FlyTheNest

A haven
It is currently Tue 23 Jan, 2018 11:26 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Welcome to FTN. New posters are welcome to join the conversation. You can follow us on Twitter @FlythenestHaven You are responsible for the content you post. This is a public forum. Treat it as if you are speaking in a crowded room. Site admin and Moderators are volunteers who will respond as quickly as they are able to when made aware of any complaints. Please do not post copyrighted material without the original authors permission.



Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 155 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 2:40 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:18 pm
Posts: 6678
Has thanked: 4096 times
Been thanked: 15497 times
PorFavor wrote:
Quote:
David Davis’s claim in a leaked letter to the prime minister that the EU is discriminating against the UK and damaging its economic interests by preparing for a no-deal scenario in March 2019 has been met with flat denials and accusations of hypocrisy in Brussels, my colleague Daniel Boffey reports.(Politics Live, Guardian)



Yes that's a very odd one.

UK government: "We're preparing for no-deal. Wait, some of us are on record as saying we'd even like a no-deal to happen"
EU: "OK, we'll prepare for no-deal then"
UK government "Wait. You can't do that - it's just not on!"

_________________
FTN's supplier of tedious, pedantic education policy waffle; and Pedant-in-Chief generally.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 2:45 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 1:40 pm
Posts: 4276
Has thanked: 9539 times
Been thanked: 10812 times
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
adam wrote:

I think Labour's leadership are being, of all things, quite like Blair over Iraq - they've made a face and the wind changed. They've decided this is the principle and that's it, everything must follow from there.

That's not my reading at all.

Both Corbyn and McDonnell have said quite clearly they want to focus on outcomes not structures. And that's what they are doing.

Meanwhile Starmer has said there will be lots of opposition to the bills as they come through Parliament.

Interviewers, perhaps fairly enough, will keep asking these "totemic" questions. People will continue to be disappointed and Labour will try to carry on with their approach.


Keir Starmer has said very clearly it is important to keep all options on the table, including the possibility of remaining in the single market permanently, and I think that's a very sensible position to take. Yet according to Corbyn remaining in the single market isn't even an option, let alone one he's not ruling out.

I understand everyone has their own interpretation of what Corbyn is trying to say and why. I'm just personally having trouble trying to reconcile what Starmer is saying with what Corbyn keeps choosing to repeatedly emphasise (and he has, on this occasion, brought up the point of not being able to remain in the SM voluntarily, rather than in response to a direct question).

_________________
“Find a nice, self sufficient hilltop, and fortify it.” - The Kraken Wakes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 2:45 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 11:18 am
Posts: 9395
Has thanked: 18134 times
Been thanked: 16836 times
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
PTO


Maybe it's been tacked onto one of the expanded job-titles that have emerged from the "reshuffle", and nobody's noticed. Sajid Javid and\or Jeremy Hunt are probably charged with the task.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 2:51 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 11:22 am
Posts: 13669
Has thanked: 76081 times
Been thanked: 12996 times
gilsey wrote:
---
I think the problem arises because so many people can see now that there is no possibility that the govt's deal can meet Labour's 6 tests.
I don't believe that Corbyn is a leaver at heart any more than Starmer is, but how can they get from here to where they and the country need to be? I don't pretend to know the answer, and I don't think it lies in the past either, I don't see how they could have acted differently.
(cJA edit)
I agree


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 2:51 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 11:22 am
Posts: 13669
Has thanked: 76081 times
Been thanked: 12996 times
Good-afternoon, everyone


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 2:55 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 11:22 am
Posts: 13669
Has thanked: 76081 times
Been thanked: 12996 times
SpinningHugo wrote:
---
Labour's six tests are just a joke, nobody takes them seriously.
---
(cJA edit)
Gordon Brown's five tests for the UK adopting the Euro aren't a joke and neither are the current Labour conditions


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 3:01 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 11:22 am
Posts: 13669
Has thanked: 76081 times
Been thanked: 12996 times
Willow904 wrote:
---
I understand everyone has their own interpretation of what Corbyn is trying to say and why. I'm just personally having trouble trying to reconcile what Starmer is saying with what Corbyn keeps choosing to repeatedly emphasise (and he has, on this occasion, brought up the point of not being able to remain in the SM voluntarily, rather than in response to a direct question).
(cJA edit)
yep, I'm having difficulty too


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 3:06 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 11:22 am
Posts: 13669
Has thanked: 76081 times
Been thanked: 12996 times
Quote:
Daily Mail accuses Virgin of censorship after trains stop selling its papers

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... daily-mail
Detestable nonsense, broken brained confusion, no one stopping your absurd publication from being printed, no one is stifling your right to publish it who in the world do you think you are demanding it must be purchased and read you may go to the devil with that


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 3:17 pm 
Online
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 8:26 pm
Posts: 6798
Has thanked: 679 times
Been thanked: 15021 times
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
PorFavor wrote:
Quote:
David Davis’s claim in a leaked letter to the prime minister that the EU is discriminating against the UK and damaging its economic interests by preparing for a no-deal scenario in March 2019 has been met with flat denials and accusations of hypocrisy in Brussels, my colleague Daniel Boffey reports.(Politics Live, Guardian)

What happened to the Minister for No-Deal anyway?


Looks like the, ahem, deal is off regarding that one :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 3:24 pm 
Offline
First Secretary of State

Joined: Mon 16 Feb, 2015 1:22 pm
Posts: 3999
Has thanked: 150 times
Been thanked: 2262 times
Willow904 wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
adam wrote:

I think Labour's leadership are being, of all things, quite like Blair over Iraq - they've made a face and the wind changed. They've decided this is the principle and that's it, everything must follow from there.

That's not my reading at all.

Both Corbyn and McDonnell have said quite clearly they want to focus on outcomes not structures. And that's what they are doing.

Meanwhile Starmer has said there will be lots of opposition to the bills as they come through Parliament.

Interviewers, perhaps fairly enough, will keep asking these "totemic" questions. People will continue to be disappointed and Labour will try to carry on with their approach.


Keir Starmer has said very clearly it is important to keep all options on the table, including the possibility of remaining in the single market permanently, and I think that's a very sensible position to take. Yet according to Corbyn remaining in the single market isn't even an option, let alone one he's not ruling out.

I understand everyone has their own interpretation of what Corbyn is trying to say and why. I'm just personally having trouble trying to reconcile what Starmer is saying with what Corbyn keeps choosing to repeatedly emphasise (and he has, on this occasion, brought up the point of not being able to remain in the SM voluntarily, rather than in response to a direct question).


As you know, various Labour spokespersons have said completely different things at completely different times. if you favour remain, you're likely to focus on Starmer. If you're a lexiter, plenty of good stuff coming out of McDonnell's mouth. Corbyn waxes and wanes. It is all deliberately obscure. Want to know what Labour's position of freedom of movement is (on which membership of the single market turns)? Good luck.

but the clock is ticking. There was an opportunity to try and construct a coalition around a coherent kind of brexit, and to try and construct a parliamentary majority. that opportunity has gone, because the leadership had no interest in doing so. They may have been right in terms of party politics. Just not in terms of what is best for the poor, and indeed pursuing all the rest of labour's agenda which is stymied because of Brexit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 3:27 pm 
Offline
First Secretary of State

Joined: Mon 16 Feb, 2015 1:22 pm
Posts: 3999
Has thanked: 150 times
Been thanked: 2262 times
As for the ridiculous six tests, number 2 is

Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union?

As that is only possible by remaining within the Single Market and Customs Union you might think that was Labour's policy.

But it isn't.

it is for suckers and the faithful only (the two categories are not exclusive).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 3:33 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 11:22 am
Posts: 13669
Has thanked: 76081 times
Been thanked: 12996 times
Quote:
Please take a look at this


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 3:44 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:40 pm
Posts: 18230
Has thanked: 16181 times
Been thanked: 27521 times
Being disingenuous and a patronising plonker are indeed not mutually exclusive.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 3:46 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:40 pm
Posts: 18230
Has thanked: 16181 times
Been thanked: 27521 times
That's the view of my Brabantia bread bin by the way.(minus the expletives)


Last edited by HindleA on Tue 09 Jan, 2018 4:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 3:49 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 11:22 am
Posts: 13669
Has thanked: 76081 times
Been thanked: 12996 times
HindleA wrote:
That's the view of my Brabanta bread bin by the way.(minus the expletives)

get off that damn home improvement website


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 3:50 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 11:22 am
Posts: 13669
Has thanked: 76081 times
Been thanked: 12996 times
citizenJA wrote:
Quote:
Please take a look at this
This has to do with legislation in the House today, isn't it?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 3:50 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:40 pm
Posts: 18230
Has thanked: 16181 times
Been thanked: 27521 times
It's ten years guarantee has run out,it's showing signs of stress.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 3:58 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 11:18 am
Posts: 9395
Has thanked: 18134 times
Been thanked: 16836 times
HindleA wrote:
It's ten years guarantee has run out,it's showing signs of stress.



After 10 years with you? It's done well . . .


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 4:05 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 11:18 am
Posts: 9395
Has thanked: 18134 times
Been thanked: 16836 times
Was the Chris Grayling announcement made yesterday to make Toby Young look worthy of a long-service medal?

And Nadhim Zahawi? Is that because of some hazy connection with "stable"?

Anyway, Caroline Dinenage - up the road. Suella Fernandes - up the road. Penny Mordaunt (not a reshuffle person) my MP. All rather depressing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 4:06 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 11:18 am
Posts: 9395
Has thanked: 18134 times
Been thanked: 16836 times
Weird move re Rory Stewart.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 4:45 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:18 pm
Posts: 6678
Has thanked: 4096 times
Been thanked: 15497 times
Quote:
UK Prime Minister
‏Verified account
@Number10gov
1h1 hour ago
More
Suella Fernandes MP becomes Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at Department for Exiting the European Union @DExEUgov #Reshuffle


Thankfully nothing to do with education. She seems to have lost interest - not chair of Michaela, didn't bother applying for the select committee - and was hardly a shining star when she did tour up. One HT had trouble keeping his temper with one exchange of views.

Actually, wasn't she a leading light in this thinktank which seemed to exist only in Westminster and not even on t'internet?

_________________
FTN's supplier of tedious, pedantic education policy waffle; and Pedant-in-Chief generally.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 4:47 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 10:18 pm
Posts: 9884
Has thanked: 1604 times
Been thanked: 12954 times
I'm still not sure there won't be a conversion to Freedom of Movement, but I'm not encouraged. I think Corbyn had to find some way out of the SNP-led talks because the Tories would make hay with it, but it wasn't really a good enough excuse. And to repeat, it's not all on Corbyn's head, there are loads of Flints about who are worse.

Hugo makes a good point there. What Labour have done is basically what Leave did- have different things people can focus on, and they might vote for you.

If I were somewhere with local borough elections, I'd be very tempted to vote for somebody else, as a gentle reminder. Wouldn't hurt them to lose some London seats to the Greens or Lib Dems.

The stuff being talked about rail by Labour isn't good either. Why do I mention that? Because I think the emphasis on that could be part of a "Lexit" strategy, with the Fourth Rail Package coming up.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 4:52 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 10:18 pm
Posts: 9884
Has thanked: 1604 times
Been thanked: 12954 times
RogerOThornhill wrote:
Quote:
UK Prime Minister
‏Verified account
@Number10gov
1h1 hour ago
More
Suella Fernandes MP becomes Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at Department for Exiting the European Union @DExEUgov #Reshuffle


Thankfully nothing to do with education. She seems to have lost interest - not chair of Michaela, didn't bother applying for the select committee - and was hardly a shining star when she did tour up. One HT had trouble keeping his temper with one exchange of views.

Actually, wasn't she a leading light in this thinktank which seemed to exist only in Westminster and not even on t'internet?


Good Lord. That's her, Davis and Steve Baker, with Stuart Jackson running Davis' office?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 4:53 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 10:18 pm
Posts: 9884
Has thanked: 1604 times
Been thanked: 12954 times
I think that odds on Soft Brexit have gone down!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 5:06 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:18 pm
Posts: 6678
Has thanked: 4096 times
Been thanked: 15497 times
Ouch.

Quote:
Steve Peers
‏Verified account
@StevePeers
53m53 minutes ago
More Steve Peers Retweeted UK Prime Minister
Shall I mention again that I worked with her on a report on protecting EU27 citizens' rights in the UK after Brexit - and then she voted against the principle of the report?

Yes. Yes I will. No one should trust her.

_________________
FTN's supplier of tedious, pedantic education policy waffle; and Pedant-in-Chief generally.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 5:09 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 11:18 am
Posts: 9395
Has thanked: 18134 times
Been thanked: 16836 times
Apparently (according to Sky TV news) the "photo-shoot" (outside Number 10) of Theresa May and her new gang has been cancelled. Small mercies, I suppose - but it seems that Theresa May can't even stick to the most minor and trivial plans.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 5:11 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 10:18 pm
Posts: 9884
Has thanked: 1604 times
Been thanked: 12954 times
Oh Christ.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 5:12 pm 
Offline
Speaker of the House

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 10:34 am
Posts: 2920
Has thanked: 817 times
Been thanked: 5188 times
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
I'm still not sure there won't be a conversion to Freedom of Movement, but I'm not encouraged. I think Corbyn had to find some way out of the SNP-led talks because the Tories would make hay with it, but it wasn't really a good enough excuse. And to repeat, it's not all on Corbyn's head, there are loads of Flints about who are worse.

Hugo makes a good point there. What Labour have done is basically what Leave did- have different things people can focus on, and they might vote for you.

If I were somewhere with local borough elections, I'd be very tempted to vote for somebody else, as a gentle reminder. Wouldn't hurt them to lose some London seats to the Greens or Lib Dems.

The stuff being talked about rail by Labour isn't good either. Why do I mention that? Because I think the emphasis on that could be part of a "Lexit" strategy, with the Fourth Rail Package coming up.


You can use your vote how you want but really fail to see how giving ammunition to the right wing of Labour (not all remainers either) to launch more attacks on Labour leadership will help

Labour may not fulfill every remain voters need a but they are the only alternative to the Tories and people making 'a point' is only going to ensure a Tory Brexit

I don't think people who voted remain can be seen to be a uniform group either....I am not in agreement with a number on here for example

I will not accept SM/CU with no say on the rules.....that would be a very poor proposition politically


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 5:21 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 5033
Has thanked: 1582 times
Been thanked: 8324 times
SpinningHugo wrote:
As for the ridiculous six tests, number 2 is

Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union?

As that is only possible by remaining within the Single Market and Customs Union you might think that was Labour's policy.

But it isn't.

it is for suckers and the faithful only (the two categories are not exclusive).

I'm sorry I may be many things, but I'm really not a sucker or some kind of zealot.

Nor are others here that believe a more nuanced view is best.

I don't think it's acceptable behaviour to insult fellow forum members like this and respectfully ask you to stop.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 5:24 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 11:22 am
Posts: 13669
Has thanked: 76081 times
Been thanked: 12996 times
Quote:
"As a staunch leave voter I think that if we have to accept free movement of people and EU regulations in order to regain our sovereignty then this is a price worth paying....."
- unionjack


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 5:30 pm 
Offline
First Secretary of State

Joined: Mon 16 Feb, 2015 1:22 pm
Posts: 3999
Has thanked: 150 times
Been thanked: 2262 times
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
I'm still not sure there won't be a conversion to Freedom of Movement, but I'm not encouraged. I think Corbyn had to find some way out of the SNP-led talks because the Tories would make hay with it, but it wasn't really a good enough excuse. And to repeat, it's not all on Corbyn's head, there are loads of Flints about who are worse.

Hugo makes a good point there. What Labour have done is basically what Leave did- have different things people can focus on, and they might vote for you.

If I were somewhere with local borough elections, I'd be very tempted to vote for somebody else, as a gentle reminder. Wouldn't hurt them to lose some London seats to the Greens or Lib Dems.

The stuff being talked about rail by Labour isn't good either. Why do I mention that? Because I think the emphasis on that could be part of a "Lexit" strategy, with the Fourth Rail Package coming up.


Corbyn was never going to do that. One of the main complaints about the Miliband era (expressed repeatedly here) was about Labour appearing on the same platform as the other Unionist parties. So, during the EU referendum Labour ran a completely separate campaign, with Corbyn unwilling to appear on the same platform as Cameron saying "Brexit is dumb, don't vote for it."

I don't myself think it is a coincidence that the Scottish referendum vote was won, whilst the Brexit vote was lost. The former damaged Labour, the latter has greatly benefitted it.

It depends whether you care about party or substance. Those who care about party, will think Corbyn was (and is) right to refuse all co-operation with the enemy. Those who care about substance will disagree.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 5:33 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 11:22 am
Posts: 13669
Has thanked: 76081 times
Been thanked: 12996 times
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
As for the ridiculous six tests, number 2 is

Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union?

As that is only possible by remaining within the Single Market and Customs Union you might think that was Labour's policy.

But it isn't.

it is for suckers and the faithful only (the two categories are not exclusive).
I'm sorry I may be many things, but I'm really not a sucker or some kind of zealot.

Nor are others here that believe a more nuanced view is best.

I don't think it's acceptable behaviour to insult fellow forum members like this and respectfully ask you to stop.
I hadn't seen the 'sucker and/or zealot' part! :lol:
Labour explicitly saying, 'Exact same benefits', isn't an accident


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 5:36 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 11:22 am
Posts: 13669
Has thanked: 76081 times
Been thanked: 12996 times
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Oh Christ.

Image

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DTG3fQEW0AA_6R6.jpg
Did everyone else get a <image> notification and nothing more?


Last edited by citizenJA on Tue 09 Jan, 2018 5:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 5:36 pm 
Offline
First Secretary of State

Joined: Mon 16 Feb, 2015 1:22 pm
Posts: 3999
Has thanked: 150 times
Been thanked: 2262 times
citizenJA wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
As for the ridiculous six tests, number 2 is

Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union?

As that is only possible by remaining within the Single Market and Customs Union you might think that was Labour's policy.

But it isn't.

it is for suckers and the faithful only (the two categories are not exclusive).
I'm sorry I may be many things, but I'm really not a sucker or some kind of zealot.

Nor are others here that believe a more nuanced view is best.

I don't think it's acceptable behaviour to insult fellow forum members like this and respectfully ask you to stop.
I hadn't seen the 'sucker and/or zealot' part! :lol:
Labour explicitly saying, 'Exact same benefits', isn't an accident


It is derived from a quote from Davis (ie Tory policy). The kind of thing that sounds clever, but isn't a serious policy. Just political game playing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 5:37 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 11:22 am
Posts: 13669
Has thanked: 76081 times
Been thanked: 12996 times
It's in Labour's Manifesto


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 5:39 pm 
Offline
First Secretary of State

Joined: Mon 16 Feb, 2015 1:22 pm
Posts: 3999
Has thanked: 150 times
Been thanked: 2262 times
citizenJA wrote:
It's in Labour's Manifesto



Which took it from the 6 points, which took it from Davis. It is just game playing, not to be taken seriously (unless Labour policy were to stay in the EU: which it isn't.)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 5:53 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 11:22 am
Posts: 13669
Has thanked: 76081 times
Been thanked: 12996 times
It's my intention to survive current Tory government


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 5:58 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:40 pm
Posts: 18230
Has thanked: 16181 times
Been thanked: 27521 times
Malthouse responsibilities will be confirmed in due course.Sharma has also moved there.


https://www.gov.uk/government/people/alok-sharma


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 6:00 pm 
Offline
Speaker of the House

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 10:34 am
Posts: 2920
Has thanked: 817 times
Been thanked: 5188 times
SpinningHugo wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
I'm still not sure there won't be a conversion to Freedom of Movement, but I'm not encouraged. I think Corbyn had to find some way out of the SNP-led talks because the Tories would make hay with it, but it wasn't really a good enough excuse. And to repeat, it's not all on Corbyn's head, there are loads of Flints about who are worse.

Hugo makes a good point there. What Labour have done is basically what Leave did- have different things people can focus on, and they might vote for you.

If I were somewhere with local borough elections, I'd be very tempted to vote for somebody else, as a gentle reminder. Wouldn't hurt them to lose some London seats to the Greens or Lib Dems.

The stuff being talked about rail by Labour isn't good either. Why do I mention that? Because I think the emphasis on that could be part of a "Lexit" strategy, with the Fourth Rail Package coming up.


Corbyn was never going to do that. One of the main complaints about the Miliband era (expressed repeatedly here) was about Labour appearing on the same platform as the other Unionist parties. So, during the EU referendum Labour ran a completely separate campaign, with Corbyn unwilling to appear on the same platform as Cameron saying "Brexit is dumb, don't vote for it."

I don't myself think it is a coincidence that the Scottish referendum vote was won, whilst the Brexit vote was lost. The former damaged Labour, the latter has greatly benefitted it.

It depends whether you care about party or substance. Those who care about party, will think Corbyn was (and is) right to refuse all co-operation with the enemy. Those who care about substance will disagree.


well that is an impressive load of assumptions and extrapolations unfortunately completely devoid of anything resembling evidence

It is of the 'cat has four legs, so has a dog therefore a dog is a cat' genre


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 6:04 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 1:40 pm
Posts: 4276
Has thanked: 9539 times
Been thanked: 10812 times
citizenJA wrote:
It's my intention to survive current Tory government


Quite a challenge.

Keeping an eye on all their nefarious activities is a full time job. My husband has only just started catching up with the dubious "NHS properties services". From 2015:

https://www.opendemocracy.net/ournhs/de ... al-selloff

_________________
“Find a nice, self sufficient hilltop, and fortify it.” - The Kraken Wakes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 6:16 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 10:18 pm
Posts: 9884
Has thanked: 1604 times
Been thanked: 12954 times
SpinningHugo wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
I'm still not sure there won't be a conversion to Freedom of Movement, but I'm not encouraged. I think Corbyn had to find some way out of the SNP-led talks because the Tories would make hay with it, but it wasn't really a good enough excuse. And to repeat, it's not all on Corbyn's head, there are loads of Flints about who are worse.

Hugo makes a good point there. What Labour have done is basically what Leave did- have different things people can focus on, and they might vote for you.

If I were somewhere with local borough elections, I'd be very tempted to vote for somebody else, as a gentle reminder. Wouldn't hurt them to lose some London seats to the Greens or Lib Dems.

The stuff being talked about rail by Labour isn't good either. Why do I mention that? Because I think the emphasis on that could be part of a "Lexit" strategy, with the Fourth Rail Package coming up.


Corbyn was never going to do that. One of the main complaints about the Miliband era (expressed repeatedly here) was about Labour appearing on the same platform as the other Unionist parties. So, during the EU referendum Labour ran a completely separate campaign, with Corbyn unwilling to appear on the same platform as Cameron saying "Brexit is dumb, don't vote for it."

I don't myself think it is a coincidence that the Scottish referendum vote was won, whilst the Brexit vote was lost. The former damaged Labour, the latter has greatly benefitted it.

It depends whether you care about party or substance. Those who care about party, will think Corbyn was (and is) right to refuse all co-operation with the enemy. Those who care about substance will disagree.


The Indyref was much easier to win than Brexit. You had Salmond not even telling people how he'd deal with something as fundamental as the currency.

I don't know if Cameron wanted to appear with Corbyn, and give him equal status, seeing that he'd made that mistake with Clegg in 2010 at the debates.

I think maybe a trick missed was not to internationalize the Labour platform. Get somebody from Sweden over and say, "You want amazing services like us? You can have them in the EU too".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 6:18 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 10:18 pm
Posts: 9884
Has thanked: 1604 times
Been thanked: 12954 times
howsillyofme1 wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
I'm still not sure there won't be a conversion to Freedom of Movement, but I'm not encouraged. I think Corbyn had to find some way out of the SNP-led talks because the Tories would make hay with it, but it wasn't really a good enough excuse. And to repeat, it's not all on Corbyn's head, there are loads of Flints about who are worse.

Hugo makes a good point there. What Labour have done is basically what Leave did- have different things people can focus on, and they might vote for you.

If I were somewhere with local borough elections, I'd be very tempted to vote for somebody else, as a gentle reminder. Wouldn't hurt them to lose some London seats to the Greens or Lib Dems.

The stuff being talked about rail by Labour isn't good either. Why do I mention that? Because I think the emphasis on that could be part of a "Lexit" strategy, with the Fourth Rail Package coming up.


You can use your vote how you want but really fail to see how giving ammunition to the right wing of Labour (not all remainers either) to launch more attacks on Labour leadership will help

Labour may not fulfill every remain voters need a but they are the only alternative to the Tories and people making 'a point' is only going to ensure a Tory Brexit

I don't think people who voted remain can be seen to be a uniform group either....I am not in agreement with a number on here for example

I will not accept SM/CU with no say on the rules.....that would be a very poor proposition politically


I think Caroline Flint and all (much worse than Corbyn) would find it hard to argue a swing to Green or Lib Dem was because Brexit wasn't hard enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 6:18 pm 
Offline
Speaker of the House

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 10:34 am
Posts: 2920
Has thanked: 817 times
Been thanked: 5188 times
I have been reading UKPR a lot recently as it is full of Brexiteers and there are no Corbyn fans...all are from the right of Labour. The site is pretty right wing but the posts can be interesting, informative and sometimes downright barmy!

I will though share two posts I read today from Labour supporters - but definitely no fans of Corbyn......if they see this I hope they are okay with me using their words

I find their thoughts interesting and demonstrate how Labour's position can be explained

They are both fairly long


Quote:
I have to admit that stating the obvious is now seen as clear political strategy is something that I fear is going to be a let off for our politicians. May has never been great at policy or had any instincts beyond that of inforcement of government policy. Her famed view of the Tories seen as the nasty party is to my mind the same lip service that we seem to get: All in this together, the JAMs and the like spring to mind. If you look at policy itself it appears very much exclusive and not inclusive of the message that is given

it is as if they spend their time working out what emotional buttons to push without given then away anything of substance.

As a lets say a ‘hardened’ remainer, I personally believe that you have constantly answered why Corbyn will stay on the fence for Brexit since he knows in order to win enough seats he need to hold all his voters and they are more likely to either not vote or if they voted leave to vote Tory as to provide surety of leaving the EU. He has been clear in how he would vote personally, something that seems to be ignored and something that May could not bring herself to answer as an example of what he thinks personally and yet I feel what his detractors want him to do is damage the party he represents. If I was leader of the Labour party he is following the approach I would take since being in the EU is less important that sorting out the problems that the UK faces. For if you accept that the EU is not the cause of our problems then it has to be a move away from the current policies which have been under our control.

My feeling is that for the Labour leadership the EU is an irrelevance, in that it divides the country in a manner that is unhelpful to their agenda and therefore it is better that the Tories deal with it.

I understand Tory exasperations in that they would want to share the blame especially if you take the view that only a minority of Tory MP on both side genuinely wanted a referendum and more to the point that the referendum itself was only forced on Cameron for fear of losing his job and being a tactical plan because he did not think he would get a majority in GE2015

My view of the GE2017 was that there was two winners in the election. Jeremy and Ruth.

Corbyn because he basically dodged the bullet of having to deal with the brexit and the fact that having to deliver it for his own voters whom have diametrically opposite views on the EU but more importantly are essentially representing two different types of voter with little really in common.

Ruth because the 12 seats that the Tories won in Scotland give her a platform as a more liberal tory in terms of leadership opportunity

The advantage May has is of course she is in power and she can command the spotlight no matter what happens and what she does. it means that any ‘success’ is seen as hers but it also means any failure is seen as hers too. Corbyn cannot create successes only failures and in truth the only time when he would be considered interesting is when his party is in turmoil or when there is an election and he could be considered a potential PM

Corbyn is not of interest of the BBC’s LK for example because not only is he safe in his position but he is boring, there is no new policies, not much that the Anyone But Corbyn crowd can do and even of the labour party were seen as torn asunder with regards brexit they are as far away from being able to influence it as Nigel Farage is. The real story is May and what the government is doing. Tactically the problem that May has is that abandoning austerity reinforces Corbyn’s policy thrust and that is an association Tories do not want the electorate to have.

Now if you ask me as a remainer as to whether I think that what Corbyn is doing is acceptable? I agree for a principled position I would say no, but I would argue that Brexit is not the be all and end all of our politics since for example the problems that we have in the NHS as nothing to do with the EU and indeed if it were not for the EU may even be considerably worse.

Now I know people whom voted tory despite the striver versus scrounger narrative so I think it is because people tend to vote for what they consider the least worst option that can get into power.


and

Quote:
Let me try to enunciate labour policy on Brexit to those who have problem understanding nuance and emphasis.

The Referendum result will be honoured.

This means leaving THE CU and SM as they are the EUs but could mean joining a New (Bespoke) CU/SM attached to the EUs SM and CU.

There should be an interim period of at least 2 years (3 perhaps) where we either stay as full members of the current CU/SM or abide by all the rules agreed up to March 29th 2019 through some other mechanism.

(No position on new rules in that period yet but neither has HMG)

The hope of many MPs is that the EU may give some ground on free movement (Labour MPs believe Lab leave voters care little about the ECJ) so that the party may be able to move to a position of advocating staying in THE SM/CU.

They could do this with intellectual cover (whether tenuous or not would be for discussion I guess) as the CU/SM would have moved from the one in place at the time of the Referendum sufficiently to no longer be the CU/SM we voted to leave.

Being too clear about this now is unnecessary and invited questions about how much amendment required to free movement etc.

The Ian Murray and Umunna amendments required an answer to a binary question before the details of the basis on which people would make that binary choice are known and was at best naïve and at worst disloyal.

Ignore the other shadow cabinet members who make statements based on hypothetical scenarios only Corbyn and Starmer have authority in the area. Most sensible remain labour Party members and MPs trust Starmer and if he is OK with what Corbyn is saying and emphasising they can accept it also.

Finally, I am not denying that differing views exist within the front bench let alone the PLP but the unity on th e anti–austerity platform means more, at least for now.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 6:19 pm 
Offline
Speaker of the House

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 10:34 am
Posts: 2920
Has thanked: 817 times
Been thanked: 5188 times
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
howsillyofme1 wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
I'm still not sure there won't be a conversion to Freedom of Movement, but I'm not encouraged. I think Corbyn had to find some way out of the SNP-led talks because the Tories would make hay with it, but it wasn't really a good enough excuse. And to repeat, it's not all on Corbyn's head, there are loads of Flints about who are worse.

Hugo makes a good point there. What Labour have done is basically what Leave did- have different things people can focus on, and they might vote for you.

If I were somewhere with local borough elections, I'd be very tempted to vote for somebody else, as a gentle reminder. Wouldn't hurt them to lose some London seats to the Greens or Lib Dems.

The stuff being talked about rail by Labour isn't good either. Why do I mention that? Because I think the emphasis on that could be part of a "Lexit" strategy, with the Fourth Rail Package coming up.


You can use your vote how you want but really fail to see how giving ammunition to the right wing of Labour (not all remainers either) to launch more attacks on Labour leadership will help

Labour may not fulfill every remain voters need a but they are the only alternative to the Tories and people making 'a point' is only going to ensure a Tory Brexit

I don't think people who voted remain can be seen to be a uniform group either....I am not in agreement with a number on here for example

I will not accept SM/CU with no say on the rules.....that would be a very poor proposition politically


I think Caroline Flint and all (much worse than Corbyn) would find it hard to argue a swing to Green or Lib Dem was because Brexit wasn't hard enough.



I don't think they really care about whether their response is logical or not...they do not want a Labour Party like we have no....and not all are Lexiteers


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 6:23 pm 
Offline
Foreign Secretary

Joined: Mon 23 Feb, 2015 8:23 am
Posts: 1521
Has thanked: 11328 times
Been thanked: 3329 times
SpinningHugo wrote:
As for the ridiculous six tests, number 2 is

Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union?

As that is only possible by remaining within the Single Market and Customs Union you might think that was Labour's policy.

But it isn't.

it is for suckers and the faithful only (the two categories are not exclusive).

Starmer would look pretty stupid if one of his tests was holding Government to delivering less benefits than we have currently. ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 6:27 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 5033
Has thanked: 1582 times
Been thanked: 8324 times
@HSOM1

Thanks for the long posts. Interesting perspectives.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 6:28 pm 
Offline
First Secretary of State

Joined: Mon 16 Feb, 2015 1:22 pm
Posts: 3999
Has thanked: 150 times
Been thanked: 2262 times
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
I'm still not sure there won't be a conversion to Freedom of Movement, but I'm not encouraged. I think Corbyn had to find some way out of the SNP-led talks because the Tories would make hay with it, but it wasn't really a good enough excuse. And to repeat, it's not all on Corbyn's head, there are loads of Flints about who are worse.

Hugo makes a good point there. What Labour have done is basically what Leave did- have different things people can focus on, and they might vote for you.

If I were somewhere with local borough elections, I'd be very tempted to vote for somebody else, as a gentle reminder. Wouldn't hurt them to lose some London seats to the Greens or Lib Dems.

The stuff being talked about rail by Labour isn't good either. Why do I mention that? Because I think the emphasis on that could be part of a "Lexit" strategy, with the Fourth Rail Package coming up.


Corbyn was never going to do that. One of the main complaints about the Miliband era (expressed repeatedly here) was about Labour appearing on the same platform as the other Unionist parties. So, during the EU referendum Labour ran a completely separate campaign, with Corbyn unwilling to appear on the same platform as Cameron saying "Brexit is dumb, don't vote for it."

I don't myself think it is a coincidence that the Scottish referendum vote was won, whilst the Brexit vote was lost. The former damaged Labour, the latter has greatly benefitted it.

It depends whether you care about party or substance. Those who care about party, will think Corbyn was (and is) right to refuse all co-operation with the enemy. Those who care about substance will disagree.


The Indyref was much easier to win than Brexit. You had Salmond not even telling people how he'd deal with something as fundamental as the currency.

I don't know if Cameron wanted to appear with Corbyn, and give him equal status, seeing that he'd made that mistake with Clegg in 2010 at the debates.

I think maybe a trick missed was not to internationalize the Labour platform. Get somebody from Sweden over and say, "You want amazing services like us? You can have them in the EU too".



Corbyn refused

https://labourlist.org/2016/03/corbyn-r ... on-the-eu/

and it wasn't just Cameron he wouldn't be seen alongside

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/corb ... -wrvq7c75c

Strange really, considering who Corbyn has been quite happy to share platforms with over the years.


Last edited by SpinningHugo on Tue 09 Jan, 2018 6:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 6:32 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 5033
Has thanked: 1582 times
Been thanked: 8324 times
Cameron was hopeless and had burned all his bridges for his own personal gain.

Come the day, possible allies across the continent, including Labour, were simply unable to stand with him, because, in simple terms, he had shafted them all in the past.

It really, really was Cameron's fault from start to finish.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 6:34 pm 
Offline
Speaker of the House

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 10:34 am
Posts: 2920
Has thanked: 817 times
Been thanked: 5188 times
Quote:
Corbyn refused

https://labourlist.org/2016/03/corbyn-r ... on-the-eu/

and it wasn't just Cameron he wouldn't be seen alongside

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/corb ... -wrvq7c75c

Strange really, considering who Corbyn has been quite happy to share platforms with over the years.



so your contention is that if Corbyn had share platforms with these people it would have convinced more people to vote Remain than did?

Can I just ask if you have any sliver of evidence....un petit peu?

I would contend the absolute opposite to be honest....no more evidence that that but I would be happy to back mine over yours.....looking at how popular Corbyn is with Blair supporters and vice versa


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 09 Jan, 2018 6:36 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 5033
Has thanked: 1582 times
Been thanked: 8324 times
I've posted this before, but way back in 2009 Cameron sowed the seeds of this.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ctions-epp
Quote:
Caroline Jackson, Tory MEP for the south-west of England, spoke out as the Tories held their final meetings in Strasbourg as part of the EPP-ED grouping before next month's elections.

All Tory candidates have signed a form agreeing to join a new centre-right grouping after the election, allowing the Conservatives to leave the fiercely pro-European EPP-ED grouping. The move follows Cameron's commitment to the rightwing Cornerstone group of Tory MPs in the 2005 leadership election to leave the EPP, which is dominated by federalist parties from Germany and France. [...]

But she was scathing about Cameron. She said: "David Cameron's decision on the EPP is pathetic and will sow the seeds of endless trouble. It will leave David Cameron and William Hague very isolated because it will leave bad blood with Christian Democrat parties throughout Europe. It is a stupid, stupid policy."

Well Caroline Jackson was quite right!

PTO


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 155 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AngryAsWell, Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], frog222, Google [Bot], refitman, tinyclanger2 and 23 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group