Friday 17th March 2017

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 7:20 am

Morning

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 7:31 am

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... march-2017" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ESA: outcomes of Work Capability Assessments including mandatory reconsiderations and appeals: March 2017

Still not finished transferring from legacy.More reassessments than initial.(no existing claimants will be affected)

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 7:40 am

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Half of English schools 'could see funding cuts of up to 11% per pupil'
Education Policy Institute research finds that all schools will face real-term cuts under the government’s funding formula

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 7:54 am

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

Entire homelessness agency could be eliminated by Trump's budget cuts

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 9:18 am

http://www.npi.org.uk/blog/children-and ... =hootsuite" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"The official poverty numbers published today (16 March) are the most important for years. That’s because they confirm something that has looked like it has been there for a while – but which couldn’t be distinguished from a blip in the data until a third year of data came in.

That ‘something’ is that the proportions of both pensioners and children living in low income households are now on rising trends. Pensioner poverty has not been on a rising trend for a generation"

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 9:23 am

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

Several MPs told the Guardian they blamed the ferocity of the outcry about the measure on pro-Brexit Tories, who are concerned that Hammond is too pessimistic about the economic risks of leaving the European Union and hope to see his influence diminished.

One former cabinet minister from David Cameron’s government said the Conservatives were locked in “a battle for the future of our party” and warned that May was ceding too much ground to the Eurosceptic wing.

ScarletGas · Post by **ScarletGas** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 9:36 am

This from an outfit called Wilmington Healthcare UK can ,I think, be filed under the heading stating the bleeding obvious!

The number of NHS reorganisations in recent years is a key reason for the health service’s struggle to retain staff, a poll has found.
The NHS has been struggling to meet rising demand with a chronic shortage of staff and the results of a survey, published on Friday, suggest that a feeling of constant upheaval is at least partially to blame.
The poll by Wilmington Healthcare UK of more than 2,000 nurses, GPs and hospital doctors across the UK found that 64% blamed staff retention problems on the continuous and “demoralising” national changes in NHS workforce planning that had occurred since 2000

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 9:56 am

I've been thinking about the SDP a bit, for obvious reasons. I'd missed this interview with Bill Rodgers, which is very interesting

http://www.newstatesman.com/2016/01/bil ... nful-leave" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And I just bought this on Abebooks

http://www.trashfiction.co.uk/sdp_claret_cover.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

When would the balance shift, so that the PLP were forced into UDI? AT the moment the reasons for staying are

1. The belief (that I do not share) that Corbyn will quit

2. Sentimentality and personal loyalty.

I don't think they will ever get 'their' party back, and the Corbyn triumph is permanent. What could reveal this to them? 2020 defeat? Long-Bailey being elected leader as the anointed one?

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 9:58 am

Willow904 wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... are_btn_tw
Several MPs told the Guardian they blamed the ferocity of the outcry about the measure on pro-Brexit Tories, who are concerned that Hammond is too pessimistic about the economic risks of leaving the European Union and hope to see his influence diminished.

One former cabinet minister from David Cameron’s government said the Conservatives were locked in “a battle for the future of our party” and warned that May was ceding too much ground to the Eurosceptic wing.

Yes. Interesting that the one vaguely progressive thing the Tories have done is quickly abandoned because of opposition from the right. Dark days.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 10:30 am

Corbyn will either quit before 2020, or do so just after when Labour suffers a heavy defeat (as I accept is highly likely in that scenario)

The paranoid fantasy of some "moderates" that he will somehow insist on staying on after that (he will be over 70, remember) has no basis in reality whatsoever.

Even more than that, however, what makes any breakaway unfeasible is - what would the new party actually stand for?

Whatever else you say, the SDP had a real and definable political philosophy and strong stances on a few key issues. The anti-Corbyn majority in the PLP are united by little more than not wanting him as leader, and several genuinely seem to believe in literally nothing other than being in office for its own sake.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 10:42 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
The paranoid fantasy of some "moderates" that he will somehow insist on staying on after that (he will be over 70, remember) has no basis in reality whatsoever.

I'd be interested to know what makes you so sure of this.

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 10:49 am

An interesting (I'm feeling generous) point of view from the Greens on indyref2:

A Green spokesman said: “The situation we find ourselves in is down the recklessness of the Tories, their disrespect for Scotland’s Remain vote, and a feeble Labour opposition. A timescale of autumn 2018 to spring 2019 is not rushed – it’s perfectly reasonable. As the Tories’ hard Brexit deal becomes clear in the Autumn of next year, Scots deserve the chance to choose between that damaging, isolated option and being able to secure our own, outward-looking future.”

So, in their opinion, Scotland outside both the UK and the EU is less isolated than in the UK but outside the EU. The SNP view, parroted here by the Greens, that a vote for 'remain' equates to a vote for independence is also absolute tripe.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/u ... -1-4394523

A more informed opinion of the Greens stance on the indyref vote here:

http://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/br ... -1-4394217

Then we have the curious case of the Scottish Greens. It seems taken for granted that they will support the Nationalists though this is in breach of their own manifesto position. A new referendum was only to “come about by the will of the people, and not be driven by calculations of party political advantage,” pronounced the saintly Greens. Their preferred method for the people to manifest their will was for them to “petition” in support of a referendum, which I haven’t noticed. On the contrary, every measure of opinion confirms that “the will of the people” is not to have a second referendum. Can the Greens produce contrary evidence? And if not, why will they underwrite a token majority by surrendering their own integrity?

Vote Green - get SNP.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 10:55 am

PorFavor wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:
The paranoid fantasy of some "moderates" that he will somehow insist on staying on after that (he will be over 70, remember) has no basis in reality whatsoever.

I'd be interested to know what makes you so sure of this.

Optimism as to what the agenda of Corbyn, McDonnell and Milne is (ie that their goal is for Labour to be in government in the immediate future).

That is, I think, to seriously underestimate their intelligence. McDonnell is not an idiot. If their agenda were the same as other leaderships, Corbyn would have quit long ago.

But yes, the problems for SDP II being even as successful as SDP I are large

1. No viable leadership (see the Rodgers interview).

2. No unifying policy agenda (see AK's post).

and

3. The example of SDP I. If that had not happened, I think it would be being tried now.

A mass PLP declaration of UDI could work, as a kind of refounding of Labour, but they are far too timid to try that. So, Labour drifts on.

IPSOS/Mori was quite a good one for Labour yesterday as it put the party in the 30s, for the first time in ages

Con 43 (+3) Lab 30 (+1) Lib Dems 13 (nc) UKIP 6 (-3) Greens 4 (nc)

Ukips are finished I think. Quite a good score for the Greens.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 10:59 am

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

Trump budget threatens nutrition services for poor women and children

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 11:03 am

PorFavor wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:
The paranoid fantasy of some "moderates" that he will somehow insist on staying on after that (he will be over 70, remember) has no basis in reality whatsoever.

I'd be interested to know what makes you so sure of this.

I agree with AK but couldn't honestly tell you it's more than gut feeling.
I can't understand people saying they can't vote Labour because Corbyn. Pig in a poke otherwise, you might say, but that's what we've got now. Tories can get away with murder.

Post by **adam** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 11:05 am

SpinningHugo wrote:
PorFavor wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:
The paranoid fantasy of some "moderates" that he will somehow insist on staying on after that (he will be over 70, remember) has no basis in reality whatsoever.

I'd be interested to know what makes you so sure of this.
Optimism as to what the agenda of Corbyn, McDonnell and Milne is (ie that their goal is for Labour to be in government in the immediate future).

That is, I think, to seriously underestimate their intelligence. McDonnell is not an idiot. If their agenda were the same as other leaderships, Corbyn would have quit long ago.

But yes, the problems for SDP II being even as successful as SDP I are large

1. No viable leadership (see the Rodgers interview).

2. No unifying policy agenda (see AK's post).

and

3. The example of SDP I. If that had not happened, I think it would be being tried now.

A mass PLP declaration of UDI could work, as a kind of refounding of Labour, but they are far too timid to try that. So, Labour drifts on.

IPSOS/Mori was quite a good one for Labour yesterday as it put the party in the 30s, for the first time in ages

Con 43 (+3) Lab 30 (+1) Lib Dems 13 (nc) UKIP 6 (-3) Greens 4 (nc)

Ukips are finished I think. Quite a good score for the Greens.

And do you think times are similar enough to the early 80s to see an SDPII burning brightly for a little while, then merging into a larger middle ground with prospects, then being part of that middle-ground's decline, and then disappearing completely, by which time the cycle has moved on more generally and the Labour leadership is back being the kind of thing the SDPII would have adored but now will pretend to feel disdainful towards? And in the meantime they will have done their own thing, in the own way, to ensure conservative hegemony for another decade?

Or are you going to tell me it would be very different now?

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 11:09 am

PorFavor wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:
The paranoid fantasy of some "moderates" that he will somehow insist on staying on after that (he will be over 70, remember) has no basis in reality whatsoever.

I'd be interested to know what makes you so sure of this.

Even in the (highly unlikely) event he still wanted to stay on after a crushing defeat, key backers would desert him.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 11:17 am

George Osborne to replace Sands as editor of Evening Standard in May.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 11:21 am

HindleA wrote:George Osborne to replace Sands as editor of Evening Standard in May.

Just saw that.

reaction generally seems to be....

But continue as an MP - I;m sure his constituents will be happy with him doing a full time job in London as well.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 11:40 am

Whatever he says now, it is inconcievable he can remain an MP for very long in such a role.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 11:47 am

adam wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
PorFavor wrote: I'd be interested to know what makes you so sure of this.
Optimism as to what the agenda of Corbyn, McDonnell and Milne is (ie that their goal is for Labour to be in government in the immediate future).

That is, I think, to seriously underestimate their intelligence. McDonnell is not an idiot. If their agenda were the same as other leaderships, Corbyn would have quit long ago.

But yes, the problems for SDP II being even as successful as SDP I are large

1. No viable leadership (see the Rodgers interview).

2. No unifying policy agenda (see AK's post).

and

3. The example of SDP I. If that had not happened, I think it would be being tried now.

A mass PLP declaration of UDI could work, as a kind of refounding of Labour, but they are far too timid to try that. So, Labour drifts on.

IPSOS/Mori was quite a good one for Labour yesterday as it put the party in the 30s, for the first time in ages

Con 43 (+3) Lab 30 (+1) Lib Dems 13 (nc) UKIP 6 (-3) Greens 4 (nc)

Ukips are finished I think. Quite a good score for the Greens.
And do you think times are similar enough to the early 80s to see an SDPII burning brightly for a little while, then merging into a larger middle ground with prospects, then being part of that middle-ground's decline, and then disappearing completely, by which time the cycle has moved on more generally and the Labour leadership is back being the kind of thing the SDPII would have adored but now will pretend to feel disdainful towards? And in the meantime they will have done their own thing, in the own way, to ensure conservative hegemony for another decade?

Or are you going to tell me it would be very different now?

TBF to SDP I, I don't think they did "ensure Tory hegemony for a decade". The Tories would have won in 83 and 87 quite comfortably regardless of the SDP. The reason is that it is a myth that there is some kind of progressive block of votes. The SDP took votes off the Tories too.

As I said above, the prospects for SDP II are actually worse. What is needed is something far more radical (eg the 85%+ of the PLP with no confidence in Corbyn going for UDI).

I do think we need some kind of shake up of the parties of the center left. So I don't think Labour will ever be in power in government again without some change in party structures., and it would be better if parties split more along German lines. At the moment, Die Linke has control of a party made up of SPD representatives.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 11:47 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Whatever he says now, it is inconcievable he can remain an MP for very long in such a role.

Boundary changes hit that area hard?

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 11:50 am

Oh, I'm thinking he will have to give it up a bit sooner than 2020.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 11:56 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Oh, I'm thinking he will have to give it up a bit sooner than 2020.

I do like these confident predictions of people imminently quitting.

He'll deputise presumably. I'd be surprised if, at his age, he'd given up on being an MP (unlike say Cameron). There would seem to me to be an opening once Brexit proves a disaster (as it will). May is 60. She'll obviously win in 2020, but will she still be there by 2025?

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 11:59 am

I have little doubt he fantasises about such a phoenix-style comeback - the Churchill of our age, no less!

Fantasy is all it is, however

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 12:03 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:I have little doubt he fantasises about such a phoenix-style comeback - the Churchill of our age, no less!

Fantasy is all it is, however

I hope he does stay around for a while. Nicky Morgan is doing a bit of the old regime criticism of the new. Osborne could be a useful gatherer of those ditched by May when(?) things start to slide.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 12:03 pm

http://scotland.shelter.org.uk/news/mar ... 6/_nocache" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Shelter Scotland,which Tubby referenced yesterday.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 12:04 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:I have little doubt he fantasises about such a phoenix-style comeback - the Churchill of our age, no less!

Fantasy is all it is, however

Who else have the Tories got who won't be tarred by Brexit?

Post by **adam** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 12:10 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
TBF to SDP I, I don't think they did "ensure Tory hegemony for a decade". The Tories would have won in 83 and 87 quite comfortably regardless of the SDP. The reason is that it is a myth that there is some kind of progressive block of votes. The SDP took votes off the Tories too.

As I said above, the prospects for SDP II are actually worse. What is needed is something far more radical (eg the 85%+ of the PLP with no confidence in Corbyn going for UDI).

I do think we need some kind of shake up of the parties of the center left. So I don't think Labour will ever be in power in government again without some change in party structures., and it would be better if parties split more along German lines. At the moment, Die Linke has control of a party made up of SPD representatives.

Less importantly - I'm not going to argue about 1983 but Labour then started to move to the centre and I think it's difficult to argue that 1987 and 1992 would not have been very very different elections without the early 80s SDP split.

More importantly I don't fundamentally disagree with quite a lot of what your saying about realignment except that in a first past the post system it will just spell doom and a swathe of seats lost to the right. If Clegg had been prepared to do a short term deal with Labour in 2010 we would have had PR or one form or another for another election a year down the line and form then on, and then talk about realignment would be more than idle speculation.

NonOxCol · Post by **NonOxCol** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 12:13 pm

Someone's not impressed re Osborne...

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

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 12:13 pm

#EdMiliband

Breaking: I will shortly be announced as editor of Heat magazine....

Post by **adam** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 12:27 pm

Cutting food to the poor is compassionate to taxpayers, says Trump's budget chief.

NonOxCol · Post by **NonOxCol** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 12:33 pm

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

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 12:36 pm

adam wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
TBF to SDP I, I don't think they did "ensure Tory hegemony for a decade". The Tories would have won in 83 and 87 quite comfortably regardless of the SDP. The reason is that it is a myth that there is some kind of progressive block of votes. The SDP took votes off the Tories too.

As I said above, the prospects for SDP II are actually worse. What is needed is something far more radical (eg the 85%+ of the PLP with no confidence in Corbyn going for UDI).

I do think we need some kind of shake up of the parties of the center left. So I don't think Labour will ever be in power in government again without some change in party structures., and it would be better if parties split more along German lines. At the moment, Die Linke has control of a party made up of SPD representatives.
Less importantly - I'm not going to argue about 1983 but Labour then started to move to the centre and I think it's difficult to argue that 1987 and 1992 would not have been very very different elections without the early 80s SDP split.

More importantly I don't fundamentally disagree with quite a lot of what your saying about realignment except that in a first past the post system it will just spell doom and a swathe of seats lost to the right. If Clegg had been prepared to do a short term deal with Labour in 2010 we would have had PR or one form or another for another election a year down the line and form then on, and then talk about realignment would be more than idle speculation.

92 might have been, but the SDP were 5 yearsin the past by then.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 12:40 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
PorFavor wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:
The paranoid fantasy of some "moderates" that he will somehow insist on staying on after that (he will be over 70, remember) has no basis in reality whatsoever.

I'd be interested to know what makes you so sure of this.
Even in the (highly unlikely) event he still wanted to stay on after a crushing defeat, key backers would desert him.

Who exactly are his "key backers" anyway, other than Len McCluskey? And do backers matter as long as Corbyn commands a majority among members? Would a Momentum approved successor, who almost inevitably would succeed him, actually represent any real change to what we have now? Although personified by Corbyn, the current leadership is a team effort. If Corbyn stepping down means Long Bailey becoming leader, closely advised by John McDonnell, it seems to me the Labour Party will continue to be in exactly the same place it is now. I appreciate the stuff about Long Bailey being lined up to follow Corbyn is just a rumour and I appreciate an election defeat may mean a change of heart among members, but as things stand it does feel very much as if "this is it", this is what the Corbyn left has to offer. And it doesn't seem enough, somehow. I know some posters here consider me hostile to Corbyn but I'm only hostile to his response to the EU referendum. Before that I had been known to defend him from time to time and I certainly don't have anything against him in areas such as education or the NHS. I have, however, found Corbyn and his whole left wing transformation project somewhat underwhelming and still do. People keep saying Labour's problems are more than just Corbyn and they're right. What else will change when he eventually steps down that will start to address that?

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 12:48 pm

Willow904 wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:
PorFavor wrote: I'd be interested to know what makes you so sure of this.
Even in the (highly unlikely) event he still wanted to stay on after a crushing defeat, key backers would desert him.
Who exactly are his "key backers" anyway, other than Len McCluskey? And do backers matter as long as Corbyn commands a majority among members? Would a Momentum approved successor, who almost inevitably would succeed him, actually represent any real change to what we have now? Although personified by Corbyn, the current leadership is a team effort. If Corbyn stepping down means Long Bailey becoming leader, closely advised by John McDonnell, it seems to me the Labour Party will continue to be in exactly the same place it is now. I appreciate the stuff about Long Bailey being lined up to follow Corbyn is just a rumour and I appreciate an election defeat may mean a change of heart among members, but as things stand it does feel very much as if "this is it", this is what the Corbyn left has to offer. And it doesn't seem enough, somehow. I know some posters here consider me hostile to Corbyn but I'm only hostile to his response to the EU referendum. Before that I had been known to defend him from time to time and I certainly don't have anything against him in areas such as education or the NHS. I have, however, found Corbyn and his whole left wing transformation project somewhat underwhelming and still do. People keep saying Labour's problems are more than just Corbyn and they're right. What else will change when he eventually steps down that will start to address that?

The Owen Jones thesis is that Corbyn is failing because of presentational problems.The idea is that a more photogenic Bennite (Lewis) would do better.

We'll here a lot of that, and much talk of Evil Blairite betrayal, which will justify the enthronement of Corbyn II.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 12:50 pm

I really think some of you are overthinking this. Corbyn never wanted to be leader in the first place and the idea he will be determined to cling on even after a battering in 2020 is genuinely hard to imagine. Indeed, I *do* think there is a good chance he will be gone before then but let's not get sidetracked by that for now

And yes, LM is one of his important backers - along with other union people. If they ever decide collectively that Jez's time is up, it is over - and I also suspect that (unlike much of the PLP) their views would carry considerable weight even amongst many members who had backed him hitherto.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 12:58 pm

Whoops.

Maggie Haberman‏Verified account @maggieNYT 52m52 minutes ago
More
US makes formal apology to Britain after White House accuses GCHQ of wiretapping Trump Tower

Good job we're not likely to see Trump over here for quite a while yet...oh...wait...

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 1:08 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:Whoops.

Maggie Haberman‏Verified account @maggieNYT 52m52 minutes ago
More
US makes formal apology to Britain after White House accuses GCHQ of wiretapping Trump Tower
Good job we're not likely to see Trump over here for quite a while yet...oh...wait...

Gives Theresa May a good excuse to backtrack on the grovelling and become a little more frosty towards him. Not that I think she'd take the opportunity, mind, I'm just saying that if she was in any way embarrassed by her fawning, here's her chance to redeem herself.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 1:16 pm

Both Corbyn and Watson have called for Osborne to resign and trigger by-election.

Goes without saying that for every day that Osborne spends as MP while doing his new job, the ES won't be seen as impartial in its dealings with the Mayor. Makes Sadiq's job easier though...effectively neutralizes his main opposition.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 1:20 pm

Hahaha, I have never seen questions that must be answered in order to gain entry to a show !

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIp ... rm?c=0&w=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.youngvic.org/whats-on/kicking-off-live" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Mason's credibility surely can't get any lower.

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 1:29 pm

pk1 wrote:Hahaha, I have never seen questions that must be answered in order to gain entry to a show !

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIp ... rm?c=0&w=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.youngvic.org/whats-on/kicking-off-live" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Mason's credibility surely can't get any lower.

What is wrong with this?

He makes clear audience participation is considered important and entry is free so I guess he wants people who will join in

No worse than much performance art that goes on......

Perhaps politicians who 'manipulate' pictures to make it look like they have more supporters present than they do (Owen Smith for example) can also be considered performance art

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 1:33 pm

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/a ... ck_Twitter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Another day, and another embarrassing U-turn looms for Theresa May’s Government.
Hot on the heels of the National Insurance fiasco – which saw a Tory Chancellor hastily rewrite his own Budget for the third year in a row – comes a new row over schools funding.
Once again, the ham-fisted Mrs May has made the fatal mistake of announcing a policy which is not just unpopular in the country, but upsets many of her own backbenchers.

Only 7% of the population are educated privately, so it stands to reason that most Tory voters have to send their kids to state schools like everyone else. It really is strange that we have to go through the whole crumbling schools and hospitals again before voters work out where the tax cuts they voted for come from. Given the remarkable persistence of the idea that spending cuts only effect other people, I think our education system could do with more investment rather than less.

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 1:34 pm

Talk about losing credibility

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

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 1:37 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:Both Corbyn and Watson have called for Osborne to resign and trigger by-election.

Goes without saying that for every day that Osborne spends as MP while doing his new job, the ES won't be seen as impartial in its dealings with the Mayor. Makes Sadiq's job easier though...effectively neutralizes his main opposition.

Wonder what Sadiq really thought as he sent his congrats tweet.

Osborne's multitude of jobs lowers the credibility of politicians (of all stripes). Writing OPs is one thing - editing a daily paper quite something else.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 1:37 pm

howsillyofme1 wrote:Talk about losing credibility

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

Nah, play a straight bat. No point in being antagonistic at this stage. As I said above any attacks by the ES from now on will simply look like partisanship.

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 1:38 pm

Oh and talking about someone without credibility

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

Just stop.....now please

The Chilcott Report removed any vestige of credibility you had left Blair....a shame that a potent politician is now so easily dismissed but there you have it - and that goes for your helpers as well....

You are in no place to lecture others

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 1:40 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
howsillyofme1 wrote:Talk about losing credibility

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Nah, play a straight bat. No point in being antagonistic at this stage. As I said above any attacks by the ES from now on will simply look like partisanship.

Sorry Roger, don't see that as playing a straight bat....and anyway isn't appointing a sitting Tory partisan? An incompetent one too at that

He could have been less effusive

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 1:41 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote: I *do* think there is a good chance he will be gone before then but let's not get sidetracked by that for now

A "genuine chance" is rather different from your confident predictions in the past that he will certainly be gone.

The aim is the transformation of the Labour party. On its own terms, the Corbyn movement is an enormous success. Why quit?

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 17 Mar, 2017 1:43 pm

howsillyofme1 wrote:
Sorry Roger, don't see that as playing a straight bat....and anyway isn't appointing a sitting Tory partisan? An incompetent one too at that

He could have been less effusive

Of course it's partisan. But all Sadiq has to do is wait until the ES attacks his record and point to Osborne as editor and say "Well, what did you expect with a Tory MP in charge?". I doubt ES staff will be happy with him remaining as an MP.

In any case, as mayor SK has to be seen as acting on behalf of all Londoners not just those who elected him.