends austerity and leaves no one and nowhere left behind.
Isn't some of that money printed by the BoE?

I don't see that happening without the Bank's independence being compromised and the Governor walking out. If Corbyn/McDonnell are basically in charge of the central bank, that'll be extra borrowing costs.

take the private sector out of monetary creation

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 9:03 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:Lots of cheers for Comprehensive schools on BBCAQ's

Who'd have thought that would happen a few years ago?

Credit to Gove when he was Ed Sec for not going down the grammar route although he's blotted his copybook for sucking up to May over this since.

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 9:03 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
The leadership have said they favour continued SM membership "given certain conditions". That may not be totally realistic, but shows they are open to persuasion possibly. Certainly more so than the increasingly block headed Reeves/Kinnock Jnr tendency, but they could well end up a marginalised minority. Well, here's hoping
I hope so too. But why aren't the leadership backing Single Market membership? What are the conditions we're going to force on to others? I didn't get it. Even before McDonnell's odd lurch.

I think it may be that strange and currently unacceptable approach of 'keeping your options open'!

They know that saying No to the Single Market would bring all the Remainers out screaming, and to say an unequivocal Yes will bring all the Kippers (and a good part of the right wing of the PLP - all who never said a word during the Blair years) out frothing

The best option is the one that Anatoly and Paul suggest....be ambiguous until you need to show your hand

Taking a clear position at the moment is not in my view sensible if there is the assumption of a 2020 GE......what is the point of being a dyed in the wool Remainer if we are out...apart from crowing 'we told you so'.

W have to make sure the decisions taken are all seen as Tory ones.....

The referendum was lost...we cannot go back to June 22nd and the Labour Party cannot be seen to oppose as directly as the LD have.....

That may mean taking some hits now (and it seems a lot from 'so-called' supporters who change party allegiance very readily to my mind) to look to the long game.

The long game will see us outside the EU with a strong link to the Single Market and virtual free movement....clearly just my opinion and may be wrong

The view we take is all based on our assumptions and mine is we are leaving, if you think there is a way we can somehow manage to stay in then my conclusions will be wrong....at the moment though I think I am more likely to be right than you are

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 9:03 pm

http://press.labour.org.uk/post/1542569 ... act-on-the" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The bid must be judged on its likely impact on the UK news market and the provision of robust and independent journalism - Watson

Tom Watson, Labour’s Shadow Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, commenting on the Fox bid for BskyB, said

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 9:10 pm

howsillyofme1 wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
The leadership have said they favour continued SM membership "given certain conditions". That may not be totally realistic, but shows they are open to persuasion possibly. Certainly more so than the increasingly block headed Reeves/Kinnock Jnr tendency, but they could well end up a marginalised minority. Well, here's hoping
I hope so too. But why aren't the leadership backing Single Market membership? What are the conditions we're going to force on to others? I didn't get it. Even before McDonnell's odd lurch.

I think it may be that strange and currently unacceptable approach of 'keeping your options open'!

They know that saying No to the Single Market would bring all the Remainers out screaming, and to say an unequivocal Yes will bring all the Kippers (and a good part of the right wing of the PLP - all who never said a word during the Blair years) out frothing

The best option is the one that Anatoly and Paul suggest....be ambiguous until you need to show your hand

Taking a clear position at the moment is not in my view sensible if there is the assumption of a 2020 GE......what is the point of being a dyed in the wool Remainer if we are out...apart from crowing 'we told you so'.

W have to make sure the decisions taken are all seen as Tory ones.....

The referendum was lost...we cannot go back to June 22nd and the Labour Party cannot be seen to oppose as directly as the LD have.....

That may mean taking some hits now (and it seems a lot from 'so-called' supporters who change party allegiance very readily to my mind) to look to the long game.

The long game will see us outside the EU with a strong link to the Single Market and virtual free movement....clearly just my opinion and may be wrong

The view we take is all based on our assumptions and mine is we are leaving, if you think there is a way we can somehow manage to stay in then my conclusions will be wrong....at the moment though I think I am more likely to be right than you are

Labour has said no to Single Market membership.

Starmer said so expressly in the Commons.

Corbyn and McDonnell have said so as well.

Are you confusing access and membership? The Tories and Labour both favour "access", which is completely meaningless.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 9:10 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote:Danny Blanchflower ‏@D_Blanchflower 4s5 seconds ago
UK real annual earnings fall 07-15 3rd worst in @OECD
Greece -17.8%
Mexico -7.8%
UK -7.7%
Italy -1.7%
USA +5.3%
France +8.9%
Germany +9.3%
Striking figures there for Germany. They're often criticized for being far too timid on wage rises and dragging the Eurozone down/

Poor old Hollande must look at those UK numbers and wonder why he's scoring 4% approval and May whatever lunatic figure she's getting.

Tory polling companies like Tories.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 9:11 pm

The best option is the one that Anatoly and Paul suggest....be ambiguous until you need to show your hand

I'm not sure that's what's going on. I mean Corbyn's happy to offer his personal view on freedom of movement. If he supports the Single Market, why doesn't he back that too? There's a history of prejudice v the EU on his wing of the party, that's all I can think of.

But I should be clear again. He isn't anything like the main stumbling block for Labour. Frustrating that he backs the politically brave and principled bit (immigration) and fails at the easy bit (Single Market membership), but he's way, way preferable to the Kipper Labour people. And I'm delighted one of them isn't in his job.

Single Market membership should be put forward as the best solution for us when we leave. I think the Kipper-Government case that this is pissing on the referendum result would get short shrift.

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 9:22 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
The best option is the one that Anatoly and Paul suggest....be ambiguous until you need to show your hand
I'm not sure that's what's going on. I mean Corbyn's happy to offer his personal view on freedom of movement. If he supports the Single Market, why doesn't he back that too? There's a history of prejudice v the EU on his wing of the party, that's all I can think of.

But I should be clear again. He isn't anything like the main stumbling block for Labour. Frustrating that he backs the politically brave and principled bit (immigration) and fails at the easy bit (Single Market membership), but he's way, way preferable to the Kipper Labour people. And I'm delighted one of them isn't in his job.

Single Market membership should be put forward as the best solution for us when we leave. I think the Kipper-Government case that this is pissing on the referendum result would get short shrift.

They can make that decision when the negotiations start....until we have started seeing the negotiations then Labour should not make anything too concrete...let other parties offer hostages to fortune. On immigration I think Corbyn would just about get away with what he is saying if only some of his party colleagues would shut the fuck up making so much noise.....

Let Tories make all the running...remember they are probably more split than Labour in reality...and May knows it.

Let Labour give up rabid right wing seats in Lincolnshire and Lib Dem Tories in Richmond......they have no importance in the ridiculous times we are living in. Make sure Leigh is held!

Oh and can the resident troll who I see is still stinking up this board go and do one....I bet Tem is glad to have Green company on the board though......

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 9:22 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote:Lots of cheers for Comprehensive schools on BBCAQ's
Who'd have thought that would happen a few years ago?

Credit to Gove when he was Ed Sec for not going down the grammar route although he's blotted his copybook for sucking up to May over this since.

Yeah, grammars weren't popular with the Policy Exchange-Wilshaw-Academy Chain new establishment. I wonder how far even the PM can overthrow that.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 9:43 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote:Lots of cheers for Comprehensive schools on BBCAQ's
Who'd have thought that would happen a few years ago?

Credit to Gove when he was Ed Sec for not going down the grammar route although he's blotted his copybook for sucking up to May over this since.
Yeah, grammars weren't popular with the Policy Exchange-Wilshaw-Academy Chain new establishment. I wonder how far even the PM can overthrow that.

Think that was the main reason that this new Parents and Teachers for Education grassroots (cough) campaign was set up. From my reading it came about once Rachel Wolf left/was turfed out No 10 on May's arrival.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 9:50 pm

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 65391.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Brexit: Leaked memo confirms David Davis will go into talks with 'have our cake and eat it' plan
Liberal Democrats call the Brexit Secretary ‘completely deluded’ after he is recorded suggesting Britain will leave the single market yet retain full access to it

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 9:51 pm

Couldn't even score a proper goal against ten men,Leeds having to give them penalties to allow them to get to the top of the League.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 9:52 pm

I don't want to make trouble, but am getting a bit bored of all this scrolling.
Truncation is the new black.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 9:52 pm

Or it could be.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 10:05 pm

Interesting, Roger.

Talking of special advisers, this old fave is in there. With Grayling.

https://twitter.com/emmaboon" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 10:08 pm

Here's another old fave. Special Advisor at the DWP.

http://powerbase.info/index.php/Lottie_Dexter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 10:12 pm

Goodnight, everyone.
love,
cJA

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 10:13 pm

Weird story on the DT front pages about parents buying access to Stowe School - most comments so far seem to think that was the whole point of fee-paying schools!

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

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 10:15 pm

It's a bribe by the look of it for kids who don't pass Common Entrance.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 10:17 pm

Talking of which, there was a suggestion from the independent schools council that the govt pay for poor bright kids to fill up some spaces at feepaying schools.

Now, the ISC spokesman is one Barnaby Lenon who, with another hat on, is also a trustee at the New Schools network who advise people on setting up free schools.

So...here's my theory.

1. DfE refuses to convert any more independent schools who are struggling to fill their places and therefore running out of cash to Free Schools as they've done before with a few.
2. Lenon knows this and thinks the other solution to fill the places is to get the govt to pay to put poor bright kids in them. So he sticks his other hat on...

Plausible?

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 10:21 pm

The Independent Schools Council is what exactly? The second division to the HMC? Or are the HMC schools in the ISC too?

The HMC aren't going to need the government paying for fees, I wouldn't have thought.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 10:30 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:The Independent Schools Council is what exactly? The second division to the HMC? Or are the HMC schools in the ISC too?

The HMC aren't going to need the government paying for fees, I wouldn't have thought.

Looking at this, the HMC are represented on the ISC.

http://www.isc.co.uk/about-isc/board-and-committees/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 10:30 pm

But Brexit is the most important thing?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/local ... -1.3887210" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 10:33 pm

https://waitingfortax.com/2016/12/09/ne ... igh-court/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Jolyon Maugham's big story.

Challenging Brexit in the Irish Courts. I'm not sure this is all that big.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 10:35 pm

Brexit isn't going to help on climate change or nature conservation.
Too late now anyway. We've been saying it for decades, but no-one wanted to know.

Cars, for a start.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 10:54 pm

Given that we've got Kipper-Tories trying to lead us away from any environmental standards and encourage the same sort of people in Europe, I do think Brexit is quite important, yes.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 11:06 pm

Bloody Hell,Trevor Cherry is 68.Huddersfield to Leeds reference.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 11:09 pm

Apologies if repeat

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38267368" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Michael Gove: Theresa May was 'right to sack me'

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 11:15 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Given that we've got Kipper-Tories trying to lead us away from any environmental standards and encourage the same sort of people in Europe, I do think Brexit is quite important, yes.

Which pretty much demonstrates how limited yoru vision is, and your understanding of what is happening to our planet - your support for HS2 has oft demonstrated that though, so Im not surprised.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 11:16 pm

Used to see Mick Jones in Nottingham,he ran a market stall.Excuse wafflings.

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 11:17 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:https://waitingfortax.com/2016/12/09/ne ... igh-court/

Jolyon Maugham's big story.

Challenging Brexit in the Irish Courts. I'm not sure this is all that big.

it's important, and (i think) fits in nicely with David Davies confirming on Wednesday that parliament would have a vote on the exit agreement, it aims to establish irrevocability (or revocability ?)

https://www.crowdjustice.org/case/brexit-for-the-100/

If we cannot withdraw our Article 50 notification then Parliament will have to accept those agreements - whatever their content. Like a Model T Ford, it will be able to choose any colour it wants, but only so long as it's black. The Government will have free reign to do exactly what it wants. There will be no control by Parliament.
But if the notification can be withdrawn Parliament will have a choice: it will be free to reject that deal. And, because the Government knows this, and because it wishes to deliver the result of the Referendum, it will have to try to do the deal that Parliament wants or it will risk the possibility that Parliament throws the deal out.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 11:34 pm

I still reckon that Brexit is just way too hard for the clowns in charge to deliver and nowhere is it more complex than in Ireland.

May hasn't the faintest clue what to do about Ireland has she?

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 11:41 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/business/ni ... entury-fox" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Why is Murdoch taking over Sky now? Blame Brexit and Netflix
Nils Pratley

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 11:47 pm

Rats in a sack "A minister that has done that (lied to HoC) is not fit to hold office"

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

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 11:54 pm

Damon
‏@damocrat
(@rickygervais)
"We still have 'do not drink' on bleach bottles. Take that off for two years, then have a referendum"

Brilliant.

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

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 11:55 pm

John McDonnell MP ‏@johnmcdonnellMP 36m36 minutes ago
In extremely worrying move Gambian President Jammeh has now rejected result of election.Our Gambian friends & colleagues need our solidarity

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 11:56 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:Rats in a sack "A minister that has done that (lied to HoC) is not fit to hold office"

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

Yeah and Liam Fox too

Post by **refitman** » Sat 10 Dec, 2016 1:08 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote:Rats in a sack "A minister that has done that (lied to HoC) is not fit to hold office"

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Yeah and Disgraced former Minister Liam Fox too

*ahem* FIFY

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sat 10 Dec, 2016 4:51 am

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

CIA concludes Russia interfered to help Trump win election – report

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... f4ee911573" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 10 Dec, 2016 6:16 am

Temulkar, just a thought. If you want to bring people around to your view, you might be better off choosing a more persuasive path than being permanently cross. Moreover there are pros and cons to, for example, HS2 - and weighing them up could put an intelligent and honourable person on either side of that. Your starting point - that you are more of both of these things (intelligent and honourable) than anyone else - won't help your various causes.