Monday 6th March 2017

Post by **refitman** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 7:11 am

Morning all.

NonOxCol · Post by **NonOxCol** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 8:47 am

Morning.

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

"Empire 2.0"

Not exactly disproving the theory that this is set to be the most embarrassing chapter in Britain's history since Suez, are they?

NonOxCol · Post by **NonOxCol** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 8:51 am

Meanwhile...

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

When is Humphries going to fuck the fuck off and keep fucking off?

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 9:20 am

NonOxCol wrote:Meanwhile...

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

When is Humphries going to fuck the fuck off and keep fucking off?

Mornings are so much more pleasant listening to a podcast instead of Today.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 9:25 am

Morning all.

More than 600 health quango chiefs on six figure salaries amid cash crisis

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03 ... sh-crisis/

More than 600 NHS quango chiefs are now on six-figure salaries, with a doubling in the number earning more than the Prime Minister, new figures show.

Many of the highest earners have made repeated demands on Government to increase NHS funding as it battles against its worst financial deficit in history.

But figures uncovered by the Telegraph, show that the nine main health quangos are now employing 628 officials on salaries of at least £100,000.

Quangos eh? So where did this quango structure we have now come from?

Many of the most expensive organisations are new structures, which were set up in 2013 following pledges to “streamline” the running of the NHS.

Oh, wonder who was in charge then? I might be wrong but I don't recall the DT in the forefront of groups against Lansley's top down reorganisation that no-one wanted....

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 9:46 am

NonOxCol wrote:Morning.

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

"Empire 2.0"

Not exactly disproving the theory that this is set to be the most embarrassing chapter in Britain's history since Suez, are they?

Couldn't they just play the computer game instead?

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 9:55 am

Morning all missed out earlier. Very poor form from me.

The JC tax return feeding frenzy is interesting.

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 10:06 am

http://www.conservativehome.com/platfor ... rship.html

Our growing movement is waking up to this fact: we respect the democratic mandate that the referendum gave the Government, but this did not give it the right to surrender our economic prosperity and future.

By Chairman of 'Target single market',
At first I thought It's good to see some dissent, but not sure having read the comments, it doesn't look to have been well received.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 10:12 am

StephenDolan wrote:Morning all missed out earlier. Very poor form from me.

The JC tax return feeding frenzy is interesting.

Is it?

Looks like the usual incompetence.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 10:20 am

Some cheery news

https://www.ft.com/content/2bc62cb8-004 ... e3738f9ae4" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

nickyinnorfolk · Post by **nickyinnorfolk** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 10:31 am

StephenDolan wrote:
NonOxCol wrote:Meanwhile...

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

When is Humphries going to fuck the fuck off and keep fucking off?
Mornings are so much more pleasant listening to a podcast instead of Today.

.... or Radio 3

nickyinnorfolk · Post by **nickyinnorfolk** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 10:35 am

tinybgoat wrote:http://www.conservativehome.com/platfor ... rship.html

Our growing movement is waking up to this fact: we respect the democratic mandate that the referendum gave the Government, but this did not give it the right to surrender our economic prosperity and future.
By Chairman of 'Target single market',
At first I thought It's good to see some dissent, but not sure having read the comments, it doesn't look to have been well received.

Not surprisingly. Brexit blind faith ...

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 10:41 am

SpinningHugo wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:Morning all missed out earlier. Very poor form from me.

The JC tax return feeding frenzy is interesting.

Is it?

Looks like the usual incompetence.

Indeed. The self described moderates and their cheerleaders have outdone themselves.

nickyinnorfolk · Post by **nickyinnorfolk** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 10:46 am

AAV: spot on.

Philip Hammond has been talking absolute crap about the economy

For the first seven months of his job as Chancellor of the Exchequer Philip Hammond remained pretty tight-lipped about his plans for the economy, but on Sunday March 5th he started blabbering ludicrous economically illiterate nonsense on ITV's Peston on Sunday show.

Hammond's interview with Peston will have come as a blow to anyone hoping that he might have the good sense to begin unwinding George Osborne's socially and economically ruinous austerity agenda, and the honesty to avoid talking about economics in deliberately misleading pseudo-economic platitudes.

However, instead of admitting that ideological austerity has utterly failed to achieve what the Tories claimed it was going to back in 2010, Hammond decided to blurt out the ridiculous austerity-justification that the Tories are trying to get Britain to "get back to living within our means".

The problem with this pro-austerity propaganda narrative that the Tories are interested in "living within our means" is that it is totally contradicted by their inept economic record.

The Tories came to power in 2010 promising that their austerity agenda would completely eliminate the budget deficit within five years. They spectacularly failed to achieve this primary objective, but instead of holding them to account for this extraordinary failure, the mainstream press let them completely off the hook before the 2015 General Election by allowing them to reframe their abject failure to eliminate the deficit as some kind of brilliant success by endlessly repeating guff like "we've cut the deficit by a third"!

Instead of pointing out that boasting about having cut the deficit by a third actually means that they failed to achieve their headline objective by two thirds, the press just let them get away with reframing their inept failure as a praiseworthy success!

The Tories now admit that there's no hope whatever of them eliminating the deficit until well after 2021, which means they're going to end up taking a lot longer than eleven years to achieve what they said they would do in five. The consequence of all of this extra borrowing is that the Tories have ended up creating more new public debt than every single Labour government in history!

Would you trust a party with such an inept economic track record to do what they say they're going to do? Well it's clear that the right-wing propaganda rags want you to. The S*n described his "living within our means" platitude as "spot on".

Aside from spurting misleading gibberish about "living within our means" Hammond also had some other ridiculous things to say about the economy too.

Instead of acknowledging that the NHS and social care are in crisis and committing to resolve the problems, he described the concept of adequately funding the health services as a "spending spree"! This kind of rhetoric perfectly illustrates the rotten Tory mentality. Adequately funding the health services so that people don't end up dying on trolleys in hospital corridors is unjustifiably reckless spending, while handing out £billions more in corporate welfare and tax cuts for the super-rich minority are perfectly justifiable priorities!

Another of Hammond's ludicrous comments involved comparing government spending with shagging a credit card up to its limit. Anyone with the economic literacy of a ten year old could tell you why such a comparison is so desperately misleading, but, as usual, the mainstream press not only failed to criticise Hammond's deliberate effort to muddy the economic waters, they uncritically repeated his absurd credit card analogy as if it actually made sense.

When the cost of public sector borrowing is at an all time record low (due to the all time record low interest rates) there's no way of seeing an effort to compare public borrowing with recklessly spending on a high interest credit card, than as a deliberate effort to confuse and mislead people.

If any form of public spending can be compared to credit card recklessness then it's the kind of rip-off PFI schemes that end up costing the taxpayer many multiples of the value of the infrastructure during the decades long repayment period. Ordinary public sector borrowing in order to invest directly in infrastructure and services is much more like taking out a very low interest loan in order to make material improvements to your business.

The mainstream media clearly don't care though. Even supposedly reputable sources like the Financial Times uncritically repeated Hammond's ridiculous credit card analogy as if it wasn't desperately misleading political propaganda designed to fool the economically uneducated.

You could be forgiven for imagining that right-wing tabloid hacks at the S*n, Express or Daily Mail are too stupid to see Hammond's absurdly misleading pseudo-economic wittering for the rubbish that it is, but if even broadsheet and Financial Times correspondents are uncritically repeating it, then the conclusion is obvious. Reputable economics correspondents are clearly not stupid enough to believe such nonsense, so they're simply working on the assumption that the majority of their readership are gullible economically illiterate idiots who are incapable of clocking Hammond's woeful pseudo-economic gibberish for what it is, and they're happy to keep things that way.

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

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 10:48 am

Pointless, cruel & expensive: It's time to close Yarl's Wood
http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analy ... -must-stop" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

We could write a long list of 'pointless, cruel and expensive' govt policies.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 10:50 am

The tories always talk crap about the economy. They know better imo, but do what's best for them and their rich mates.

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 12:35 pm

Alice Hooker Stroud steps down as leader of the Greens in Wales. Cant fit the job in with work, and its an unpaid role... Im firmly of the opinion that Welsh independence as far as the Green party here goes is holding us back. It may have worked in Scotland, but I dont think its working here.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 12:45 pm

From the G live blog:

Downing Street ruled out MPs being able to amend the Brexit deal when they vote on it at the end of the Brexit talks.

The government is sticking to the line that parliament will get to vote only on a choice between their negotiated deal or leaving without a deal. Although many people have suggested that the EU would be willing to allow the UK to abandon Brexit and not leave after all, I see no way this can happen unless the Tory government itself decides to abandon Brexit. There appears to be no way parliament can now influence anything unless pro-EU Tory MPs rebel and refuse to bounce back the article 50 bill to the Lords without the Lords amendments. And that assumes Labour would be up for that, which is by no means certain.

The real battle is surely going to be over the UK's new deal, which will be the focus of the 2020 GE.

Post by **adam** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 12:46 pm

Downing Street ruled out MPs being able to amend the deal when they vote on it at the end of the talks. ...The spokesman also said that the vote at the end of the process would be on whether to accept the deal negotiated by the government or to leave the EU without a deal.

From the graun's daily politics.

There's something really deeply cowardly about a government which is saying to Parliament 'You can't have a say, but you can take the blame off our shoulders if we don't achieve anything.'

Edit - willow just beat me to it.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 1:12 pm

Hello again. I was missing the place, so might as well come back sooner rather than later. But it's probably best if HowSilly and I don't interact too much. See how it goes?

I'm wondering what the difference is between a "punishment budget" and a budget that builds up a "war chest" because we've a big problem.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 1:16 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:Morning all.

More than 600 health quango chiefs on six figure salaries amid cash crisis

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03 ... sh-crisis/

More than 600 NHS quango chiefs are now on six-figure salaries, with a doubling in the number earning more than the Prime Minister, new figures show.

Many of the highest earners have made repeated demands on Government to increase NHS funding as it battles against its worst financial deficit in history.

But figures uncovered by the Telegraph, show that the nine main health quangos are now employing 628 officials on salaries of at least £100,000.

Quangos eh? So where did this quango structure we have now come from?

Many of the most expensive organisations are new structures, which were set up in 2013 following pledges to “streamline” the running of the NHS.
Oh, wonder who was in charge then? I might be wrong but I don't recall the DT in the forefront of groups against Lansley's top down reorganisation that no-one wanted....

However it's organized, I don't think having 628 managers on £100k is all that much out of £116bn.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 1:28 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
However it's organized, I don't think having 628 managers on £100k is all that much out of £116bn.

No, probably not. It's the hypocrisy of calling them 'quango chiefs' when the structure was set up by the very government they supported. Whatever happened to that bonfire?

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 1:29 pm

NonOxCol wrote:Meanwhile...

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

When is Humphries going to fuck the fuck off and keep fucking off?

Humphrys knows more about the mental state of Thomas Mair than his legal team then. They didn't even use it as part of their defence.

He's just had his 30th anniversary, so not stopping for that. I've a horrible feeling he'll want to go on till Brexit happens.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 1:34 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Hello again. I was missing the place, so might as well come back sooner rather than later. But it's probably best if HowSilly and I don't interact too much. See how it goes?

I'm wondering what the difference is between a "punishment budget" and a budget that builds up a "war chest" because we've a big problem.

No difference whatsoever that I can divine. The effects are the same. But you already knew that.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 1:42 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
However it's organized, I don't think having 628 managers on £100k is all that much out of £116bn.
No, probably not. It's the hypocrisy of calling them 'quango chiefs' when the structure was set up by the very government they supported. Whatever happened to that bonfire?

Indeed.

It's incredible anyway that something as trivial in the broader scheme of things as merging some organizations together was considered such a pressing political issue in 2010, and touted by the Coalition as an important bit of ideological unity against Labour.

And no doubt, lots of the same names come up running the quangos we have. Remember the huge fuss made about Suzi Leather before?

Post by **adam** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 2:01 pm

More on education - this time on business rates...

Schools with solar panels face £1.8m bill due to business rates rise
Tax hike on solar-installed properties to affect 821 state schools in England and Wales, research suggests

From the guardian here.

Solar-equipped private schools will duck the changes because of their charitable status

Obviously.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 2:08 pm

News from America.

http://www.zanesvilletimesrecorder.com/ ... /97890744/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The sensible candidate, John Kasich, is requiring that Ohio teachers renewing their licences spend a day doing a job shadow.

This guy has an amusing response.

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

EEC Teacher Interns will have a two part day.
Morning: EEC Teacher Interns will arrive at Ghostlight Coffee at 9:00 am on Wayne Avenue in Dayton, Ohio (or thereabouts; I’m going to be very forgiving about punctuality, since this is about three hours later than most teachers arrive on a normal day). EEC Teacher Interns will then be given free lattes, compliments of Ghostlight, the best coffee shop in Southwest Ohio. I’ve already worked this out with Ghostlight ownership (Thanks, Shane!). During this time, teachers will be able to work on their lesson plans and grade papers since they never have the time to do that during a normal day’s work. Or, if they would like, they will be able to strategize with other EEC Teacher Interns on how to best organize against politicians who have no respect for teachers.
Once the morning is over, EEC Teacher Interns will be allowed to go out to eat as if they were normal people with normal jobs.
In the afternoon, EEC Teacher Interns will finish their state-mandated internship requirements by getting a free massage donated by a local business. The internship day will end with a parting gift from Ervin Educational Consulting and a sincere thank you for doing a really hard job every single day.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 2:23 pm

adam wrote:More on education - this time on business rates...

Schools with solar panels face £1.8m bill due to business rates rise
Tax hike on solar-installed properties to affect 821 state schools in England and Wales, research suggests
From the guardian here.

Solar-equipped private schools will duck the changes because of their charitable status
Obviously.

Looks like they used to be exempt but the Valuation Office Agency changed it. Quango, anyone?

NonOxCol · Post by **NonOxCol** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 2:29 pm

In case anyone is still struggling to grasp what Brexit is really about - to its very marrow - here's The Disgraced Former Defence Secretary to make it crystal clear:

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

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 2:40 pm

From the New York Times.

The F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, asked the Justice Department this weekend to publicly reject President Trump’s assertion that President Barack Obama ordered the tapping of Mr. Trump’s phones, senior American officials said on Sunday. Mr. Comey has argued that the highly charged claim is false and must be corrected, they said, but the department has not released any such statement.

Mr. Comey, who made the request on Saturday after Mr. Trump leveled his allegation on Twitter, has been working to get the Justice Department to knock down the claim because it falsely insinuates that the F.B.I. broke the law, the officials said.

Who would be stopping the Justice Department making a statement?

Step forward, Jeff Sessions.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 2:47 pm

Good-afternoon, everyone.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 2:54 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:From the New York Times.

The F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, asked the Justice Department this weekend to publicly reject President Trump’s assertion that President Barack Obama ordered the tapping of Mr. Trump’s phones, senior American officials said on Sunday. Mr. Comey has argued that the highly charged claim is false and must be corrected, they said, but the department has not released any such statement.

Mr. Comey, who made the request on Saturday after Mr. Trump leveled his allegation on Twitter, has been working to get the Justice Department to knock down the claim because it falsely insinuates that the F.B.I. broke the law, the officials said.
Who would be stopping the Justice Department making a statement?

Step forward, Jeff Sessions.

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out with Congress. A majority Republican house to impeach Trump and install someone more typical of the party a la Pence? Midterms will be worth watching.

Post by **adam** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 2:56 pm

StephenDolan wrote:It'll be interesting to see how this plays out with Congress. A majority Republican house to impeach Trump and install someone more typical of the party a la Pence? Midterms will be worth watching.

The problem with midterms (and I witter on about this, I know) is that there are only 8 republican senators up in 2018 and they are, on the whole,quite ridiculously safe,whilst a lot of the Democrat's up are very very very unsafe indeed (west virginia?),and that the House is so gerrymandered that it's very very difficult for the democrats to win.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 2:56 pm

https://mainlymacro.blogspot.co.uk/2017 ... -ours.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Why it’s your bloody GDP, not ours
Mainlymacro

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 3:05 pm

StephenDolan wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:From the New York Times.

The F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, asked the Justice Department this weekend to publicly reject President Trump’s assertion that President Barack Obama ordered the tapping of Mr. Trump’s phones, senior American officials said on Sunday. Mr. Comey has argued that the highly charged claim is false and must be corrected, they said, but the department has not released any such statement.

Mr. Comey, who made the request on Saturday after Mr. Trump leveled his allegation on Twitter, has been working to get the Justice Department to knock down the claim because it falsely insinuates that the F.B.I. broke the law, the officials said.
Who would be stopping the Justice Department making a statement?

Step forward, Jeff Sessions.
It'll be interesting to see how this plays out with Congress. A majority Republican house to impeach Trump and install someone more typical of the party a la Pence? Midterms will be worth watching.

I've a horrible feeling that a debt-fuelled boom is going to save the Republicans for a while.

I asked a bloke on another board what happens with Sessions now. Over here, Bercow would have him answering an Urgent Question, and something might or might not happen. Over there, apparently, nothing like that happens.

When I was moaning about PMQs a while ago, somebody said it is a brake on demagogues who get made to look silly once a week. He mentioned Mugabe. It applies to Trump too.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 3:15 pm

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/ec ... -and-gen-x" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Budget 2017: What is at stake for millennials, baby boomers and Gen X?

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 3:17 pm

Hello there Tubby - knew you would be back before too long

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 3:26 pm

http://touchstoneblog.org.uk/2017/03/ri ... um=twitter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Right2Remain gains wider support: so what’s the problem?

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 3:28 pm

http://www.24housing.co.uk/news/only-8b ... e-housing/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Only £8bn of £51bn government funding going to affordable housing

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 3:29 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Hello there Tubby - knew you would be back before too long

Thanks. Appreciated your input the other day, as ever.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 3:32 pm

http://www.24housing.co.uk/news/landlor ... nefit-cut/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Landlords ‘unlikely to rent’ to under 21s after benefit cut

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

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 3:41 pm

West Virginia's Democratic Party have their own distinctive conservative sort of brand. I remember seeing Joe Manchin win the senate seat in 2010 and give a garbled speech attacking Obama. I thought, what a twat, but as someone pointed out, he'll vote for most of the good stuff, so it's still a worthwhile win. He voted for Sessions but has been strong enough on the perjury. He voted against Betsy De Vos. He's got a reasonably chance of keeping his senate seat, I think. Actually, if Trump lets "coal country" down, the Democrats could make a come back.

Claire McCaskill in Missouri and Joe Donnelly in Indiana look like they could have problems. Both won last time because the Republicans put up outright loons against them in 2012. In Indiana, they chucked out Richard Luger in a primary, and he'd not even been worth challenging in 2006.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 3:50 pm

Thanks Tubby and adam for the info.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 4:00 pm

'These media barons have tax questions of their own to answer. Tax avoidance and evasion deprive the public purse of billions in revenue for vital services and is unfair on those with much lower earnings who pay a higher proportion of their income in tax.'

Quite like the linking of the two sentences. The second is a bit long but the inference at the start is great. Will it get any traction? Probably not!

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 4:07 pm

StephenDolan wrote:'These media barons have tax questions of their own to answer. Tax avoidance and evasion deprive the public purse of billions in revenue for vital services and is unfair on those with much lower earnings who pay a higher proportion of their income in tax.'

Quite like the linking of the two sentences. The second is a bit long but the inference at the start is great. Will it get any traction? Probably not!

And the full statement from Jeremy Corbyn's spokesperson is available over at Politics Live, Guardian (at 15.49). The whole thing is worth a read.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 4:14 pm

I like it too. There's a synergy with Leveson II here. I'm not sure Tom Watson is exactly busting his arse on it, like he should be, though maybe it's because there's a lot going on with Brexit etc.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 4:14 pm

PorFavor wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:'These media barons have tax questions of their own to answer. Tax avoidance and evasion deprive the public purse of billions in revenue for vital services and is unfair on those with much lower earnings who pay a higher proportion of their income in tax.'

Quite like the linking of the two sentences. The second is a bit long but the inference at the start is great. Will it get any traction? Probably not!
And the full statement from Jeremy Corbyn's spokesperson is available over at Politics Live, Guardian (at 15.49). The whole thing is worth a read.

The whole point about tax transparency is a good one, but Corbyn really has created an uphill battle for himself with the stange allocation of his extra money for leader of the opposition as a pension/annuity/state benefit. If only May published hers, we could compare and see if the extra money for an enhanced MP role is, indeed, in the right place!

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 4:18 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:I like it too. There's a synergy with Leveson II here. I'm not sure Tom Watson is exactly busting his arse on it, like he should be, though maybe it's because there's a lot going on with Brexit etc.

Gordon Brown is the only Labour person I've really noticed keeping the pressure up on this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39145261" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Gordon Brown has called for the second part of the Leveson Inquiry to go ahead - and said the majority of press abuses in recent years were from the Murdoch press.

Tom Watson has been more useless than even I expected and I didn't expect much.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 4:42 pm

Ed Miliband has continued his good work too.

My opinions on Corbyn are well enough known, but Watson shouldn't be hanging about too long either.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Mon 06 Mar, 2017 4:55 pm

Has anybody been working on reducing the time leadership and deputy leadership elections take?

I mean, the principles are likely well known. Can't it be done in a month?