FlyTheNest

Morning all.

Morning.

Labour are going to regret using the word "caveat", I suspect, especially when it's not even the right word for a supporting clarification.

They could do with someone with legal training to defend their stance on this complicated subject, not a random member of Momentum - as was the case on Victoria Derbyshire this morning. What was that about?

Still, now summer break is over the media will have to talk about Brexit again and that should put the spotlight back where it belongs, on the government.

Good-morning, everyone

Willow904 wrote:Morning.
Labour are going to regret using the word "caveat", I suspect, especially when it's not even the right word for a supporting clarification.
They could do with someone with legal training to defend their stance on this complicated subject, not a random member of Momentum - as was the case on Victoria Derbyshire this morning. What was that about?
Still, now summer break is over the media will have to talk about Brexit again and that should put the spotlight back where it belongs, on the government.

" ... that should put the spotlight back where it belongs, on the government."
If only ! On Toady Kinnock Jr was calling for 'remorse' from Corbyn , whatever that is ... as if anything apart from his elimination will satisfy the Blairites , LFI, BoD and Netanyahu.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new- ... ss-england" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



New free schools to open across England


https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... plications" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/asia ... n-cornwall" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Asian hornet identified in Cornwall
An Asian hornet has been found in Cornwall and surveillance activity is underway.

Guidance

Primary school accountability

(Updated)

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


National curriculum assessments: key stage 2, 2018 (provisional)

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... llocations" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Guidance

Basic need allocations
Basic need capital funding allocated to each local authority to create new places from 2011 to 2021.

(Updated)

Open consultation

Implementation of Technical Qualifications


https://www.gov.uk/government/consultat ... ifications" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

HindleA wrote:https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new- ... ss-england

New free schools to open across England

I got my draft notice in the post giving me classes I have to teach
I've serious concerns:
- I've no teaching qualifications at this time
- it's unpaid
- the tent provided isn't sufficient for a classroom full of children and their drafted teacher
- the portable toilets haven't arrived

HindleA wrote:https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new- ... ss-england



New free schools to open across England


https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... plications" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There's no such thing as a free school.

HindleA wrote:https://www.gov.uk/government/news/asia ... n-cornwall

Asian hornet identified in Cornwall
An Asian hornet has been found in Cornwall and surveillance activity is underway.

I guess as long as there's only one we should be OK for now?

Interesting blog and very well written.
https://duncanroy.com/2018/07/27/rosie-duffield-mp/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... ing-policy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Government faces court action over 'illegal' planning policy

HindleA wrote:https://www.gov.uk/government/news/asia ... n-cornwall

Asian hornet identified in Cornwall
An Asian hornet has been found in Cornwall and surveillance activity is underway.

I think I'd be better hornet hunting in Cornwall than teaching without qualifications
I wonder if government will permit a transfer

"free"

frog222 wrote:

Willow904 wrote:Morning.
Labour are going to regret using the word "caveat", I suspect, especially when it's not even the right word for a supporting clarification.
They could do with someone with legal training to defend their stance on this complicated subject, not a random member of Momentum - as was the case on Victoria Derbyshire this morning. What was that about?
Still, now summer break is over the media will have to talk about Brexit again and that should put the spotlight back where it belongs, on the government.

" ... that should put the spotlight back where it belongs, on the government."
If only ! On Toady Kinnock Jr was calling for 'remorse' from Corbyn , whatever that is ... as if anything apart from his elimination will satisfy the Blairites , LFI, BoD and Netanyahu.

Ah yes Kinnock Jnr, all the old man's vices without any of his compensating virtues.

An entertaining online debate going on right now about whether his "book" that the Graun shamelessly puffed yesterday actually exists in any meaningful sense

Dear me

Tuesday's #PoliticsLive guests will include @AndrewMarr9 @jessphillips Tim Martin and @trussliz joining @Jo_Coburn

I shan't be turning that on!

gilsey wrote:Interesting blog and very well written.
https://duncanroy.com/2018/07/27/rosie-duffield-mp/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Didn't know that Rosie Duffield was "one of them".

Updated Labour rulebook

http://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads ... E-BOOK.pdf

gilsey wrote:Interesting blog and very well written.
https://duncanroy.com/2018/07/27/rosie-duffield-mp/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"I asked her if she thought Jeremy Corbyn was anti semitic and a racist.

Rosie wanted me to know her fiancé is black, that she couldn’t possibly understand what it is like to be black, gay or jewish. She had to accept as the truth from her jewish friends if they were convinced Jeremy was anti-Semitic… she had no option but to believe them. "
Definitely very thick, OR just seriously under-educated for some reason(s).Could she be saved ?
The Holocaust particularly being used to justify the taboo/self-censorship on having an independent opinion?

AnatolyKasparov wrote: Ah yes Kinnock Jnr, all the old man's vices without any of his compensating virtues.

History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce.

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Dear me

Tuesday's #PoliticsLive guests will include @AndrewMarr9 @jessphillips Tim Martin and @trussliz joining @Jo_Coburn

I shan't be turning that on!

I turned it on in all innocence to see the 'new look' and turned it off again sharpish.

gilsey wrote:

AnatolyKasparov wrote: Ah yes Kinnock Jnr, all the old man's vices without any of his compensating virtues.

History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce.

Time for your occasional reminder that he (SK) originally won selection to his present seat before the 2015 GE by the princely margin of just 1 (ONE) vote.

Deselection express choo-choo?

Today’s Live thread does apply some correctives to the notion that the IHRA code is sacred, notably strong reservations by the Author of it !

"The man who drafted this statement that defines antisemitism, the American lawyer who is Jewish himself, Kenneth Stern, says he now regrets that the wording of some of the examples he’s included has restricted freedom of speech when you are discussing the state of Israel. So, if they do include all of those poorly-worded examples, we have got to make absolutely sure that people aren’t then disciplined for simply stating historical facts, or having an honest and open debate."

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/bl ... 3ab23d145d" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Examples of it being used for censorship --

https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org.uk ... s-its-use/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

frog222 wrote:Today’s Live thread does apply some correctives to the notion that the IHRA code is sacred, notably strong reservations by the Author of it !

"The man who drafted this statement that defines antisemitism, the American lawyer who is Jewish himself, Kenneth Stern, says he now regrets that the wording of some of the examples he’s included has restricted freedom of speech when you are discussing the state of Israel. So, if they do include all of those poorly-worded examples, we have got to make absolutely sure that people aren’t then disciplined for simply stating historical facts, or having an honest and open debate."

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/bl ... 3ab23d145d" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Examples of it being used for censorship --

https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org.uk ... s-its-use/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It sounds like the final compromise proposal is to take the IHRA thing in full, but to explicitly add that it does not prevent legit criticism of Israel.

Some folk will perhaps rightly say this isn't actually as good as the original Labour proposal, because the IHRA wording is not sufficiently watertight in parts to withstand scrutiny in court.

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:

frog222 wrote:Today’s Live thread does apply some correctives to the notion that the IHRA code is sacred, notably strong reservations by the Author of it !
"The man who drafted this statement that defines antisemitism, the American lawyer who is Jewish himself, Kenneth Stern, says he now regrets that the wording of some of the examples he’s included has restricted freedom of speech when you are discussing the state of Israel. So, if they do include all of those poorly-worded examples, we have got to make absolutely sure that people aren’t then disciplined for simply stating historical facts, or having an honest and open debate."
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/bl ... 3ab23d145d" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Examples of it being used for censorship --
https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org.uk ... s-its-use/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It sounds like the final compromise proposal is to take the IHRA thing in full, but to explicitly add that it does not prevent legit criticism of Israel.
Some folk will perhaps rightly say this isn't actually as good as the original Labour proposal, because the IHRA wording is not sufficiently watertight in parts to withstand scrutiny in court.

And who defines what is legit , a minefield !
(I don't know if the original LP one could stand up in court either ... not being in Law .)
"" Of course the groups which were behind this “McCarthy-like” repression of free speech condemned by Stern are the very same ones which are now engaged in the current vendetta against Corbyn. For example in the case of the Bristol University lecturer who was subjected to an inquiry into false accusations of antisemitism, it was the misnamed Campaign Against Antisemitism, in reality an aggressively pro-Israel lobby group, which had called for her to be sacked unless she recanted.

Tellingly Stern clearly recognises the intrinsic logical absurdity and threat to free speech which arises where consistent attempts are made to ban political speech regarding states or governments:""
(JVL above link .)
Corbyn has been consistently wrong-footed on this, apparently believing that 'apologies' work with people who were and still are after his elimination. And anyway he didn't have anything to apologise for . Late for beach but off at any rate !

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:

frog222 wrote:Today’s Live thread does apply some correctives to the notion that the IHRA code is sacred, notably strong reservations by the Author of it !

"The man who drafted this statement that defines antisemitism, the American lawyer who is Jewish himself, Kenneth Stern, says he now regrets that the wording of some of the examples he’s included has restricted freedom of speech when you are discussing the state of Israel. So, if they do include all of those poorly-worded examples, we have got to make absolutely sure that people aren’t then disciplined for simply stating historical facts, or having an honest and open debate."

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/bl ... 3ab23d145d" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Examples of it being used for censorship --

https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org.uk ... s-its-use/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It sounds like the final compromise proposal is to take the IHRA thing in full, but to explicitly add that it does not prevent legit criticism of Israel.

Some folk will perhaps rightly say this isn't actually as good as the original Labour proposal, because the IHRA wording is not sufficiently watertight in parts to withstand scrutiny in court.

This is obviously in hindsight, so not criticism, just an observation - but if the NEC had taken the time to consult outside the party among the wider Jewish community before officially adopting their revised examples (rather than offering to do so only after) they may have been in a stronger position from which to stick to their guns. Also, not adopting the IHRA at all, given the concerns the NEC appeared to have with it, was also an option.
Given where we are, however, the only way to move on seems to be to "adopt in full" (easy, really, as they already have ) and just get on with it and worry about the possibility of it being abused to repress free speech only when or if that actually happens. As long as those who came up with the definition insist it isn't antisemitic to criticise Israel, it should be possible to prevent it being used as cover to attack those who exercise that freedom of speech within Labour.

Yes, I think most objective observes agree that not consulting Jewish groups before was Corbyn's/the NEC's biggest error.

Willow904 wrote:

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:

frog222 wrote:Today’s Live thread does apply some correctives to the notion that the IHRA code is sacred, notably strong reservations by the Author of it !

"The man who drafted this statement that defines antisemitism, the American lawyer who is Jewish himself, Kenneth Stern, says he now regrets that the wording of some of the examples he’s included has restricted freedom of speech when you are discussing the state of Israel. So, if they do include all of those poorly-worded examples, we have got to make absolutely sure that people aren’t then disciplined for simply stating historical facts, or having an honest and open debate."

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/bl ... 3ab23d145d" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Examples of it being used for censorship --

https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org.uk ... s-its-use/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It sounds like the final compromise proposal is to take the IHRA thing in full, but to explicitly add that it does not prevent legit criticism of Israel.

Some folk will perhaps rightly say this isn't actually as good as the original Labour proposal, because the IHRA wording is not sufficiently watertight in parts to withstand scrutiny in court.

This is obviously in hindsight, so not criticism, just an observation - but if the NEC had taken the time to consult outside the party among the wider Jewish community before officially adopting their revised examples (rather than offering to do so only after) they may have been in a stronger position from which to stick to their guns. Also, not adopting the IHRA at all, given the concerns the NEC appeared to have with it, was also an option.
Given where we are, however, the only way to move on seems to be to "adopt in full" (easy, really, as they already have ) and just get on with it and worry about the possibility of it being abused to repress free speech only when or if that actually happens. As long as those who came up with the definition insist it isn't antisemitic to criticise Israel, it should be possible to prevent it being used as cover to attack those who exercise that freedom of speech within Labour.

Yes completely agree.

As it happens, the Israeli influence that has emerged has been quite revealing and has shocked even me. So maybe not all bad in terms of openness.

PFY ( &Willow) -- "" Yes completely agree.
As it happens, the Israeli influence that has emerged has been quite revealing and has shocked even me. So maybe not all bad in terms of openness.""
You don't have a 'Ministry for Strategic Affairs' for nothing
https://www.jonathan-cook.net/2018-05-0 ... my-corbyn/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
This site is not as extreme as it may appear --
https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/as ... assy-front" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
McCarthyism sums up very well the orchestrated Corbynophobia !

( Apologies to all those with the name McCarthy )

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

Five difficulties wheelchair users face when flying by plane


In general bat shit stupidity to deny yourself incalcuable amounts of revenue for the minimum of effort.

Laura Kuenssberg
‏
Verified account

@bbclaurak
15m
15 minutes ago


More
Labour HAS now agreed all the IHRA examples 'alongside a statement which ensures this will not in any way undermine freedom of expression on Israel or the rights of Palestinians' - full text to follow

Good.

Now can we please get back to doing something about Labour's Brexit policy?

https://www.parliament.uk/business/publ ... 4/HCWS932/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Social Housing Green Paper:Written statement

https://amp.theguardian.com/society/201 ... ssion=true" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(Conveniently ignoring the" looking after "infantilisation)

Labour Friends of Israel is not happy with the party’s new position. (Politics Live, Guardian)

[youtube]OC9sESRMRRM[/youtube]

I know it's said that we get the politicians we deserve bit surely we deserve better than this idiot?

Matthew Holehouse
‏@mattholehouse
Follow
Follow @mattholehouse

More
MP Emma Reynolds asks about EU warnings on UK-content in auto manufacturing for rules of origin purposes.

Brexit sec Dominic Raab says she should be "showing a bit of mettle and standing up for this country."

PorFavor wrote:

Labour Friends of Israel is not happy with the party’s new position. (Politics Live, Guardian)

[youtube]OC9sESRMRRM[/youtube]

Well they can jolly well shut up

Labour adopts IHRA antisemitism definition in full

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

What Corbyn wanted included but withdrew:

RogerOThornhill wrote:I know it's said that we get the politicians we deserve bit surely we deserve better than this idiot?

Matthew Holehouse
‏@mattholehouse
Follow
Follow @mattholehouse

More
MP Emma Reynolds asks about EU warnings on UK-content in auto manufacturing for rules of origin purposes.

Brexit sec Dominic Raab says she should be "showing a bit of mettle and standing up for this country."

He and his party are lost

JC's amendment may not have been formally adopted, but I expect the burden of proof will still be on those who claim such statements are AS - rather than the opposite.

(basically, I expect them to normally be allowed unless there is other "incriminating" evidence)

Old NEC of course not the new cleansed version ie.non binding.

nothing wrong with what Corbyn wanted included but I guess that doesn't matter

From the G live blog:

Board of Deputies gives qualified welcome to NEC move, saying it's 'right call' but 'long overdue'
The Board of Deputies of British Jews has given a qualified welcome to the Labour NEC decision. Its statement is much more measured that the one from Labour Friends of Israel (see 5.52pm), although the Board of Deputies is still asking for an apology from Jeremy Corbyn.

Approval is approval, however grudging. Labour finally out of the woods on this, it seems.

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

citizenJA wrote:nothing wrong with what Corbyn wanted included but I guess that doesn't matter

The inclusion of "...the circumstances around its foundation..." might have proved controversial, I suspect. The statement in support of free speech on the other hand is much harder to object to, though some of Corbyn and Labour's critics have been petty enough to try.

HindleA wrote:Old NEC of course not the new cleansed version ie.non binding.

Not out of the woods?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0bk5q99" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Profits before Pupils? The Academies Scandal

(Panorama next Monday)


Pto