Tuesday 11th August 2015

[ohsocynical]

Under proposals to renegotiate the UK's membership of the EU, migrants who have arrived in Britain from any of bloc's other member states will have to wait four years before being able to claim benefits.

The pledge is a cornerstone of David Cameron's promise to get a better deal for Britain for Brussels lawmakers, with the Prime Minister describing the move as an "absolute requirement".

However, it has now emerged that the radical plans will also be felt closer to home, with lawyers suggesting the application of this rule to migrants alone would breach EU laws by constituting "direct discrimination".

In order to swerve a row with EU bureacrats, the Government is now reportedly looking at extending the four-year wait to ALL applicants from the age of 18 - including British citizens.

The Prime Minister will need to persuade all 28 EU nations if he is to put his overhaul of Britain's benefits system into action.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/597545 ... rimination

[PorFavor]

Under proposals to renegotiate the UK's membership of the EU, migrants who have arrived in Britain from any of bloc's other member states will have to wait four years before being able to claim benefits.

The pledge is a cornerstone of David Cameron's promise to get a better deal for Britain for Brussels lawmakers, with the Prime Minister describing the move as an "absolute requirement".

However, it has now emerged that the radical plans will also be felt closer to home, with lawyers suggesting the application of this rule to migrants alone would breach EU laws by constituting "direct discrimination".

In order to swerve a row with EU bureacrats, the Government is now reportedly looking at extending the four-year wait to ALL applicants from the age of 18 - including British citizens.

The Prime Minister will need to persuade all 28 EU nations if he is to put his overhaul of Britain's benefits system into action.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/597545 ... rimination

(And for the special attention of tinyclanger2):

I love the fact that the Express, in their article, can't spell "bureaucrats"! And surely they mean from and not for in the bit about Brussels lawmakers?

Ok - I'll stop now.

[tinyclanger2]

That' "for" certainly takes linguistic fluidity a step too far.

[AngryAsWell]

Taxpayers to pay investment firm annual £468,000 rent for free school
The Department for Education agrees to pay private landlord rent for primary school. Plus planning rejection in Crawley; Norfolk council left with bill for academy; and Ofsted unconcerned by high staff turnover

http://www.theguardian.com/education/20 ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Tubby Isaacs]

In order to swerve a row with EU bureacrats, the Government is now reportedly looking at extending the four-year wait to ALL applicants from the age of 18 - including British citizens.

The Prime Minister will need to persuade all 28 EU nations if he is to put his overhaul of Britain's benefits system into action.

Who's he having the row with? Bureaucrats or the EU governments?

[Tubby Isaacs]

Ha ha ha ha.

[letsskiptotheleft]

Nice history lesson there from Nuttal, I never realised Marxists were that influential?!


You learn something new everyday dontcha?!

[Tubby Isaacs]

And nobody noticed them doing this skullduggery till the early 90s either!

And it wasn't philosophers who noticed, but hard right gobshites.

[RogerOThornhill]

Jeez....what an utter loon.

they called this "cultural Marxism"?

Er...no, they didn't

The term "cultural Marxism" was first sighted around 1973, in The Critique of Domination: The Origins and Development of Critical Theory by Trent Schroyer.[1]

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Cultural_Marxism" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



What brought this load of guff on I wonder - UKIP not getting the press these days?

[mbc1955]

I've read through today's thread and I've found it to be a very depressing experience.

I've no idea what's going to happen in the future and I've had enough of being lectured on the inevitability of everything that will happen between now and 2025 by a small number of individuals who give the impression that they think they know every single detail about what will happen, down to which week it will happen in, and who are quite happy talking about, indeed positively welcoming 'coups' in democratic political parties.

So I'm off. Maybe it'll only be until the Labour leadership election is decided, or, depending on its outcome, it could be permanent.

I'd like to thank everyone who's listened to me, and those who still post here without arrogance, but I don't want to put up with this any more.

[letsskiptotheleft]

To think he has the brass neck to moan about second rate politicians.

I give up, clown is beyond parody.

[RogerOThornhill]

I've found watching the Birbalsingh woman tweeting about the Chinese School programme far more entertaining than actually watching said programme.

https://twitter.com/miss_snuffy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[AngryAsWell]

I've read through today's thread and I've found it to be a very depressing experience.

I've no idea what's going to happen in the future and I've had enough of being lectured on the inevitability of everything that will happen between now and 2025 by a small number of individuals who give the impression that they think they know every single detail about what will happen, down to which week it will happen in, and who are quite happy talking about, indeed positively welcoming 'coups' in democratic political parties.

So I'm off. Maybe it'll only be until the Labour leadership election is decided, or, depending on its outcome, it could be permanent.

I'd like to thank everyone who's listened to me, and those who still post here without arrogance, but I don't want to put up with this any more.

Think of it more like a conversation in the pub, people get wound up about the topic, lean forward over the table wagging a finger "I tell you what I think...." you reply with "Oh get out of it" you argue back and forth till one notices the glasses are empty, "I'll get them, you got the last lot." By the time you get back its "What about that ref last night! what a plonker...!!!" and so on till conversation turn back to politics - another scrap, another beer and on to cheers about winning the ashes.

Please don't go.
If I've upset you I sincerely apologise

[AngryAsWell]

Yvette Cooper is now on R5 - if anyone is interested.

Thanks - and yes I am\was interested. Unfortunately, the BBC on-line radio whatsit let me down. I'll have to try to catch it later. Meanwhile - what did you make of it? (I think I mentioned here that I was originally thinking of voting for YC - but she went off (or never came to) the boil for me.)

Edited to add

I would be very happy to hear something from someone in the running (other than Jeremy Corbyn) that makes me want to vote for them.

Edited again

"k" for "l"

Missed this earlier sorry.
Yes she was fine, didn't say anything dramatic or controversial, I missed quite a bit myself actually for the same reason, my connection is bad at the moment as well.

[TechnicalEphemera]

I've read through today's thread and I've found it to be a very depressing experience.

I've no idea what's going to happen in the future and I've had enough of being lectured on the inevitability of everything that will happen between now and 2025 by a small number of individuals who give the impression that they think they know every single detail about what will happen, down to which week it will happen in, and who are quite happy talking about, indeed positively welcoming 'coups' in democratic political parties.

So I'm off. Maybe it'll only be until the Labour leadership election is decided, or, depending on its outcome, it could be permanent.

I'd like to thank everyone who's listened to me, and those who still post here without arrogance, but I don't want to put up with this any more.

I am not sure it will get better after the election. However speculation is just that, in a year we will have a good idea who is right and who is wrong.

The concept of replacing a leader of a party isn't really a coup more normal business for most political parties, the Greens being the exception as leaders are drawn from outside the parliament. The leader is elected to lead the party in parliament, and they can only do that with the confidence of a majority of their MPs. Once they lose that they have to go.

MPs are to a degree careerists, their number one concern is their continued existence as an MP, and their number two concern is their career. This isn't necessarily a bad thing as it places limits on the power of the PM. Blindly pursuing policies that are utterly hated by the electorate means a collapse in the polls and eventually it is game over. This ultimately did for IDS (hopeless) and Thatcher (poll tax).

So Ed Miliband survived as he led a divided party that however ultimately decided there was no clear successor and Miliband was their best shot at power. He also could juggle who got plum jobs to keep the rivals onside (this is also why Cameron is reluctant to sack useless but high profile ministers).

Corbyn, if he wins, will stay in office only as long as the majority of the party believe he is a better bet at winning re-election than any obvious replacement. This is not a coup so much as the normal nature of politics. In practical terms if he is polling well he is safe as houses. If he isn't polling well and the MPs unify around a successor they think better then he will probably find himself in trouble. His best bet to avoid this (other than polling well) is to trim his policies and appoint obvious rivals to senior positions.

[AngryAsWell]

I'm not saying it good, bad or indifferent I'm trying to make a point that other candidates ARE engaging in the debate.
I'll give up now.

Please don't, AAW - I have been criticising the lack of policy from some, so if they're announcing them I'd like to know what they are.

Everyone here knows the issues I have with Cooper, but that doesn't mean that I don't want to know what her policies are.
If she has something new to offer, I'd love to hear it - if it isn't reported, could you post it here? Thank you.

I am a persuadable person - after all, I was a liberal for decades and I'm relatively new to Labour. If I truly think, when the candidates give us their policies, that if I am sufficiently impressed by their vision I could reconsider who I intend to support.

I have to go to bed for a while now - insomnia's a bugger, zero zeds at all last night. Hoping to get some rest now - it's Show's birthday today and I want to be vaguely conscious when I give him his cake. (It's chocolate gattox with cream. 2,800 KCal per glance)

I think we tend to forget in the hubris of the election that really policy is not what they "should" be discussing, because the manifesto Labour stood on in 2015 is the manifesto they still stand on now. If there was a by-election tomorrow, 2015 manifesto is what it would be fought on. It's not up to a new leader to change everything previously agreed on by the party. Yes they can decide to have a policy review, but Labour leadership is not a dictatorship and they cannot just change policy at will without consultation at least with the NEC (or PLP?) I wonder if perhaps this is why people think Liz & Yvette are not saying enough and that Andy's own manifesto is the same as the Party manifesto (well almost, with a few tweaks). They are trying to set the direction of travel rather than give manifesto policy commitments they know they might not be able to enforce.
If I find any interesting tid-bits I'll post them

I hope you had a bit of rest, and that you sleep better tonight - Happy Birthday to Show, bet he loved that cake!

[Tubby Isaacs]

I've found watching the Birbalsingh woman tweeting about the Chinese School programme far more entertaining than actually watching said programme.

https://twitter.com/miss_snuffy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Raises interesting questions about her own school. Is she really going in as hard as she makes out? How do the kids and parents react?

De facto selection, methinks.

[55DegreesNorth]

Good evening folks,
I'm baffled quite easily, and I'm baffled by lots about what's happening now and then. Why didn't the whole PLP point out that Labour didn't crash the economy, the bankers did? Radio silence on that one until last week it seems. Why didn't they analyse the reasons for losing the election before embarking on a leadership campaign? Why are we asked to vote on candidates before policies have been thrashed out? Why is all this shite happening in the public domain, rather than in house. We don't have a presidential system, so why is the vote for leader more important than deciding what the party is for?

For what it's worth, I find Kendall repellant, agree with almost everything Corbyn says, but share Hugo's concerns about him being an open goal for the rabid press and the Tories. Burnham and Cooper seem evasive and belief free, or at least of negotiable status, and I remain baffled, while too many supporters are like rats in a sack.

On the upside, the inlaws house is coming on.

[Tubby Isaacs]

I'm some way to the left of Hugo, but with him on Corbyn. It looks like silly populism to me.

In 1992, and before, Labour were up front that you had to raise tax from middle earners to pay for the services we want. John Smith's shadow budget raised tax for people on £21k. And before the election they opposed the 20% income tax rate as irresponsible.

Corbyn seems to be suggesting we can get the services we want and close the deficit with going after the "1%".

I think that's probably bollocks.

[AngryAsWell]

Stella Creasy rages against the political machine, but can she break it?
Helen Lewis talks public services, Jeremy Corbyn and ladyballs with Labour deputy leadership candidate Stella Creasy.

"And how many anti-Corbynites are voting for a deputy they expect – perhaps even hope – will take over if the left-winger gets whacked by a shadow cabinet coup?"

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/20 ... e-break-it" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

She's good... my deputy vote is on the move, well wobbling a bit

[rebeccariots2]

Stella Creasy rages against the political machine, but can she break it?
Helen Lewis talks public services, Jeremy Corbyn and ladyballs with Labour deputy leadership candidate Stella Creasy.

"And how many anti-Corbynites are voting for a deputy they expect – perhaps even hope – will take over if the left-winger gets whacked by a shadow cabinet coup?"

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/20 ... e-break-it" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

She's good... my deputy vote is on the move, well wobbling a bit

Where is it wibble wobbling from AAW?

[AngryAsWell]

Stella Creasy rages against the political machine, but can she break it?
Helen Lewis talks public services, Jeremy Corbyn and ladyballs with Labour deputy leadership candidate Stella Creasy.

"And how many anti-Corbynites are voting for a deputy they expect – perhaps even hope – will take over if the left-winger gets whacked by a shadow cabinet coup?"

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/20 ... e-break-it" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

She's good... my deputy vote is on the move, well wobbling a bit

Where is it wibble wobbling from AAW?

Well, I'm an odd ball I actually like Caroline Flint, mainly because she was one of the few SC who came out fighting for Ed esp on the A Neil show, and I like loyalty. On the other hand Angela Eagle is much better than she is given credit for. I thought Stella a bit to shouty (or as we say up here goby) but the more I see/read about her the more I like her.
Sadly none of the men dep's do anything for me

[AngryAsWell]

Nite all