Tuesday 16th June 2015

Post by **refitman** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 7:11 am

Morning all.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 8:55 am

Morning!

Cameron in "shock" u-turn and Indy in "shock" poor English "David Cameron expected not to hold EU referendum alongside other elections".

My main reason for bobbing by was apologise really for being an absentee "mod" and to note that Ernst is also largely absent for the time being.

Refitman as ever is staunchly maintaining things. But I wonder if the time has come for some other regulars to step up as "mods" and to give him a hand. We know Refitman is well able to deal with the technical aspects of the site, so it would be more about just helping with the integrity of the place and perhaps helping to build a new ethos and direction for FTN in the new political world.

Just a thought. And Refitman I hope you don't mind me chucking this out here in public, but there didn't seem to be any reason to restrict discussion.

Have a lovely day thinking about the bloody referendum all. Nice to see Dave wobbling all over the place as usual. Shame he never falls off

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 9:23 am

Morning all. Thank you PaulfromYorkshire for that post. Good to hear from you.

David Maddox ‏@DavidPBMaddox 8h8 hours ago
David Maddox retweeted Gerry Hassan
After the brickbats, this is an interesting read. Although I disagree over what the pro-UK parties need to do...

The SNP Ascendancy is changing Scotland and the SNP
http://www.gerryhassan.com/blog/the-snp ... d-the-snp/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It is a good read - non histrionic which helps. Be interested to know from Eric - if he knows - what the points made about SCVO and other key organisations are about. I haven't read anything re their role in other commentaries.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 9:26 am

: Reasons For Not Voting Labour.jpg (42.41 KiB) Viewed 17599 times

AndrewSparrow retweeted
Blair McDougall ‏@blairmcdougall 9h9 hours ago
Interesting reasons from non-tories at Gen Election for why, in the end, they didn't vote Labour.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 9:29 am

Chris Bryant MP retweeted
Classicbritishcomedy ‏@Classicbritcom 2h2 hours ago
James Bolam is 80 today, Happy Birthday James!!

Does that make anyone else feel really old?!

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 9:33 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Chris Bryant MP retweeted
Classicbritishcomedy ‏@Classicbritcom 2h2 hours ago
James Bolam is 80 today, Happy Birthday James!!
Does that make anyone else feel really old?!

Oh yes.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 9:34 am

WalesOnline ‏@WalesOnline 12h12 hours ago
Labour leadership frontrunner Andy Burnham sets out vision for Wales http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales ... am-9461479" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

Labour leadership frontrunner Andy Burnham has revealed he will appoint Carwyn Jones as co-chairman of a constitutional convention within the party if he becomes Leader of the Opposition in September.

He also intends to give the First Minister and Welsh Labour leader an automatic seat on the party’s ruling national executive committee.

Mr Burnham was in Cardiff to meet with supporters including Shadow Welsh Secretary Owen Smith, a member of his campaign team.

He said: “I want to get the relationship right between the UK and Wales. If we’re honest, we haven’t ever got that relationship right since devolution.

“It’s looked like we’ve taken Welsh votes for granted at times and it’s also looked a bit grudging in terms of devolution.

“I’m determined to get that relationship right.

“I want a more autonomous Wales within a stronger UK.

“Carwyn has been very much at the forefront of this debate with the constitutional convention that he called for...

That sounds a bit more substantial than the 'listening to Carwyn Jones' that Kendall offered after her visit to Cardiff. I will wait to see how all the candidates address Wales in the hustings - which I have actually registered for after a bit of badgering from Mr Riots who had already signed himself up.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 9:43 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:Morning all. Thank you PaulfromYorkshire for that post. Good to hear from you.

David Maddox ‏@DavidPBMaddox 8h8 hours ago
David Maddox retweeted Gerry Hassan
After the brickbats, this is an interesting read. Although I disagree over what the pro-UK parties need to do...

The SNP Ascendancy is changing Scotland and the SNP
http://www.gerryhassan.com/blog/the-snp ... d-the-snp/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
It is a good read - non histrionic which helps. Be interested to know from Eric - if he knows - what the points made about SCVO and other key organisations are about. I haven't read anything re their role in other commentaries.

Labour people tell me with glee that the SNP should be given what they want in terms of devolution in the UK. They then imagine they can watch the Nationalists twist and turn in their discomfort as they are impaled on the logic of their own argument: Full Fiscal Autonomy leading to huge cuts, and magically, the beginning of the end of SNP dominance. It isn’t going to happen like that, and this is desperate stuff.

I wonder who "Labour people" are? If he means Labour voters, I've not doubt this is true in some cases, but Labour leadership seems to be taking the rather more mature line of opposing FFA on the grounds it wouldn't be in the best interests of the Scottish people. Not exactly desperate stuff, just principled and sensible.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 9:51 am

Willow904 wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:Morning all. Thank you PaulfromYorkshire for that post. Good to hear from you.

David Maddox ‏@DavidPBMaddox 8h8 hours ago
David Maddox retweeted Gerry Hassan
After the brickbats, this is an interesting read. Although I disagree over what the pro-UK parties need to do...

The SNP Ascendancy is changing Scotland and the SNP
http://www.gerryhassan.com/blog/the-snp ... d-the-snp/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
It is a good read - non histrionic which helps. Be interested to know from Eric - if he knows - what the points made about SCVO and other key organisations are about. I haven't read anything re their role in other commentaries.

Labour people tell me with glee that the SNP should be given what they want in terms of devolution in the UK. They then imagine they can watch the Nationalists twist and turn in their discomfort as they are impaled on the logic of their own argument: Full Fiscal Autonomy leading to huge cuts, and magically, the beginning of the end of SNP dominance. It isn’t going to happen like that, and this is desperate stuff.
I wonder who "Labour people" are? If he means Labour voters, I've not doubt this is true in some cases, but Labour leadership seems to be taking the rather more mature line of opposing FFA on the grounds it wouldn't be in the best interests of the Scottish people. Not exactly desperate stuff, just principled and sensible.

I often wonder about references like that myself Willow. The official Labour line does indeed seem to be taking a principled line re what they consider in Scotland's best interest - trying not to harm. But there must be some people who say these things ... even if it's just a glancing throwaway ... viz the Taliban Kendall remarks. They are bound to get seized on and / or remembered - and then we get the picking up and using in the argy bargy between SNP, Labour and whoever else engages. This general ongoing picking and prodding - needling I suppose - is probably partly what turned people right off the idea of any combination of Labour and SNP at the election. It's not attractive.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 9:53 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Reasons For Not Voting Labour.jpg

AndrewSparrow retweeted
Blair McDougall ‏@blairmcdougall 9h9 hours ago
Interesting reasons from non-tories at Gen Election for why, in the end, they didn't vote Labour.

Fascinating. All that talk of "aspiration" post election from Labour leadership hopefuls and it was the one thing people were least worried about. As I suspected people voted against the SNP not against Labour, and basically reveals that it was the money spent on huge amounts of propaganda, backed up by a compliant press and BBC that swung it. It also suggests the two Eds were right to worry about any appearance of not being fiscally responsible, however unfair that might seem in the light of unfunded spending commitments and unspecified cuts promises from the Tories.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 9:53 am

Have to go to work now. And then back to try to figure out what - if anything - which I doubt - I can do about the blight which struck my greenhouse tomatoes yesterday. Very sad. Have spent two hours early this morning taking them all out and placing in quaratine until I have time to take decisive action later on.

And we've got bloody ants in there - greenhouse - again.

Never rains but it pours. See you later.

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 9:54 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Chris Bryant MP retweeted
Classicbritishcomedy ‏@Classicbritcom 2h2 hours ago
James Bolam is 80 today, Happy Birthday James!!
Does that make anyone else feel really old?!

He went to the same school as I did.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 11:00 am

Good-morning, everyone.

I'm sorry to read your greenhouse problems, RR2.
I blame Tories.
pestilent contagion stalking the land

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 11:23 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:Morning all. Thank you PaulfromYorkshire for that post. Good to hear from you.

David Maddox ‏@DavidPBMaddox 8h8 hours ago
David Maddox retweeted Gerry Hassan
After the brickbats, this is an interesting read. Although I disagree over what the pro-UK parties need to do...

The SNP Ascendancy is changing Scotland and the SNP
http://www.gerryhassan.com/blog/the-snp ... d-the-snp/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
It is a good read - non histrionic which helps. Be interested to know from Eric - if he knows - what the points made about SCVO and other key organisations are about. I haven't read anything re their role in other commentaries.

Morning.
I think the problems with COSLA stem from the SNP policy of centralisation and their council tax freeze which has left LAs more dependent on cash from Holyrood. COSLA is the body that allocates the available government money between LAs. Aberdeen were unhappy with their allocation, so resigned, followed by (iirc) three other LAs, including Glasgow. (The relationship between Central gov/COSLA/Local gov was always a bit fragile)!
There were many reports in the press, prior to the referendum, of the SNP putting pressure on organisations dependent on Holyrood funding, to back independence, or at least keep quiet. Any organisation, such as the CBI, which raised their heads in favour of 'no' were attacked - not with rational arguments but with cries of 'scaremongering'. The attacks were from the SNP hierarchy, not just cybernats. (Alex Salmond was reported to have tried to pressure the Principal of St Andrews University into backing the SNP government).
The perception (rightly or wrongly) that the SNP support their own, at the expense of their critics, has, I think, led to organisations either supporting the SNP or keeping their heads below the parapet.

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 11:38 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Willow904 wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:Morning all. Thank you PaulfromYorkshire for that post. Good to hear from you.
It is a good read - non histrionic which helps. Be interested to know from Eric - if he knows - what the points made about SCVO and other key organisations are about. I haven't read anything re their role in other commentaries.

Labour people tell me with glee that the SNP should be given what they want in terms of devolution in the UK. They then imagine they can watch the Nationalists twist and turn in their discomfort as they are impaled on the logic of their own argument: Full Fiscal Autonomy leading to huge cuts, and magically, the beginning of the end of SNP dominance. It isn’t going to happen like that, and this is desperate stuff.
I wonder who "Labour people" are? If he means Labour voters, I've not doubt this is true in some cases, but Labour leadership seems to be taking the rather more mature line of opposing FFA on the grounds it wouldn't be in the best interests of the Scottish people. Not exactly desperate stuff, just principled and sensible.
I often wonder about references like that myself Willow. The official Labour line does indeed seem to be taking a principled line re what they consider in Scotland's best interest - trying not to harm. But there must be some people who say these things ... even if it's just a glancing throwaway ... viz the Taliban Kendall remarks. They are bound to get seized on and / or remembered - and then we get the picking up and using in the argy bargy between SNP, Labour and whoever else engages. This general ongoing picking and prodding - needling I suppose - is probably partly what turned people right off the idea of any combination of Labour and SNP at the election. It's not attractive.

I guess that in this context 'Labour' means any anti-SNP party.
I think FFA would, indeed, be the beginning of the end for the SNP - but at a huge cost to Scotland in terms of services and taxation. The only party I could envisage actually encouraging FFA is the Tory party, in their dogmatic pursuit of austerity, and with their lack of economic acumen. FFA may well call the SNP bluff, but while the brunt of the resulting chaos would fall on Scotland, there would be significant repercussions in the rest of the UK.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 11:42 am

"Today we see further evidence of an economic plan that is working, with a powerful mix of low prices and rising wages, which are continuing to grow well above inflation. This is good news for working people and family budgets, and shows the economic recovery is going from strength to strength. Of course the job is not done and we will continue to remain vigilant to all risks, particularly when the global economic situation is so uncertain."

- Chancellor George, on the inflation figures out today from the ONS (quote from Sparrow's daily politics blog)

Caricature messages from a plastic person.
He'd be entertaining if it weren't for the power he's vested with.
His policies are dangerous.

giselle97 · Post by **giselle97** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 12:11 pm

Morning! I have some links to post, but also some reading here to catch up on, so I hope I'm not barging in and re-posting stuff! This is an excellent source:

: 2015-06-16_115244.jpg (125.25 KiB) Viewed 17473 times

http://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/case/_new/rese ... limate.asp
and this is a really good read:
Labour’s Social Policy Record: Policy, Spending and Outcomes 1997-2010
http://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/dps/case/spcc/rr01.pdf

giselle97 · Post by **giselle97** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 12:16 pm

: 2015-06-16_091522.jpg (131.64 KiB) Viewed 17473 times

https://twitter.com/JJ_159/status/610484039615672320

giselle97 · Post by **giselle97** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 12:24 pm

When I saw this photo by Steve Parsons PA, two things came in to my mind. The polite one was "Photo Caption". No-one's actually looking at what Cameron's pointing to and the look on the Archbishop's face is worth a million words!

: 2015-06-16_112414.jpg (87.04 KiB) Viewed 17470 times

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/blog ... nniversary

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 12:32 pm

giselle97 wrote:When I saw this photo by Steve Parsons PA, two things came in to my mind. The polite one was "Photo Caption". No-one's actually looking at what Cameron's pointing to and the look on the Archbishop's face is worth a million words!
2015-06-16_112414.jpg
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/blog ... nniversary

Flying fish?

Tonibel · Post by **Tonibel** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 1:10 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:Have to go to work now. And then back to try to figure out what - if anything - which I doubt - I can do about the blight which struck my greenhouse tomatoes yesterday. Very sad. Have spent two hours early this morning taking them all out and placing in quaratine until I have time to take decisive action later on.

And we've got bloody ants in there - greenhouse - again.

Never rains but it pours. See you later.

I thought I saw a trace of blight on one of our tomatoes this morning but thought "Nah! It's much too early"

giselle97 · Post by **giselle97** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 1:48 pm

Hi Admin/Refitman!

On the old forum when you clicked on a member name in the members list I'm sure you could gain access to a list of posts by that member by doing a search for their posts.

I've just clicked on my member name and it comes up with this (and it's the same for other members).

Parse error: syntax error, unexpected '}' in /home/refitman/public_html/cache/tpl_subsilver2_memberlist_view.html.php on line 108

Is there any way on this new forum that by clicking on a member name you can find their posts?

No urgency - just curious!

Many thanks.

giselle97 · Post by **giselle97** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 2:15 pm

Hi Admin/Refitman

Re my last post, I found the one I was looking for. It was from @adam

adam

PostPosted: Mon 11 May, 2015 10:37 pm

Offline
Lord Chancellor

Joined: Wed 27 Aug, 2014 8:15 pm
Posts: 323
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time

One final thought and then I really am gone.

Having allowed labour to crucify themselves in scotland fighting against independence, I am sure that Cameron's and Crosby's next plan is to allow them to do the same across those 'purple in second place' areas on the map in the coming EU referendum.

On current form I am quite sure that the referendum will be lost and that we'll be leaving, (go on, tell me what the polls say, I fucking dare you) and that this will be followed by a second but this time successful indieref in Scotland. The tories will divide in two on europe but will come back together afterwards. Cameron's hope is that the referendum will be the bedrock for UKIPs capture of 'old' working class labour.

So I would very very strongly argue that labour should have nothing to do with Cameron's albatross. Don't get involved, don't campaign, don't take part. It's his mess. If Labour fight UKIP for Cameron on the referendum then 2020 in the urban north and midlands will be Scotland.

I 100% agree with Adam and wonder how it's possible to get this over to the Labour Party (or even NuFingLabour as it appears to be morphing in to).

giselle97 · Post by **giselle97** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 2:45 pm

This is a link to the Indy - warning, because that web page always freezes my laptop!

George Osborne has asked Iain Duncan Smith to find even deeper cuts to benefits
Jon Stone Tuesday 16 June 2015

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 22799.html

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 3:03 pm

Tonibel wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:Have to go to work now. And then back to try to figure out what - if anything - which I doubt - I can do about the blight which struck my greenhouse tomatoes yesterday. Very sad. Have spent two hours early this morning taking them all out and placing in quaratine until I have time to take decisive action later on.

And we've got bloody ants in there - greenhouse - again.

Never rains but it pours. See you later.
I thought I saw a trace of blight on one of our tomatoes this morning but thought "Nah! It's much too early"

It's not too early - sadly. There is actually something called 'early blight'. Just what we all wanted - this summer of all summers - eh. It's because it's been so damn humid for the last 10 days or so ...

I am now armed with some Bordeaux Mixture - but I'm not hopeful about the Burpees Delicious.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 3:14 pm

giselle97 wrote:
2015-06-16_091522.jpg
https://twitter.com/JJ_159/status/610484039615672320

What a depressing graph that is.

Look at the 2015 intake. See how many more than from the other groups nominate Corbyn, and how many fewer nominate Kendall. The party is drifting left, further and further away from winning every year.

I think Burnham, a boring man with no ideas, will win as the candidate of the soft left. Kendall, the only one who might win will do badly. Corbyn, with the support of Owen Jones, and rightwing £3 sign ons will do surprisingly well.

How depressing.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 3:14 pm

giselle97 wrote:This is a link to the Indy - warning, because that web page always freezes my laptop!

George Osborne has asked Iain Duncan Smith to find even deeper cuts to benefits
Jon Stone Tuesday 16 June 2015

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 22799.html

From that article:

Before the election the Liberal Democrats leaked documents which appeared to suggest the Conservatives were considering cuts to tax credits and child benefit before the election.

Downing Street dismissed the documents at the time as “scaremongering”; George Osborne and Iain Duncan Smith pledged to make £12bn welfare cuts before the election but would not expand on which cuts they would make.

Please someone explain to me how and why the Tories constantly get away with this denial and deceit ... seem to never be held to account ... whilst accusing other parties of being irresponsible ... and people vote for them nevertheless? I am at a loss ... they have proven to be the most evasive and dishonest politicians - reneging on so many things - yet people don't point to them as the dodgy ones. They actually claim the mantle of 'stability' and 'security' - and people buy that?

giselle97 · Post by **giselle97** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 3:17 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
giselle97 wrote:
2015-06-16_091522.jpg
https://twitter.com/JJ_159/status/610484039615672320
What a depressing graph that is.

Look at the 2015 intake. See how many more than from the other groups nominate Corbyn, and how many fewer nominate Kendall. The party is drifting left, further and further away from winning every year.

I think Burnham, a boring man with no ideas, will win as the candidate of the soft left. Kendall, the only one who might win will do badly. Corbyn, with the support of Owen Jones, and rightwing £3 sign ons will do surprisingly well.

How depressing.

No, for me, what's more depressing is you commenting on it.

giselle97 · Post by **giselle97** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 3:23 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
giselle97 wrote:This is a link to the Indy - warning, because that web page always freezes my laptop!

George Osborne has asked Iain Duncan Smith to find even deeper cuts to benefits
Jon Stone Tuesday 16 June 2015

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 22799.html

From that article:
Before the election the Liberal Democrats leaked documents which appeared to suggest the Conservatives were considering cuts to tax credits and child benefit before the election.

Downing Street dismissed the documents at the time as “scaremongering”; George Osborne and Iain Duncan Smith pledged to make £12bn welfare cuts before the election but would not expand on which cuts they would make.
Please someone explain to me how and why the Tories constantly get away with this denial and deceit ... seem to never be held to account ... whilst accusing other parties of being irresponsible ... and people vote for them nevertheless? I am at a loss ... they have proven to be the most evasive and dishonest politicians - reneging on so many things - yet people don't point to them as the dodgy ones. They actually claim the mantle of 'stability' and 'security' - and people buy that?

No way I can answer RR2. It's a complete mystery except for the fact that the Tories have huge stockpiles of backers and donors and corruption and bribery is a winner for them, I believe.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 3:27 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
giselle97 wrote:
2015-06-16_091522.jpg
https://twitter.com/JJ_159/status/610484039615672320
What a depressing graph that is.

Look at the 2015 intake. See how many more than from the other groups nominate Corbyn, and how many fewer nominate Kendall. The party is drifting left, further and further away from winning every year.

I think Burnham, a boring man with no ideas, will win as the candidate of the soft left. Kendall, the only one who might win will do badly. Corbyn, with the support of Owen Jones, and rightwing £3 sign ons will do surprisingly well.

How depressing.

No, what is depressing is diehard blinkered Blairites who think that droning on endlessly about "public sector reform" (something that genuinely interests about 0.001% of the population) is going to win back Scotland and stop our former core voters going UKIP or our "new" core Green.

Kendall has almost no new or interesting ideas about anything - this campaign has also shown her up as a desperately vacuous lightweight and unprepared for such an onerous job. If she somehow won, it would very likely be a total car crash that might put the very existence of the Labour party in question.

(the shallow, cynical adoring write ups she is getting from our deeply corrupt and profoundly Labour hating MSM really shouldn't fool anybody)

At least Cooper and Burnham (neither of whom am I wildly enthused about, tbh) are likely to be reasonably competent. That may be the best we can expect right now.

As for the 2015 intake - they are mostly locally rooted pragmatic types who also believe, however, that the Labour party should actually stand for something and indeed that this is vital for its long term future. They are also refreshingly untainted by the destructive Blair/Brown "wars" - good.

They show there is maybe hope for the party after all

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 3:29 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
giselle97 wrote:
2015-06-16_091522.jpg
https://twitter.com/JJ_159/status/610484039615672320
What a depressing graph that is.

Look at the 2015 intake. See how many more than from the other groups nominate Corbyn, and how many fewer nominate Kendall. The party is drifting left, further and further away from winning every year.

I think Burnham, a boring man with no ideas, will win as the candidate of the soft left. Kendall, the only one who might win will do badly. Corbyn, with the support of Owen Jones, and rightwing £3 sign ons will do surprisingly well.

How depressing.

Accept that you might find it depressing Hugo. But these are the 2015 intake - they've just been voted in so presumably their constituents thought they were OK ...

I can't predict how it's going to turn out. The spread of support amongst MPs favours Burnham but Cooper and Kendall have done OK too. It's a different election system - less union sway - and second preferences may prove pivotal. I'm just going to try and keep an open mind until I feel we've seen these candidates put through their paces a fair bit more.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 3:36 pm

James Landale ‏@BBCJLandale 20m20 minutes ago
Dominic Grieve tells MPs that @DLidington is about to say that the govt will "go away and review" its plans to suspend purdah for EU ref

Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 21m21 minutes ago
Things really are bad for No.10 when even Clarkeite Dominic Grieve attacks Govt's 'strange and cackhanded' handling of Purdah issue..

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 3:40 pm

Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 52m52 minutes ago
Looks like @stellacreasy has gone up to 26 MPs with 2 extra today, inc @CatherineWest1. 9 short ahead of dep lab leader deadline noon trmw

Is she going to get the 9 needed? What do you reckon Anatoly?

giselle97 · Post by **giselle97** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 3:40 pm

: 2015-06-16_153126.jpg (85.9 KiB) Viewed 17296 times

http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/ ... 1434443723

He also signalled that the SNP would support a backbench Tory amendment to deliver full fiscal autonomy, despite warnings it would leave Scotland billions of pounds a year worse off.

Pardon?

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 3:44 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 52m52 minutes ago
Looks like @stellacreasy has gone up to 26 MPs with 2 extra today, inc @CatherineWest1. 9 short ahead of dep lab leader deadline noon trmw
Is she going to get the 9 needed? What do you reckon Anatoly?

Corbyn was short by about the same on Sunday IIRC - I am reasonably hopeful (crosses fingers)

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 3:46 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
giselle97 wrote:
2015-06-16_091522.jpg
https://twitter.com/JJ_159/status/610484039615672320
What a depressing graph that is.

Look at the 2015 intake. See how many more than from the other groups nominate Corbyn, and how many fewer nominate Kendall. The party is drifting left, further and further away from winning every year.

I think Burnham, a boring man with no ideas, will win as the candidate of the soft left. Kendall, the only one who might win will do badly. Corbyn, with the support of Owen Jones, and rightwing £3 sign ons will do surprisingly well.

How depressing.
No, what is depressing is diehard blinkered Blairites who think that droning on endlessly about "public sector reform" (something that genuinely interests about 0.001% of the population) is going to win back Scotland and stop our former core voters going UKIP or our "new" core Green.

Kendall has almost no new or interesting ideas about anything - this campaign has also shown her up as a desperately vacuous lightweight and unprepared for such an onerous job. If she somehow won, it would very likely be a total car crash that might put the very existence of the Labour party in question.

(the shallow, cynical adoring write ups she is getting from our deeply corrupt and profoundly Labour hating MSM really shouldn't fool anybody)

At least Cooper and Burnham (neither of whom am I wildly enthused about, tbh) are likely to be reasonably competent. That may be the best we can expect right now.

As for the 2015 intake - they are mostly locally rooted pragmatic types who also believe, however, that the Labour party should actually stand for something and indeed that this is vital for its long term future. They are also refreshingly untainted by the destructive Blair/Brown "wars" - good.

They show there is maybe hope for the party after all

We are not going to win back Scotland. We cannot out Scottish the SNP.

Good sensible advice here

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

Looking at the numbers nominating Corbyn, "pragmatic types" is not how I would describe them.

Being blunt, Burnham is going to win, and we are fucked. Nice lad. Isn't going to win in Nuneaton.

giselle97 · Post by **giselle97** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 3:56 pm

deleted original as was very angry.

Will just say "we" and "us" is not "me".

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 4:01 pm

So you think the SNP will remain totally dominant in Scotland forever then?

And if you can't "out SNP the SNP" isn't it equally true you can't "out Tory the Tories"? If most people in Nuneaton, Swindon et al think Cameron and his government are wonderful (or at least pretty sensible and competent) they will vote for them. If they stop thinking that (due to events most likely, as is usually the case) then they just might be open to a genuine alternative, not merely a change of faces.

Despite what I have said about Kendall I would still probably (just about) prefer her to Corbyn, who I agree is totally unelectable. So do I think it was wrong to have him on the ballot, then? Absolutely not, he represents a strain of opinion in the party and wider labour movement that is totally legitimate and genuine - it is simple democracy to allow that proper expression in a leadership contest. And the hysterical reaction of *some* Blairites (especially the usual suspects in the media) to this shows their commitment to genuine pluralism and tolerance to be skin deep, always one of their weaker points tbh.

(btw, I support Jowell as our London mayoral candidate so don't think I just oppose Blair-friendly candidates for the hell of it; then again she is everything Liz K isn't)

giselle97 · Post by **giselle97** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 4:05 pm

Still catching up - with politics from last month! On this one, is it worth pursuing who actually paid for the "soiree" referred to? Surely it shouldn't be a chargeable cost to the taxpayer?

On the evening of May 27, the day of the first full-blooded Tory Queen’s Speech for 19 years, Owen Paterson held a reception for the new intake of Tory MPs in his Commons office.

About 50 of the 74 new faces on the Tory benches turned up. As they sipped their drinks and exchanged impressions of the pomp and ceremony of their first State Opening of Parliament, one subject came to dominate the discussion: Europe.

As conversation and refreshments flowed at Mr Paterson’s soiree, it became clear that there was strong support among the younger generation of Tories for a truly radical re-drawing of Britain’s contract with the EU.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... meron.html

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 4:06 pm

giselle97 wrote:
2015-06-16_153126.jpg
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/ ... 1434443723

He also signalled that the SNP would support a backbench Tory amendment to deliver full fiscal autonomy, despite warnings it would leave Scotland billions of pounds a year worse off.
Pardon?

Yes - they are going to support Leigh's amendment apparently - or have already done so? I think they debated it last night and presumably then voted. I believe Labour abstained.

giselle97 · Post by **giselle97** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 4:12 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
giselle97 wrote:
2015-06-16_153126.jpg
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/ ... 1434443723

He also signalled that the SNP would support a backbench Tory amendment to deliver full fiscal autonomy, despite warnings it would leave Scotland billions of pounds a year worse off.
Pardon?
Yes - they are going to support Leigh's amendment apparently - or have already done so? I think they debated it last night and presumably then voted. I believe Labour abstained.

That's why I said "Pardon" RR2.

The article was dated today, but I have to admit that I find it very, very difficult to read anything SNP at the moment, being a Scot.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 4:17 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:So you think the SNP will remain totally dominant in Scotland forever then?

I agree with Tim Bale in that link I gave. I thought and think Milband was useless, but I don't really blame him for Scotland. There wasn't much to be done. The only way back will be when the SNP screw up tangibly in government in Holyrood. Not a lot Labour can positively do than wait

AnatolyKasparov wrote:And if you can't "out SNP the SNP" isn't it equally true you can't "out Tory the Tories"?

A moment's reflection should tell you that is false. Labour is not trying to beat the Tories from their right. Rather it is trying to win the swing voters from the Tories. We'll win by converting some (not most) swing voters who chose to vote Tory in 2015.

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
If most people in Nuneaton, Swindon et al think Cameron and his government are wonderful (or at least pretty sensible and competent) they will vote for them. If they stop thinking that (due to events most likely, as is usually the case) then they just might be open to a genuine alternative, not merely a change of faces.

So we just hope something turns up? How depressing. That isn't even trying to win.

why do you who constantly want to frame everything in terms of Blair?

Burnham may do a bit better than Miliband. I think he is slightly better as a candidate (I ranked EM as the 4th candidate of the 5 in 2010). He might even have stopped a Tory victory if he had been leader at the 2015 GE. But, the hurdle is going to be higher in 2020, boundary changes, the deflating of the Ukip bubble, a fresh new Tory leader. So far, he is just more of the same.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 4:25 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
giselle97 wrote:This is a link to the Indy - warning, because that web page always freezes my laptop!
George Osborne has asked Iain Duncan Smith to find even deeper cuts to benefits
Jon Stone Tuesday 16 June 2015
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 22799.html
From that article:
Before the election the Liberal Democrats leaked documents which appeared to suggest the Conservatives were considering cuts to tax credits and child benefit before the election.
Downing Street dismissed the documents at the time as “scaremongering”; George Osborne and Iain Duncan Smith pledged to make £12bn welfare cuts before the election but would not expand on which cuts they would make.
Please someone explain to me how and why the Tories constantly get away with this denial and deceit ... seem to never be held to account ... whilst accusing other parties of being irresponsible ... and people vote for them nevertheless? I am at a loss ... they have proven to be the most evasive and dishonest politicians - reneging on so many things - yet people don't point to them as the dodgy ones. They actually claim the mantle of 'stability' and 'security' - and people buy that?

I ask the same questions.
I don't have an answer for you.

Monte Python's Search For the Holy Grail - the abrupt ending - cops showed up & took everyone away, end of film.
Please don't think I'm besmirching Monte Python, for they are genius & Tory government are most certainly aren't.

I'm waiting for Tory government to be taken into authorised custody for their lying words, actions, policies - some having been independently audited & found to illegal, inappropriate & wrong by UK judiciary.
I'm seriously concerned, so much so every day I'm consciously distressed about the future with Tory leadership in government.
I don't know what mechanisms are available other than 'magic thinking' scenarios hoping appropriate overseers with sufficient just authority make Tories stop.

Archbishop of Canterbury looking at Dave thinking -
'Oh, god, please smite thy insidious servant, Dave, for he's dodgy.'

http://i.guim.co.uk/media/w-620/h--/q-9 ... 4/1000.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

giselle97 · Post by **giselle97** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 4:25 pm

And a Party with "Union" in its title which will go down in history as the Party which broke the "Union" as well as pulled the UK out of the EU. That's really something to be remembered for!

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 4:29 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote: What a depressing graph that is.

Look at the 2015 intake. See how many more than from the other groups nominate Corbyn, and how many fewer nominate Kendall. The party is drifting left, further and further away from winning every year.

I think Burnham, a boring man with no ideas, will win as the candidate of the soft left. Kendall, the only one who might win will do badly. Corbyn, with the support of Owen Jones, and rightwing £3 sign ons will do surprisingly well.

How depressing.
No, what is depressing is diehard blinkered Blairites who think that droning on endlessly about "public sector reform" (something that genuinely interests about 0.001% of the population) is going to win back Scotland and stop our former core voters going UKIP or our "new" core Green.

Kendall has almost no new or interesting ideas about anything - this campaign has also shown her up as a desperately vacuous lightweight and unprepared for such an onerous job. If she somehow won, it would very likely be a total car crash that might put the very existence of the Labour party in question.

(the shallow, cynical adoring write ups she is getting from our deeply corrupt and profoundly Labour hating MSM really shouldn't fool anybody)

At least Cooper and Burnham (neither of whom am I wildly enthused about, tbh) are likely to be reasonably competent. That may be the best we can expect right now.

As for the 2015 intake - they are mostly locally rooted pragmatic types who also believe, however, that the Labour party should actually stand for something and indeed that this is vital for its long term future. They are also refreshingly untainted by the destructive Blair/Brown "wars" - good.

They show there is maybe hope for the party after all
We are not going to win back Scotland. We cannot out Scottish the SNP.

Good sensible advice here

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

Looking at the numbers nominating Corbyn, "pragmatic types" is not how I would describe them.

Being blunt, Burnham is going to win, and we are fucked. Nice lad. Isn't going to win in Nuneaton.

I'm more confident now Burnham will competently lead Labour & into government in 2020, at the latest.

giselle97 · Post by **giselle97** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 4:36 pm

SH -

why do you who constantly want to frame everything in terms of Blair?

Maybe because when you speak and say "We" and "Us" you are not referring to the Labour Party you are referring to Blair's, Mandelson's and David Miliband's NuLabour.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 4:37 pm

I'm all for Labour "trying to win", SH. I just don't think that saying the Tories are pretty much right about everything and our last manifesto was rubbish (when most of the actual *policies* in it were actually pretty popular) is the right way to go about this. Blairism was concieved at a time when left-inclined voters really did "have nowhere else to go" - that is emphatically no longer the case (and UKIP are also around to offer cheap but superfically attractive populism)

Its not easy, but politics rarely is - those implying otherwise should always be regarded with instinctive suspicion.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 4:46 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote: Blairism was concieved at a time when left-inclined voters really did "have nowhere else to go" - that is emphatically no longer the case (and UKIP are also around to offer cheap but superfically attractive populism)

This is quite wrong.

From 1997 onwards Labour was flanked to the left by the third party, the Lib Dems. Steadily they ate into this vote, especially after the Iraq war. (In 20005 I voted Lib Dem because of the war, the one time I have not voted Labour).

In 2015 the major left wing alternative to Labour collapsed in England (not in Scotland with the SNP of course, but Scotland is only 8% of the UK). This should have accrued to the benefit of the Labour party (and indeed for many years was assumed by most of us would do).

That that did not happen was down to the leadership of Labour.

I have at length on here set out what I thought was wrong with Labour's policy proposals in 2015, and so won't do so again.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 4:52 pm

Good conversation going on. Thank you to those conducting it. Hard to leave but I must - tomatoes call. I will be back.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 16 Jun, 2015 4:58 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
This is quite wrong.

From 1997 onwards Labour was flanked to the left by the third party, the Lib Dems. Steadily they ate into this vote, especially after the Iraq war. (In 20005 I voted Lib Dem because of the war, the one time I have not voted Labour).

In 2015 the major left wing alternative to Labour collapsed in England (not in Scotland with the SNP of course, but Scotland is only 8% of the UK). This should have accrued to the benefit of the Labour party (and indeed for many years was assumed by most of us would do).

That that did not happen was down to the leadership of Labour.

I have at length on here set out what I thought was wrong with Labour's policy proposals in 2015, and so won't do so again.

Wait.

The LibDems were a left wing alternative?

I know the Orange Book seems to have passed some by but not you surely? How do you think they slipped into Coalition in 2010 so easily - by being left wing?