FlyTheNest

Morning all.

Morning.

I've just been looking at the Labour website, where it explains who can vote for the leader, after a conversation with a neighbour yesterday.

Under the section for an applicant to sign up to the £3 supporter vote it says:
''I agree that the Labour Party and its elected representatives may contact me using the data supplied. I support the aims and values of the Labour Party, and I am not a supporter of any organisation opposed to it.''

Does anyone have firsthand knowledge of how this is being actually viewed ?
I only ask because my neighbour, who cannot normally utter the word Labour without swearing and has not voted for them since the Iraq war said she is going to register to vote for Corbyn.

As I've mentioned I am seriously thinking of throwing caution to the wind and voting for Corbyn.
But if he wins, or comes a good second, I think it is important that the media cannot dismiss it as
non-members and non-Labour supporters pushing the win.
The woman voted Green last time, and has previously.
Not sure that makes her eligible to say she supports the aims and values of Labour [she doesn't and frequently has let flow that she doesn't]. Surely the Greens can be described as 'an organisation that does not support' Labour ?

It puts me in a difficult position. Am not sure whether to alert the local branch so they can decide ?

Would appreciate thoughts from others.
My neighbour considers herself to be very moral and principled...would it be rude if I asked her to consider whether she really would qualify under the statement she'd be signing up to ?
Or are people like her who we need back, presumably she really would become a supporter of Labour and its aims and values if Corbyn wins and stop supporting an organisation that opposes Labour ?

[No Hugo, she doesn't live in Nuneaton or Coventry !]

If they had to bring in the pay three quid and get a vote system, they should have done it properly. I don't think it is a good idea because it undermines the importance of party members' votes, so why on earth join the party or be an affiliate member?

And it is wide open to abuse and will be used to question the validity of the result (if Corbyn wins), sure as eggs are eggs.

mikems wrote:If they had to bring in the pay three quid and get a vote system, they should have done it properly. I don't think it is a good idea because it undermines the importance of party members' votes, so why on earth join the party or be an affiliate member?

And it is wide open to abuse and will be used to question the validity of the result (if Corbyn wins), sure as eggs are eggs.

That's what worries me. It would be the constant refrain of the right wing press and Cameron at PMQs. If Corbyn does well it won't help if his result can be trashed. People will crawl out of the woodwork - I read here last night a prominent Lib Dem has already been sussed.

You can vote if you support the 'values and principles' of the Labour party. There's a prize for anyone who can say what they are just at the moment. The election is very much about changing the values and principles of the party from what they currently are. Jeremy Corbyn should be excluded from voting because he definitely does not support the values and principles of New Labour?

Also, not being a member of something that 'opposes' the Labour party is too vague. Sometimes the trade unions oppose Labour policy, sometimes Labour members (the SEA, the Haldane Society) oppose party policy.

Good point Mike. Maybe I'll just let it be.

The eleven week old kitten we are looking after has just run up the back of my husband's legs, clung onto his bum and decided to kill it. Ouch.

Burnham on Newsnight is worth watching.

I don't know what to think of him really. His social care policy is not daft, but then he says he wants a commission set up on how to pay for it. He is accused of blowing with the wind, and gives as an example the ending of the 'reforms'to public services under Brown. Arguing for this under Blair, or opposing it under Brown would have been actual examples.

I think he is deeply unimpressive. The way the CLP nominations have changed since the Benefits Bill shows that others agree.

yahyah wrote:The eleven week old kitten we are looking after has just run up the back of my husband's legs, clung onto his bum and decided to kill it. Ouch.

Eek! Oh well, that last mouthful of tea was nearly cold anyway... Hope Mr. Yahyah doesn't have to sit on any hard chairs today!

Morning all.

Decent analysis of why the growth figures aren't all that from Jeremy Warner.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/econ ... money.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Nor are Britain’s apparently more buoyant growth numbers all they are cracked up to be. The UK is far from the reformed, more balanced economy that policymakers hoped would rise phoenix-like from the ashes of the financial crisis. To the contrary, the most striking aspect of the 0.7pc second quarter increase in output is its unbalanced, consumption-dependent nature, or precisely the sort of growth that it might be argued got Britain into difficulties in the first place. Manufacturing actually shrank in the second quarter, with virtually all the growth coming from service industries, in particular retail, hotels, restaurants and related services, which are up 4.5pc on a year ago.

just listened to 5Live for the past hour, a phone-in on the problems at Calais. Like listening to a UKIP PPB. Then Peter Allen comes on and starts talking about 'the tidal wave of immigration breaking on our shores'. Whatever happened to analysis?

frightful_oik wrote:just listened to 5Live for the past hour, a phone-in on the problems at Calais. Like listening to a UKIP PPB. Then Peter Allen comes on and starts talking about 'the tidal wave of immigration breaking on our shores'. Whatever happened to analysis?

I can't for the life of me understand why the UK doesn't just crack on and process these asylum seekers. I presume the fear is that there are many genuine asylum seekers among the economic migrants we would be duty bound to accept. I'm not surprised the French are sitting back and allowing events to develop that inconvenience the UK as they have put up with a huge amount of inconvenience themselves and Cameron's refusal to even try to meet them halfway on resolving the issue ( rather than merely policing it) must be seriously winding them up by now.

SpinningHugo wrote:Burnham on Newsnight is worth watching.

I don't know what to think of him really. His social care policy is not daft, but then he says he wants a commission set up on how to pay for it. He is accused of blowing with the wind, and gives as an example the ending of the 'reforms'to public services under Brown. Arguing for this under Blair, or opposing it under Brown would have been actual examples.

I think he is deeply unimpressive. The way the CLP nominations have changed since the Benefits Bill shows that others agree.

I didn't think he did too badly - it seemed that all Evan Davies really wanted to talk about was Jeremy Corbyn. AB's 'Beveridge-style Commission' wouldn't just be to look at funding options for Health and Care, it'd be looking at housing ('affordable housing to rent or buy for everyone') and education (from nursery to apprenticeships/university) plus employment and wages. Given five years until the next GE (barring extraordinary circumstances) and four until the next GE Manifesto needs written, there is time to work on the finer details of delivery - whilst doing our damnedest to mitigate, as far as possible, and to prevent, if possible, the damage that the current Government will inflict on the people and the country. Beveridge's committee took only eighteen months from launch to final report - during a war.

Here's Burnham's full speech from last night in Leeds:
https://medium.com/@Andy4Leader/recaptu ... d0d43f4ee2

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


They are all pissheads,druggies and fat lazy scum choosing lifestyle part 1234567


adhoc (skewed)statistics for propaganda purposes out Friday


Actuality -Prevalence of alcoholism/drug addiction among benefit receivers less than the general population.

SpinningHugo wrote:Burnham on Newsnight is worth watching.

I don't know what to think of him really. His social care policy is not daft, but then he says he wants a commission set up on how to pay for it. He is accused of blowing with the wind, and gives as an example the ending of the 'reforms'to public services under Brown. Arguing for this under Blair, or opposing it under Brown would have been actual examples.

I think he is deeply unimpressive. The way the CLP nominations have changed since the Benefits Bill shows that others agree.

Yes, it seems that Harriet wanted to stitch him up and has been quite successful.

There will be just a minor flaw in the plan if it results in Jezza winning, though

yahyah wrote:The eleven week old kitten we are looking after has just run up the back of my husband's legs, clung onto his bum and decided to kill it. Ouch.

Lucky your husband wasn't facing the other way.

Willow904 wrote:

frightful_oik wrote:just listened to 5Live for the past hour, a phone-in on the problems at Calais. Like listening to a UKIP PPB. Then Peter Allen comes on and starts talking about 'the tidal wave of immigration breaking on our shores'. Whatever happened to analysis?

I can't for the life of me understand why the UK doesn't just crack on and process these asylum seekers. I presume the fear is that there are many genuine asylum seekers among the economic migrants we would be duty bound to accept. I'm not surprised the French are sitting back and allowing events to develop that inconvenience the UK as they have put up with a huge amount of inconvenience themselves and Cameron's refusal to even try to meet them halfway on resolving the issue ( rather than merely policing it) must be seriously winding them up by now.

War & environmental disasters displace people - where are these people to go to find a home & make a living?

Cameron blamed what he called the cancer of corruption at the heart of low economic growth in poorer countries, which in turn led to some migrants wanting to leave their home countries and travel to the UK.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015 ... l-terminal" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Dave also wants to build better fencing around the tunnel. Seriously, that's Dave's solution in its entirety. What the hell is going on? I mean really? Because Dave doesn't know & neither does his government.

Corbyn now favourite with some bookies

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/bri ... our-leader" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I would hesitate to say that given that the latest "private poll" (I know) has him only triumphing by 51-49.

Some may be saying they back him to express their lack of confidence in the other candidates, but when it comes to actually filling in their ballot papers.......

And will some of his youthful cheerleaders on social media actually turn out to vote for him, we know plenty of those types didn't in the GE?

Has normal transmission now been resumed?

Good morfternoon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TYiqB35UGg

Filmed in Wales, apparently.

Good afternoon, PorFavor, it looks like you & I are it at this moment.

@citizenJA

Canasta?

my message to you got thrown into the timeless void, PorFavor

http://www.theguardian.com/society/patr ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Council tax: a 'new poll tax' for the poor
Council tax support abolition is unfair and continues to cause debt, hardship and grief, says a new study. So where is the promised official review?

David Cameron becomes first British PM to visit Vietnam

Prime minister says he is excited about visiting the country as he touches down in Hanoi for talks

On a rain-sodden day and after much uncertainty as to whether to hold the greeting ceremony in the open air, Cameron was met by Dung (Guardian)

"Little things . . . " and all that . . .

yahyah wrote:Morning.

I've just been looking at the Labour website, where it explains who can vote for the leader, after a conversation with a neighbour yesterday.

Under the section for an applicant to sign up to the £3 supporter vote it says:
''I agree that the Labour Party and its elected representatives may contact me using the data supplied. I support the aims and values of the Labour Party, and I am not a supporter of any organisation opposed to it.''

Does anyone have firsthand knowledge of how this is being actually viewed ?
I only ask because my neighbour, who cannot normally utter the word Labour without swearing and has not voted for them since the Iraq war said she is going to register to vote for Corbyn.

As I've mentioned I am seriously thinking of throwing caution to the wind and voting for Corbyn.
But if he wins, or comes a good second, I think it is important that the media cannot dismiss it as
non-members and non-Labour supporters pushing the win.
The woman voted Green last time, and has previously.
Not sure that makes her eligible to say she supports the aims and values of Labour [she doesn't and frequently has let flow that she doesn't]. Surely the Greens can be described as 'an organisation that does not support' Labour ?

It puts me in a difficult position. Am not sure whether to alert the local branch so they can decide ?

Would appreciate thoughts from others.
My neighbour considers herself to be very moral and principled...would it be rude if I asked her to consider whether she really would qualify under the statement she'd be signing up to ?
Or are people like her who we need back, presumably she really would become a supporter of Labour and its aims and values if Corbyn wins and stop supporting an organisation that opposes Labour ?

[No Hugo, she doesn't live in Nuneaton or Coventry !]

Report her. She'll be denied the vote but lose her three quid...

So what happened there, then?

AnatolyKasparov wrote:So what happened there, then?

I won't bore you with the technicalities . . . .

So you lovely people. Had a letter telling Mr Ohso to go to outpatients on the 5th Aug rather than go in for another op. That worried us.
The next day we had a letter saying they'd pushed the outpatients appointment to Nov.
So Mr Ohso rang this morning and from what we can gather the sample they took for analysis was benign...So it looks like the all clear....

I'm making small pork pies to celebrate and as a reward for our young neighbour who bless her heart, has been brilliant...I was making them for the first time the other day and her eyes lit up when she saw them but they weren't exactly right, although Mr Ohso never argues about what I put in front of him. Today I'm correcting the things I did wrong and she'll get some for her tea.

I haven't had a reaction from the good news yet, but Mr Ohso is so thankful he's going to live to be Father Christmas again. He asked the hospital to do their best as the garden centre is already taking bookings from the disabled and deprived children groups who saw him last year. He had warned them that he might not be able to so they could look for a replacement.
He hated the thought of letting them down as he's the only Father Christmas that copes properly with those precious special children.

Social care story in the G
Charitable trust arrangements aren't local government & calling them businesses make right wingers post hysterically...

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... -wellbeing" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hello all. It seems our hosting provider had some fairly major server issues this morning/afternoon. It does look like everything's working again though.

Unison backing Corbyn. Not as expected as Unite.

For yahyah, why you shouldn't.

http://publicpolicypast.blogspot.co.uk/ ... r.html?m=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The server was definitely playing up - it foiled my attempt to come here and rant like stink about the many (not-yet-extinct) bees in my (non-literal) bonnet. So not all bad, then...

I was blocked by a follower on Twitter for my opinion of Burnham last night. While I think he's a good minister, he simply doesn't seem to have anything leaderly about him to me. He looked like someone desperately trying to stick to a script about how he isn't the type to stick to a script. And while I don't doubt he is as genuine and sincere a politician as you get these days, he wasn't remotely convincing. It was another "talk about having values but don't say what they are" moment. At one stage he seemed to be saying he was open-minded about changing his opinion on whether or not he had an opinion about changing his mind about having an opinion in future. It was a little bit painful to watch.

He also criticises - rightly - the kind of timidity in the party he frequently seems to personify.

This is all personality - some of his policy suggestions are worth considering in more detail. I'm sure he'd implement them well if he was supporting a leader who shared them; I just can't see him being the kind of person that manages that himself.

SpinningHugo wrote:Unison backing Corbyn. Not as expected as Unite.

For yahyah, why you shouldn't.

http://publicpolicypast.blogspot.co.uk/ ... r.html?m=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ironic that one of the arguments is effectively "the next election isn't hopeless and Labour shouldn't act as if it is".

That wasn't what the Blairites were saying in the hours and days after polling day - then the line was that there had been some sort of electoral Year Zero which had finished the Labour party as anybody had known it forever. Hearing them then, you would think the Tories had won a majority of 200 not 12.....

Of course, that sort of spiel was designed to gain support for their preferred candidate. But as with other things, it has come back to bite them on the posterior.

Poetic justice.

SpinningHugo wrote:Unison backing Corbyn. Not as expected as Unite.

For yahyah, why you shouldn't.

http://publicpolicypast.blogspot.co.uk/ ... r.html?m=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Your posts make me feel like Tin Tin's Snowy.



Torn between being good and being bad.
It feels odd to be doing a reverse ferret on how I felt for years about Labour needing to be more cautious.

But thank you, and to others here for discussion and link sharing.
Am going to keep reviewing the situation in the next month or so.

SpinningHugo wrote:Unison backing Corbyn. Not as expected as Unite.

For yahyah, why you shouldn't.

http://publicpolicypast.blogspot.co.uk/ ... r.html?m=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I've read that. Unnecessarily unpleasant, and very scathing of Miliband.

The final paragraph is pure shite.

ohsocynical wrote:So you lovely people. Had a letter telling Mr Ohso to go to outpatients on the 5th Aug rather than go in for another op. That worried us.
The next day we had a letter saying they'd pushed the outpatients appointment to Nov.
So Mr Ohso rang this morning and from what we can gather the sample they took for analysis was benign...So it looks like the all clear....

I'm making small pork pies to celebrate and as a reward for our young neighbour who bless her heart, has been brilliant...I was making them for the first time the other day and her eyes lit up when she saw them but they weren't exactly right, although Mr Ohso never argues about what I put in front of him. Today I'm correcting the things I did wrong and she'll get some for her tea.

I haven't had a reaction from the good news yet, but Mr Ohso is so thankful he's going to live to be Father Christmas again. He asked the hospital to do their best as the garden centre is already taking bookings from the disabled and deprived children groups who saw him last year. He had warned them that he might not be able to so they could look for a replacement.
He hated the thought of letting them down as he's the only Father Christmas that copes properly with those precious special children.

Hurrah!
xx
cJA

Long and very interesting piece on Varoufakis and the Greek referendum and negotiations from the New Yorker. A rare 'must read' recommendation from me.

Profiles AUGUST 3, 2015 ISSUE
The Greek Warrior
How a radical finance minister took on Europe—and failed.
BY IAN PARKER
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/ ... ek-warrior" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ephemerid wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:Unison backing Corbyn. Not as expected as Unite.

For yahyah, why you shouldn't.

http://publicpolicypast.blogspot.co.uk/ ... r.html?m=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I've read that. Unnecessarily unpleasant, and very scathing of Miliband.

The final paragraph is pure shite.

''And then the Corbynites - most of whom have homes, jobs, contacts and prospects - will have to go round and apologise to every mum who's terrified of being pushed out of London because of the bedroom tax. To every worker who wonders how she can possibly afford to go to work now her tax credits have been slashed. To every elderly citizen trapped in their home, who's been left all day to sit in their chair without a home help. To every child who's learning in a dilapidated prefab. To everyone who's sitting, doubled up with chronic pain, waiting for an NHS appointment. To everyone living in a crowded little hutch in an unplanned, sprawling suburb.

Because Labour's plunge off the precipice will mean there will be no-one left to speak up for them''


It may be shite but it's made me feel a twinge of guilt there Ephie.

That was my feeling about people voting Green, TUSC, Plaid, SNP where Labour could win, so I could be doing the same myself.

Damn.

RogerOThornhill wrote:Morning all.

Decent analysis of why the growth figures aren't all that from Jeremy Warner.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/econ ... money.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Nor are Britain’s apparently more buoyant growth numbers all they are cracked up to be. The UK is far from the reformed, more balanced economy that policymakers hoped would rise phoenix-like from the ashes of the financial crisis. To the contrary, the most striking aspect of the 0.7pc second quarter increase in output is its unbalanced, consumption-dependent nature, or precisely the sort of growth that it might be argued got Britain into difficulties in the first place. Manufacturing actually shrank in the second quarter, with virtually all the growth coming from service industries, in particular retail, hotels, restaurants and related services, which are up 4.5pc on a year ago.

The population's up a lot, because of all that immigration which the Tories were going to stop.

As you pointed out the other day, they're now building in 1 milllion extra population in 5 years to the GDP predictions they're dining out on.

Brilliant news Ohso. Hope you and Mr Ohso have a grand celebration. Maybe buy him something truly hideously garish to wear in the spirit of growing very old very disgracefully.

AnatolyKasparov wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:Unison backing Corbyn. Not as expected as Unite.

For yahyah, why you shouldn't.

http://publicpolicypast.blogspot.co.uk/ ... r.html?m=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ironic that one of the arguments is effectively "the next election isn't hopeless and Labour shouldn't act as if it is".

That wasn't what the Blairites were saying in the hours and days after polling day - then the line was that there had been some sort of electoral Year Zero which had finished the Labour party as anybody had known it forever. Hearing them then, you would think the Tories had won a majority of 200 not 12.....

Of course, that sort of spiel was designed to gain support for their preferred candidate. But as with other things, it has come back to bite them on the posterior.

Poetic justice.

Here is hoping there are enough Blairites left to save your preferred candidate with 2nd preferences then, eh?

Great news OhSo ! Must have been a very difficult few weeks for you, Mr OhSo and the family.

rebeccariots2 wrote:Long and very interesting piece on Varoufakis and the Greek referendum and negotiations from the New Yorker. A rare 'must read' recommendation from me.

Profiles AUGUST 3, 2015 ISSUE
The Greek Warrior
How a radical finance minister took on Europe—and failed.
BY IAN PARKER
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/ ... ek-warrior" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It was always a tough gig, but I don't think a Greek finance minister lecturing other countries about economics was likely to go down very well, however much sense there was in what he said.

They also didn't realize that Spain etc weren't going to be sympathetic, for lots of reasons.

A waste of a good man, I think.

Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 31m31 minutes ago
.@YvetteCooperMP is neck and neck with @Corbyn4Leader in Cooper phone/text/canvass and other data soon to be released. Burnham 3rd.

Hard to set any store by any polling now.

I may be a bit behind [as usual] because of internet problems this week, but do we have to worry about more than Tories or 'hard' left people skewing the Corbyn vote ?

Some Cybernats showed their true colours in the Indy ref and May electioneering.
What's to stop malicious Nats/Plaid/Green supporters from registering to vote for Kendall so they can spend the next five years wailing about Red Tories and Labour still being Blairite ?
Not likely they'd want a Labour party they couldn't criticise from the left anymore.

Isabel Hardman ‏@IsabelHardman 50m50 minutes ago
“Who cares about the grassroots?” says @johnmcternan when we discuss the Blairites’ failure to woo Labour members http://specc.ie/1LY84uT" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This drips disdain for the membership. Pretty much sums up why so many people have said 'Labour left them' ...

I used to quite like McTernan, but since the GE he has been a total arse.

And why people ask him about electoral strategy given his recent record (in Scotland *and* Australia) f*** knows

Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 18m18 minutes ago
The data arms race has started. @Andy4Leader camp soon to retaliate with data of their own showing AB 1st Corbyn 2nd Cooper 3rd, LK 4th

How much longer of this have we got?

Can't we have an compulsory 2 week break for all of them - please?

AnatolyKasparov wrote:I used to quite like McTernan, but since the GE he has been a total arse.

And why people ask him about electoral strategy given his recent record (in Scotland *and* Australia) f*** knows

Surely those on Team Liz have realised the damage that these pretty nasty interventions by McTernan and others have done ... and have asked him and the other 'grandees' to please shut up?