Saturday 18th and Sunday 19th March 2017

[Tubby Isaacs]

And "coup" is "I Love 1973" stuff, like the PLP are Pinochet or something. The main ones went on strike and the others did a vote against him.

[PorFavor]

Record numbers of EU nurses quit NHS
Staffing crisis worsens as workers fear being unwelcome after Brexit

The number of EU nationals registering as nurses in England has dropped by 92% since the Brexit referendum in June, and a record number are quitting the NHS, it can be revealed. (Guardian)

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... rd-numbers

[AnatolyKasparov]

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-2

Labour led in 4 polls pre-EU ref, never by more than 3.

In February 2016 alone, the Tories led in 6, never less than by 6 points.

Labour was level in 1 poll on 25th June 2016. The Tories had led in the previous 16.

Yes, but mostly by fairly modest margins.

"Labour were level/ahead in the polls before the coup" is indeed a myth, but the claim it made no significant difference is if anything more of one.

With half of the Tories the public recognizing on TV every night, calling the PM a liar, that the Tories led at all was appalling.

Corbyn staying on after losing the vote of confidence by an absolute street is what did the damage.

Completely disagree with your last point - and he was totally within his rights to resist such an underhand and unconstitutional move.

[Tubby Isaacs]

I don't know if he was within his rights even to be on the ballot.

He's hugely unpopular. You don't become an unpopular party because you try to get rid of an unpopular leader. You get to be unpopular because he stays on.

[AnatolyKasparov]

Yes, he was. Both the NEC and courts decided that - Bitterite claims otherwise are worthless.

Look, I didn't even vote for JC on either occasion. But the behaviour of much of the PLP since his original election has been appalling and deeply injurious to the party they claim to care about. Culminating in that ridiculous and selfish "coup" when the Tories were at their most vulnerable.

This is indisputable IMO.

[Tubby Isaacs]

The court case was a Bitterite waste of time after the NEC decision. The decision itself looked more questionable, but would would have been taken to court if he'd been kept off, and who knows?

[PorFavor]

George Osborne is laughing at us as he takes his Evening Standard job
Aditya Chakrabortty (Guardian)

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... id-cameron

[SpinningHugo]

Yes, but mostly by fairly modest margins.

"Labour were level/ahead in the polls before the coup" is indeed a myth, but the claim it made no significant difference is if anything more of one.

With half of the Tories the public recognizing on TV every night, calling the PM a liar, that the Tories led at all was appalling.

Corbyn staying on after losing the vote of confidence by an absolute street is what did the damage.

Completely disagree with your last point - and he was totally within his rights to resist such an underhand and unconstitutional move.

How was it underhand? Did they do it in secret?

How was it unconstitutional? I had thought there was an election under the rules, that Corbyn won handsomely?

Let us also remember thateven if Labour had been level with the government at that point in the electoral cycle, that would have been very poor, and worse than Miliband had achieved.

The BIG polling change has been the collapse of Ukips post-referendum, which has benefited the Tories. Which is why their lead is now so huge. Labour has sunk a bit, I don't think it will now get 25% in the 2020 GE, but it has been a slow puncture under Corbyn. It isn't the case that Labour support collapsed during the Evil Blairite Coup.

Now that the PLP are keeping collective silence on Corbyn (in a remarkably disciplined way IMO) the steady decline is all at his door.

[pk1]

Point of Order:

It was Michael Foster that took the party to court on whether Corbyn had the right to automatically be on the ballot. The NEC said he did & the Court agreed.

Nothing to do with the "bitterites"

[howsillyofme1]

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-2

Labour led in 4 polls pre-EU ref, never by more than 3.

In February 2016 alone, the Tories led in 6, never less than by 6 points.

Labour was level in 1 poll on 25th June 2016. The Tories had led in the previous 16.

Yes, but mostly by fairly modest margins.

"Labour were level/ahead in the polls before the coup" is indeed a myth, but the claim it made no significant difference is if anything more of one.

With half of the Tories the public recognizing on TV every night, calling the PM a liar, that the Tories led at all was appalling.

Corbyn staying on after losing the vote of confidence by an absolute street is what did the damage.

Or the holding of an unconstitutional 'vote of confidence' did the damage?

Funnily then there was a vote of confidence in the leader from the members of the party in the constitutional vote

If MPs are so keen on unconstitutional votes of confidence perhaps they could have some in their own consituencies - oh no that is not allowed is it? Then making up accusations against their own constituency parties to compound the issue

The vote of confidence and the fall of Cameron were not concurrent....we had the Tories in disarray but the Labour Party turned on their own leadership for some inexplicable reason

It cannot have been that Corbyn was not sufficiently Remain because a lot of the MPs came on wittering on about having to curb immigration which, as has been pointed out, not consistent with Remain

[pk1]

Now that the PLP are keeping collective silence on Corbyn (in a remarkably disciplined way IMO) the steady decline is all at his door.

Agree with this. The PLP have been quiet for months now yet still the party is making no inroads. We'll soon see if Labour can use May's local elections to regain any popularity.

[SpinningHugo]

The coup.

It was certainly a miscalculation by the PLP, who if they had known how it would turn out would never have done it.

First, you cannot underestimate the betrayal they felt. It was quite clear that Corbyn and the team surrounding him had undermined the Labour Remain campaign. I believe Alan Johnson, and so do the PLP. The PLP is mainly made up of committed Europeans. Corbyn and McDonnell are not of that kind.

Second they mistakenly thought that if they collectively said they had no confidence in him, he'd behave like any previous Labour leader, or any leader of any other major UK political party there has ever been, and quit. Even I thought he'd go when Ed Miliband called for him to quit. Corbyn wobbled until the de facto leader, McDonnell, stiffened his resolve.

The idea that Labour's woes are all down to the coup are silly. Again, like blaming the Bitterites under the Bed, it doesn't even have a surface plausibility.

McDonnell, Corbyn, Milne, Fisher, Lansman have a different agenda from previous leaderships of Labour. That, at least, was made crystal clear by the 'coup'.

[SpinningHugo]

Or the holding of an unconstitutional 'vote of confidence' did the damage?

Please explain how this is unconstitutional? How does the Labour party's constitution forbid MPs from voting on anything they like?

oh and "inexplicable reason" did make me lol. Thanks.

[howsillyofme1]

The coup.

It was certainly a miscalculation by the PLP, who if they had known how it would turn out would never have done it.

First, you cannot underestimate the betrayal they felt. It was quite clear that Corbyn and the team surrounding him had undermined the Labour Remain campaign. I believe Alan Johnson, and so do the PLP. The PLP is mainly made up of committed Europeans. Corbyn and McDonnell are not of that kind.

Second they mistakenly thought that if they collectively said they had no confidence in him, he'd behave like any previous Labour leader, or any leader of any other major UK political party there has ever been, and quit. Even I thought he'd go when Ed Miliband called for him to quit. Corbyn wobbled until the de facto leader, McDonnell, stiffened his resolve.

The idea that Labour's woes are all down to the coup are silly. Again, like blaming the Bitterites under the Bed, it doesn't even have a surface plausibility.

McDonnell, Corbyn, Milne, Fisher, Lansman have a different agenda from previous leaderships of Labour. That, at least, was made crystal clear by the 'coup'.

Are you an official spokesman for these people....you seem to be speaking with definitive statements on what people thought?

Only someone of supreme arrogance would ever dream of saying that - it is a pity your arrogance is indirectly proportional to your level of intelligence

[citizenJA]

I dislike George Osborne a lot. All his monetary and political resources and he uses them as a quintessential Tory bastard.

[SpinningHugo]

The coup.

It was certainly a miscalculation by the PLP, who if they had known how it would turn out would never have done it.

First, you cannot underestimate the betrayal they felt. It was quite clear that Corbyn and the team surrounding him had undermined the Labour Remain campaign. I believe Alan Johnson, and so do the PLP. The PLP is mainly made up of committed Europeans. Corbyn and McDonnell are not of that kind.

Second they mistakenly thought that if they collectively said they had no confidence in him, he'd behave like any previous Labour leader, or any leader of any other major UK political party there has ever been, and quit. Even I thought he'd go when Ed Miliband called for him to quit. Corbyn wobbled until the de facto leader, McDonnell, stiffened his resolve.

The idea that Labour's woes are all down to the coup are silly. Again, like blaming the Bitterites under the Bed, it doesn't even have a surface plausibility.

McDonnell, Corbyn, Milne, Fisher, Lansman have a different agenda from previous leaderships of Labour. That, at least, was made crystal clear by the 'coup'.

Are you an official spokesman for these people....you seem to be speaking with definitive statements on what people thought?

Only someone of supreme arrogance would ever dream of saying that - it is a pity your arrogance is indirectly proportional to your level of intelligence

They said what they thought at the time. I don't think, say, Ed Miliband is a liar. I didn't find their actions inexplicable. Labour has been utterly hopeless as an opposition under Corbyn from the start.

[howsillyofme1]

Or the holding of an unconstitutional 'vote of confidence' did the damage?

Please explain how this is unconstitutional? How does the Labour party's constitution forbid MPs from voting on anything they like?

oh and "inexplicable reason" did make me lol. Thanks.

Yes you are right it is explicable.....the PLP contains a number of people who don't see the Tories as their main opponents

As to unconstitutional.....of course they can vote on what they like in their own time but there is no such thing as an MP vote of confidence in the leader and so there is no reason to do it apart from causing damage to the party

A CLP trying to do the same would probably be suspended based on current experience even though there would be nothing to stop them

[AnatolyKasparov]

The PLP have been quiet*er*, not totally silent.

Besides, just weeks after JC was re-elected many of them engaged in a disgusting and obscene display of disloyalty over Yemen/SaudiArabia.

Whether simply to spite Jez, or to display their utterly corrupt corporate complicity with one of the worst regimes on the planet, it was unforgivable.

[SpinningHugo]

there is no such thing as an MP vote of confidence in the leader

Of course there is. They had one. Nothing in the Labour constitutuon banning that than there is on having a vote on whether Brie or Cheddar is better.

[howsillyofme1]

Actually the Labour Party have been a pretty effective opposition with help from the other parties

https://ianjsinclair.wordpress.com/2016 ... t-u-turns/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[citizenJA]

Stoke Central's new MP, Gareth Snell, is a good guy, well-liked.

[citizenJA]

I'm grateful Stoke Central chose another Labour party MP.

[SpinningHugo]

The PLP have been quiet*er*, not totally silent.
.

Considering

1. They almost all (rightly) think Corbyn is an embarrassment

2. The ridiculous state of the shadow cabinet.

3. The remorseless decline in the polls.

I think they've been astonishingly disciplined. A couple have quit, with more to come, of course.

[AnatolyKasparov]

Stoke Central's new MP, Gareth Snell, is a good guy, well-liked.

He looks promising tbf, good to see his past slips on social media didn't do him any real harm.

(not least because this is going to become more and more of a thing in future, a generally grown up attitude towards it would be pleasingly refreshing)

And it is looking just possible that his election was the thing that finally broke UKIP

[howsillyofme1]

there is no such thing as an MP vote of confidence in the leader

Of course there is. They had one. Nothing in the Labour constitutuon banning that than there is on having a vote on whether Brie or Cheddar is better.

There is no mechanism to remove the Labour leader in this fashion so it has no constitutional basis...it is just self-indulgent

The running of this vote was clearly an attempt to force him out via unconstitutional means....bullying as well you could say. As were all the attempts to keep him off the ballot

There is a constitutional way to remove the leader and that failed!

This is how the Party treats a CLP doing the same thing

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 41196.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

but this is a Labour Party issue and I don't believe you have ever really supported the party (yes, I am happy to call you a liar when you say you have in the past) so your opinion on Labour Party imternal politics is irrelevant

[Tubby Isaacs]

The PLP have been quiet*er*, not totally silent.

Besides, just weeks after JC was re-elected many of them engaged in a disgusting and obscene display of disloyalty over Yemen/SaudiArabia.

Whether simply to spite Jez, or to display their utterly corrupt corporate complicity with one of the worst regimes on the planet, it was unforgivable.

Or classic balance of power politics, with Iran heavily involved too?

[citizenJA]

Stoke Central's new MP, Gareth Snell, is a good guy, well-liked.

He looks promising tbf, good to see his past slips on social media didn't do him any real harm.

(not least because this is going to become more and more of a thing in future, a generally grown up attitude towards it would be pleasingly refreshing)

And it is looking just possible that his election was the thing that finally broke UKIP

That's a nice post, AK, I like this a lot, thank you.

[Tubby Isaacs]

I was disappointed to see Owen Smith attacking the government over NIC changes.

Nobody seems to have any sense of how hard it'll be for a future government to raise taxes to afford decent services.

[howsillyofme1]

I was disappointed to see Owen Smith attacking the government over NIC changes.

Nobody seems to have any sense of how hard it'll be for a future government to raise taxes to afford decent services.

This is a problem I agree but taxation is not something that can be looked at in isolation and these NIC changes could be explained if there wasn't the impact that things such as UC will have.

The number of self-employed has expanded massively and I saw a figure that said that the average income had almost halved at the same time.

I agree that there may be some need to adopt some of the changes to NIC for the self-employed but as everything with the Tories there is more to it than that

[citizenJA]

Labour Land Campaign

What is Land Value Tax?
"Most of the things we see around us were made by humanity.
The buildings we live in, the vehicles we use, the clothes we wear and even most of the food we eat are set in their present form by human effort.

Land is completely different.
No human being has made land, and the value of a piece of land derives from such things as natural fertility, mineral deposits and its position in relation to public utilities, natural harbours, communications and population.
Different pieces of land vary enormously in their value.
An acre of land in the middle of a town, for example, may be worth many thousands of times as much as an acre of remote moorland.
Therefore, a tax on land values is a fair tax, because the person who owns land derives benefit from something which he or she has not made.

First off, the value of every piece of land in this country should be assessed.
By ‘land’ we mean the site alone, not counting any improvements on the site.
Thus, the value of any buildings, crops, drainage or anything else which people have put on, or done to, the site would be ignored.

Then, after the land has been valued, a tax should be fixed on the basis of that value.
Of course this wouldn’t mean any more overall taxation, because the introduction of Land Value Taxation would permit other taxes to be reduced or, in some cases, to be abolished altogether."

http://www.labourland.org/what-is-land-value-tax/

(cJA emphasis)

[PorFavor]

Labour Land Campaign

What is Land Value Tax?
"Most of the things we see around us were made by humanity.
The buildings we live in, the vehicles we use, the clothes we wear and even most of the food we eat are set in their present form by human effort.

Land is completely different.
No human being has made land, and the value of a piece of land derives from such things as natural fertility, mineral deposits and its position in relation to public utilities, natural harbours, communications and population.
Different pieces of land vary enormously in their value.
An acre of land in the middle of a town, for example, may be worth many thousands of times as much as an acre of remote moorland.
Therefore, a tax on land values is a fair tax, because the person who owns land derives benefit from something which he or she has not made.

First off, the value of every piece of land in this country should be assessed.
By ‘land’ we mean the site alone, not counting any improvements on the site.
Thus, the value of any buildings, crops, drainage or anything else which people have put on, or done to, the site would be ignored.

Then, after the land has been valued, a tax should be fixed on the basis of that value.
Of course this wouldn’t mean any more overall taxation, because the introduction of Land Value Taxation would permit other taxes to be reduced or, in some cases, to be abolished altogether."

http://www.labourland.org/what-is-land-value-tax/

(cJA emphasis)

So the frackers (in the desolate north - ie north of Watford) would be safe, then.

[Willow904]

I was disappointed to see Owen Smith attacking the government over NIC changes.

Nobody seems to have any sense of how hard it'll be for a future government to raise taxes to afford decent services.

This is a problem I agree but taxation is not something that can be looked at in isolation and these NIC changes could be explained if there wasn't the impact that things such as UC will have.

The number of self-employed has expanded massively and I saw a figure that said that the average income had almost halved at the same time.

I agree that there may be some need to adopt some of the changes to NIC for the self-employed but as everything with the Tories there is more to it than that

So oppose the UC cuts and raise the issues caused by Osborne's abolition of level 2 NICs.

Why oppose a progressive tax rise?

Labour's opposition to Hammond's measure has put them on the same side as the far right of the Tory party and the Daily Mail. Not cool. McDonnell has been misleading about Hammond's measure, conflating it with other measures. Now Hammond's rise has been cancelled, self-employed people on lower incomes could well be confused when they still find themselves very much worse off if they'd been listening to the shadow chancellor.

[Willow904]

Mike Smithson‏ @MSmithsonPB
. @PhilJDore The latest YouGov, Ipsos-MORI and now ComRes all have UKIP in 4th place behind LDs

[citizenJA]

@PorFavor
No, the hydraulic fracturing activity would be heavily taxed. Reaping value from natural resources is taxable. Given the danger the activity this venture places upon the environment, it'd be taxed into not happening. It'd be impossible to get insurance to cover possible water contamination for the region.

[howsillyofme1]

So much noise and so little intellect

Dunning-Kruger

[Tubby Isaacs]

I was disappointed to see Owen Smith attacking the government over NIC changes.

Nobody seems to have any sense of how hard it'll be for a future government to raise taxes to afford decent services.

This is a problem I agree but taxation is not something that can be looked at in isolation and these NIC changes could be explained if there wasn't the impact that things such as UC will have.

The number of self-employed has expanded massively and I saw a figure that said that the average income had almost halved at the same time.

I agree that there may be some need to adopt some of the changes to NIC for the self-employed but as everything with the Tories there is more to it than that

So oppose the UC cuts and raise the issues caused by Osborne's abolition of level 2 NICs.

Why oppose a progressive tax rise?

Labour's opposition to Hammond's measure has put them on the same side as the far right of the Tory party and the Daily Mail. Not cool. McDonnell has been misleading about Hammond's measure, conflating it with other measures. Now Hammond's rise has been cancelled, self-employed people on lower incomes could well be confused when they still find themselves very much worse off if they'd been listening to the shadow chancellor.

I can see why the Front Bench opposed it- they tend to oppose unpopular stuff, and that's always been the case. It's part of the tactics of winning power, and I can't turn my nose up at them for wanting to do that.

I am more disappointed with people on the backbenches going for it too. I don't expect them necessarily to rebel v the Front Bench, but a sign that they're aware of the issue properly would be nice.

[howsillyofme1]

This is a problem I agree but taxation is not something that can be looked at in isolation and these NIC changes could be explained if there wasn't the impact that things such as UC will have.

The number of self-employed has expanded massively and I saw a figure that said that the average income had almost halved at the same time.

I agree that there may be some need to adopt some of the changes to NIC for the self-employed but as everything with the Tories there is more to it than that

So oppose the UC cuts and raise the issues caused by Osborne's abolition of level 2 NICs.

Why oppose a progressive tax rise?

Labour's opposition to Hammond's measure has put them on the same side as the far right of the Tory party and the Daily Mail. Not cool. McDonnell has been misleading about Hammond's measure, conflating it with other measures. Now Hammond's rise has been cancelled, self-employed people on lower incomes could well be confused when they still find themselves very much worse off if they'd been listening to the shadow chancellor.

I can see why the Front Bench opposed it- they tend to oppose unpopular stuff, and that's always been the case. It's part of the tactics of winning power, and I can't turn my nose up at them for wanting to do that.

I am more disappointed with people on the backbenches going for it too. I don't expect them necessarily to rebel v the Front Bench, but a sign that they're aware of the issue properly would be nice.

fair comment

[Tubby Isaacs]

But I suppose the upshot is that Universal Credit regressive cuts are likely to sale through, under the radar.

It wouldn't have been easy to get the political agenda away from the NIC changes though,

[AnatolyKasparov]

Internet discussion board 'cliche' words and terms to avoid:-

'Self-awareness'
'Your comprehension skills'

I can understand why you don't want to hear too much about that tbf

[HindleA]

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



he fall and rise of the council estate
For decades, the Aylesbury estate in south London has been seen as a symbol of the failure of British social housing. But now – just as it is being demolished – many people are starting to think again

[Tubby Isaacs]

Kevin Hague‏ @kevverage 36m36 minutes ago

when Salmond quotes attributed Hs2 expenses in the context of the GERS deficit?

it's just £7m out of £14,833m

Much as I understand anybody looking for a way out of Hard Brexit, there's far too much outright bollocks being talked by the "good guys".

[Tubby Isaacs]

Apparently no mention of poverty in Sturgeon's speech.

Poor people don't matter because they can be blamed on the UK.

[PorFavor]

@PorFavor
No, the hydraulic fracturing activity would be heavily taxed. Reaping value from natural resources is taxable. Given the danger the activity this venture places upon the environment, it'd be taxed into not happening. It'd be impossible to get insurance to cover possible water contamination for the region.

Hello - thanks for the reply. I was thinking along the lines of their not paying tax for (and getting tax allowance on) the equipment they'd laid out on. I realise that the actual natural resource present would render them liable for land tax - I just think that all loopholes would need to be closed. Sorry for being so vague.

[citizenJA]

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... al-housing
he fall and rise of the council estate
For decades, the Aylesbury estate in south London has been seen as a symbol of the failure of British social housing. But now – just as it is being demolished – many people are starting to think again

Wonderful! It's eight months old. I'm only disappointed because I would've liked to participate below the line.

[HindleA]

Oops.

[citizenJA]

@PorFavor
No, the hydraulic fracturing activity would be heavily taxed. Reaping value from natural resources is taxable. Given the danger the activity this venture places upon the environment, it'd be taxed into not happening. It'd be impossible to get insurance to cover possible water contamination for the region.

Hello - thanks for the reply. I was thinking along the lines of their not paying tax for (and getting tax allowance on) the equipment they'd laid out on. I realise that the actual natural resource present would render them liable for land tax - I just think that all loopholes would need to be closed. Sorry for being so vague.

Of course you're right to have pointed that out. I hadn't thought of it until you did. Land Value Tax (LVT) would effectively render that kind of fossil-fuel extraction uneconomical for the companies wanting to have a go at it. It's not renewable, that energy extraction. It couldn't be done.

[HindleA]

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


Aberdeen wrestles with hard choices as independence looms again
Hit hard by falling oil prices and job losses, the Scottish ‘energy capital of Europe’ is facing a complex decision at a time of uncertainty


(First job was as a stevedore servicing the oil rigs- nicknamed "dipstick" for some inexpicable reason.

[citizenJA]

Oops.

It's probably the best article I've read today.
Of course! It's written by Andy Beckett. I like him a lot.

[Tubby Isaacs]

More
Stewart McDonald MP Retweeted Kezia Dugdale
The difference is that @NicolaSturgeon is taking action on poverty and Kezia is just talking about it. That's the bit that actually matters.

What action? Shelter Scotland didn't see much.

And what's Dugdale supposed to do? She's not in power.

[HindleA]

http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2016/12/6196/0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Annual Report on the Child Poverty Strategy for Scotland - 2016