Weekend Edition - Saturday/Sunday 22nd/23rd August

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 5:35 pm

Sitting in bed thinking about Corbyn...

I think frustration is playing a large part in events.

Over the past year, I've lost count of the demonstrations about Tory policies. It's been right across the board. Lawyers, doctors, nurses, health workers, disabled, TTIP protest, the badger cull --- Ignored.

Economists, mental health charities, Citizens Advice Bureau, housing associations, children's charities, constantly warning about what's going to happen --- Ignored.

Food banks, suicides, homelessness, evictions, housing shortage --- Ignored.

And then they wonder why Corbyn is so popular?

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 5:36 pm

I heard this on Radio 4's The World Tonight last night, was half asleep so went back to i-player:

They had Roy Hattersley on, and Labour party historian Martin Pugh

listen after 29 minutes in:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b066tqbj#play" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Pugh thinks 'the party should 'calm down a little bit' and counters Hattersley's fear mongering.
Also, that there are questions already over NATO, so don't panic he says.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 5:36 pm

refitman wrote:The rain has just popped a manhole cover outside my house.

Cripes, I hope it doesn't make its way into your home. That is impressive.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 5:37 pm

TechnicalEphemera wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:UKIP pose as a "real Labour" alternative in anti-Tory areas.

That is how they nearly won the Heywood and Middleton by-election just weeks after Ed Balls made an almost comically pro-austerity speech at the Labour conference (which they exploited shamelessly, rushing out "we will defend your benefits" leaflets after Ed B pledged to freeze CB)

Labour have just been wiped out by an SNP who were PERCIEVED as to their left and anti-austerity (whatever the reality) and if they went into terminal decline, its not just UKIP who would benefit - but Plaid the Greens and even the LibDems (who, under Farron, are set to pitch themselves way to the left of Blairism) would feast on the corpse too. There is not one part of the Labour coalition that is "safe", in extremis.

If people want to vote for a plastic insincere political puppet who just does what media plutocrats tell them, they already have Cameron. The prospects for Labour in "me-tooism" are now less than zero, and (in contrast to post-1983 or even 1992) there is little room for the party to move even further right without its very existence coming into question. The political culture in the "Westminster bubble" is sick, delusional and widely reviled.

Voting for Corbyn may not be the answer, but it is a response to a profound question - "what is the Labour party *for* in the 21st century"? The very question that both Dan Jarvis and Stella Creasy asked in the days and weeks after the GE, which alone marks them out as possible future leaders
No UKIP don't pose as real Labour, they pose as the - "stop those filthy immigrants stealing your jobs and abusing your kids party"

Hence those disgusting adverts linking child abuse and ethnicity.

The Labour loves welfare scroungers party.

They do not stand as a left wing alternative to Labour.

Jarvis and Creasy both screwed it up. Both of them could have stood and won. They probably won't get a second chance.

Also why do you think I believe in Labour me-too-ism. I don't and really only Kendall was advocating that approach.

You want a slogan - Labour Tough on Welfare, Tough on the causes of Welfare.

Which means very little but gives cover for a generous welfare system aimed at those that need it, whilst portraying a party cracking down on the tiny number that abuse the system. I don't see a "hard left" Labour Party managing that sort of messaging.

Scotland - different country. What works in Scotland won't work in England.

I don't think Creasy would have got 35 votes to stand for leader. She struggled to get them for deputy. I voted for her, but I don't think she'll come close to Watson. A campaign of selfies.

Watson (who I have no time for) told the best joke of the campaign. He rang up someone to canvass them yesterday.

Member: "I gave you the most votes"
Watson: how did you...?
Member: You 5, Stella 4, Ben 3 ....

Jarvis has the quality of being a blanksheet. Not to be dismissed at this point.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 5:37 pm

yahyah wrote:I heard this on Radio 4's The World Tonight last night, was half asleep so went back to i-player:

They had Roy Hattersley on, and historian Martin Pugh

listen after 29 minutes in:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b066tqbj#play" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Pugh thinks 'the party should 'calm down a little bit' and counters Hattersley's fear mongering.
Also, that there are questions already over NATO, so don't panic he says.

There are no questions over NATO so what Pugh is banging on about I have no idea.

NATO is probably what stands between Lithuania and Putin.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 5:41 pm

refitman wrote:The rain has just popped a manhole cover outside my house.

When manhole covers did that where I used to live, we had flash floods...My house, due to the way I'd done my front garden was the only one that didn't get water inside. It was a close call though.

Post by **refitman** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 5:42 pm

TechnicalEphemera wrote:
refitman wrote:The rain has just popped a manhole cover outside my house.
Cripes, I hope it doesn't make its way into your home. That is impressive.

Fortunately I am just up the hill from the houses at the bottom. Although one of my neighbour's garden is flooded, with all their kids toys floating around.

The water isn't exactly clean either.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 5:42 pm

TechnicalEphemera wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
His campaign recently has not been a triumph.

"I can serve under Jeremy (but he is elected by Tory entryists)."

A couple of candidates have shown leadership potential. Burnham is not one of them.

In ordinary times, the soft left candidate is the best placed strategically to win (see Miliband). His weakness as a candidate has let in Corbyn. Why he thought running as an outsider would work, when he has done nothing but work in Westminster since leaving University and never defied the party whip ever is a mystery. You won't win just because you have a scouse accent.

I don't think the evil grandees do think Labour can go back to where it was anytime soon. Sadly.
Let's get this clear Hugo - I think very very few people in the Labour party (including at the top echelons) are "evil".

Maybe the MP for Rochdale, and even that is a bit of a stretch?

I *do* think that too many of them have allowed themselves to get disastrously out of touch with both the wider party and the bigger constituency out there that is generally sympathetic to Labour. Comparisons with the 1980s keep being made, but the danger there was being driven into a marginalised proletarian ghetto in the manner of the French Communist Party. The existensial threat that faces the party today - PASOKification - is a rather different animal, and what happened in Scotland shows it is a chillingly realistic scenario.

As somebody said to me recently "if the Labour party is to die, I would rather it was with a bang not a whimper". I don't think death is anywhere near inevitable - hell, I don't even think the 2020 GE is lost - but its sentiments like that fuelling Corbynmania.
I think you are completely wrong in that analysis, the threat is not PASOKification, it is that Labour is about to become an unelectable left wing mess.

The reasons PASOK fell from power because it pushed a right wing agenda when for the majority of Greeks their living standards were collapsing. We are not even close to that in the UK.

UKIP are the existential threat to Labour and they are a right wing party. For the scenario you are proposing to apply to the UK you would need to see UKIP nowhere and Greens/TUSC votes in the high teens and 10% respectively.

Polls tell us Labour lost because it wasn't trusted on the economy and because it was seen as a soft touch on welfare (although the latter finding needs care).

When Osborne compares the UK to Greece we call him out for his bollocks, let us not allow wishful thinking lead us into the same trap.

(my bold)

UKIP appealed to the fears of voters feeling disenfranchised - I don't think most of the UKIP voters identified themselves as right-wing. It matters, that, because people want what works on their behalf - UKIP promised to do so explicitly - almost to the exclusion of all else. Who wouldn't want that? If the Greens, TUSC & other left-wing political parties in the UK weren't as successful electorally it's because their political platforms were more honest. 'We're going to have to work together'. Yes, but we're already working and we've already got Dave telling us we're all in this together and we're not in this together.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 5:45 pm

Part of the problem, SH and TE, is that many are not convinced that what Blairites/Progress et al are now proposing is any longer meaningfully "social democratic".

We had the situation (re the welfare vote) that Corbyn was seemingly the only one of the four candidates prepared to defend A KEY BLAIR POLICY WHILST IN GOVERNMENT.

You have to admit that is pretty insane, no?

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 5:46 pm

refitman wrote:
TechnicalEphemera wrote:
refitman wrote:The rain has just popped a manhole cover outside my house.
Cripes, I hope it doesn't make its way into your home. That is impressive.
Fortunately I am just up the hill from the houses at the bottom. Although one of my neighbour's garden is flooded, with all their kids toys floating around.

The water isn't exactly clean either.

It all comes up when you get that sort of rush of water.

After two flash floods in a year we took up the fight with the council and Thames Water. It took two years to get Thames Water to admit they were responsible for the drains...And another two years before they put in bigger pipes.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 5:48 pm

Those nut fritters and brown rice salad sound tasty Utopian.
Enjoy.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 5:48 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Sitting in bed thinking about Corbyn...

I think frustration is playing a large part in events.

Over the past year, I've lost count of the demonstrations about Tory policies. It's been right across the board. Lawyers, doctors, nurses, health workers, disabled, TTIP protest, the badger cull --- Ignored.

Economists, mental health charities, Citizens Advice Bureau, housing associations, children's charities, constantly warning about what's going to happen --- Ignored.

Food banks, suicides, homelessness, evictions, housing shortage --- Ignored.

And then they wonder why Corbyn is so popular?

Yes, you're right.
Corbyn's appeal is in the simplicity of his message.
That's not a bad thing.
He's not appealing to fear, he's trying to quell fear.

Post by **refitman** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 5:50 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
refitman wrote:
TechnicalEphemera wrote: Cripes, I hope it doesn't make its way into your home. That is impressive.
Fortunately I am just up the hill from the houses at the bottom. Although one of my neighbour's garden is flooded, with all their kids toys floating around.

The water isn't exactly clean either.
It all comes up when you get that sort of rush of water.

After two flash floods in a year we took up the fight with the council and Thames Water. It took two years to get Thames Water to admit they were responsible for the drains...And another two years before they put in bigger pipes.

We've had it come back out the drains a couple of times this year. The neighbour with the drive in the photo has had to rake all the gravel back onto the drive. This is the first time it's done the manhole though.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 5:52 pm

This from Hodges, who is supposedly condemning anti-Jewish feeling.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 5:55 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Part of the problem, SH and TE, is that many are not convinced that what Blairites/Progress et al are now proposing is any longer meaningfully "social democratic".

We had the situation (re the welfare vote) that Corbyn was seemingly the only one of the four candidates prepared to defend A KEY BLAIR POLICY WHILST IN GOVERNMENT.

You have to admit that is pretty insane, no?

You know as well as I do that the reason for the abstention was because there are things in the Bill we approve of, and so we abstain on second reading, propose amendments, and vote against at final.

I accept that the subtleties of how Parliament works have been lost and it would have been better on this occasion just to vote against.

I think that the government from 97-10 was a good successful one that I want returned.

You should not buy into Corbyn's Bennite narrative of betrayal by the " grandees".

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 6:00 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:Part of the problem, SH and TE, is that many are not convinced that what Blairites/Progress et al are now proposing is any longer meaningfully "social democratic".

We had the situation (re the welfare vote) that Corbyn was seemingly the only one of the four candidates prepared to defend A KEY BLAIR POLICY WHILST IN GOVERNMENT.

You have to admit that is pretty insane, no?

You know as well as I do that the reason for the abstention was because there are things in the Bill we approve of, and so we abstain on second reading, propose amendments, and vote against at final.

I accept that the subtleties of how Parliament works have been lost and it would have been better on this occasion just to vote against.

I think that the government from 97-10 was a good successful one that I want returned.

You should not buy into Corbyn's Bennite narrative of betrayal by the " grandees".

But it never can be Hugo. That was 1997 to 2010.

This is 2015. Everything is different. The next government will be operating in 2020.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 6:06 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Green Facebook Friend.jpg
Interesting argument being used here. And they appear to be saying they've been told by the Greens it's OK to vote in the Labour leadership.

Feasgar math, a h-uile duine

It would be helpful if either Natalie Bennett or Caroline Lucas would speak loudly and publicly against members of the Green Party signing up for and voting in the Labour Party internal elections. @Tizme1 has assured us that her party does not in any way support or encourage its members to do that, indeed she checked as far up the line as she could. Perhaps the attachmented* person's "Green Facebook Friend" is twisting things a little, or has misinterpreted something? I've trawled through the news pages on the Green Party's website in hopes of finding a clear statement from their leader (or others) on the matter but could only find two articles since the GE on anything to do with either Labour or with election processes and the two are not connected to each other:
https://www.greenparty.org.uk/news/2015 ... %E2%80%9D/
https://www.greenparty.org.uk/news/2015 ... -campaign/

Now, the first could be construed as support for Corbyn himself - "describing his rise as part of a “shift to a new political era” marked by the Green Surge and the growth of the SNP" is the tone of it, though; and the second, "cross-party-voting," could be also misinterpreted - it's about a petition organised by the Electoral Reform Society and Unlock Democracy. Mind you, it's also possible that the "GFF" either thought someone in their own local party had tipped them a wink or that someone did. I would not imagine it was the official 'internal' position to do so - it would just be an invitation to reciprocation, encouraging Labour Party members to do the same in Green Party internal elections.

*Attachmented= I couldn't work out how else to phrase it

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 6:07 pm

yahyah wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:Part of the problem, SH and TE, is that many are not convinced that what Blairites/Progress et al are now proposing is any longer meaningfully "social democratic".

We had the situation (re the welfare vote) that Corbyn was seemingly the only one of the four candidates prepared to defend A KEY BLAIR POLICY WHILST IN GOVERNMENT.

You have to admit that is pretty insane, no?

You know as well as I do that the reason for the abstention was because there are things in the Bill we approve of, and so we abstain on second reading, propose amendments, and vote against at final.

I accept that the subtleties of how Parliament works have been lost and it would have been better on this occasion just to vote against.

I think that the government from 97-10 was a good successful one that I want returned.

You should not buy into Corbyn's Bennite narrative of betrayal by the " grandees".

But it never can be Hugo. That was 1997 to 2010.

This is 2015. Everything is different. The next government will be operating in 2020.

The next government may be sooner than 2020, yahyah.
Many of the Labour MPs that would've make up Ed Miliband's government are still part of the team.
I'm glad because the country requires genuine competence.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 6:22 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:Off on a tangent.

Mr Riots and I are more than a little disappointed that we were too late to snap up a dinky little tractor that's been done up and put on sale in our favourite garden / machinery centre. It's 42 years old but runs like a dream now ... and would have been just perfect for getting the big logs up from down in the boggy woods. It had just been sold for £500 before we saw it this morning .......................... Such is life.

Today is a grizzly drizzly day.

Have you got room for a little Welsh cob? Not that I've one to offer but someone local to you might have a horse or pony that could haul timber when you need. Sorry to hear that the little tractor had gone to someone else. Years ago, we used to regularly go past a large Porsche showroom on the way out of London (now I can't recall if it was on the A4/M4 or the A316 down towards the M3) but they had a bright red shiny little Porsche tractor (of the old style) in pride of place in their window. It's the only Porsche anything that I've ever lusted over...

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 6:25 pm

yahyah wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:Off on a tangent.

Mr Riots and I are more than a little disappointed that we were too late to snap up a dinky little tractor that's been done up and put on sale in our favourite garden / machinery centre. It's 42 years old but runs like a dream now ... and would have been just perfect for getting the big logs up from down in the boggy woods. It had just been sold for £500 before we saw it this morning .......................... Such is life.

Today is a grizzly drizzly day.

How about one of those lovely big horses, there's a chap round here who uses one for logging ?

Hah! Just gave almost the same answer! That'll teach me to not read further before replying... Still, great minds and all that

Tonibel · Post by **Tonibel** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 6:25 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
TechnicalEphemera wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:UKIP pose as a "real Labour" alternative in anti-Tory areas.

That is how they nearly won the Heywood and Middleton by-election just weeks after Ed Balls made an almost comically pro-austerity speech at the Labour conference (which they exploited shamelessly, rushing out "we will defend your benefits" leaflets after Ed B pledged to freeze CB)

Labour have just been wiped out by an SNP who were PERCIEVED as to their left and anti-austerity (whatever the reality) and if they went into terminal decline, its not just UKIP who would benefit - but Plaid the Greens and even the LibDems (who, under Farron, are set to pitch themselves way to the left of Blairism) would feast on the corpse too. There is not one part of the Labour coalition that is "safe", in extremis.

If people want to vote for a plastic insincere political puppet who just does what media plutocrats tell them, they already have Cameron. The prospects for Labour in "me-tooism" are now less than zero, and (in contrast to post-1983 or even 1992) there is little room for the party to move even further right without its very existence coming into question. The political culture in the "Westminster bubble" is sick, delusional and widely reviled.

Voting for Corbyn may not be the answer, but it is a response to a profound question - "what is the Labour party *for* in the 21st century"? The very question that both Dan Jarvis and Stella Creasy asked in the days and weeks after the GE, which alone marks them out as possible future leaders
No UKIP don't pose as real Labour, they pose as the - "stop those filthy immigrants stealing your jobs and abusing your kids party"

Hence those disgusting adverts linking child abuse and ethnicity.

The Labour loves welfare scroungers party.

They do not stand as a left wing alternative to Labour.

Jarvis and Creasy both screwed it up. Both of them could have stood and won. They probably won't get a second chance.

Also why do you think I believe in Labour me-too-ism. I don't and really only Kendall was advocating that approach.

You want a slogan - Labour Tough on Welfare, Tough on the causes of Welfare.

Which means very little but gives cover for a generous welfare system aimed at those that need it, whilst portraying a party cracking down on the tiny number that abuse the system. I don't see a "hard left" Labour Party managing that sort of messaging.

Scotland - different country. What works in Scotland won't work in England.
I don't think Creasy would have got 35 votes to stand for leader. She struggled to get them for deputy. I voted for her, but I don't think she'll come close to Watson. A campaign of selfies.

Watson (who I have no time for) told the best joke of the campaign. He rang up someone to canvass them yesterday.

Member: "I gave you the most votes"
Watson: how did you...?
Member: You 5, Stella 4, Ben 3 ....

Jarvis has the quality of being a blanksheet. Not to be dismissed at this point.

I think that Jarvis' reasons for not standing this time round were very valid. He may feel they are no longer so relevant in two or three years time. I have always felt that JC does not really want to go into the next election as leader sothere may well be changes. From that viewpoint fixed term parliaments may be a blessing

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 6:25 pm

The storm cometh.
Thunder.
Dark sky.

Rain.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 6:27 pm

citizenJA wrote:
yahyah wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
You know as well as I do that the reason for the abstention was because there are things in the Bill we approve of, and so we abstain on second reading, propose amendments, and vote against at final.

I accept that the subtleties of how Parliament works have been lost and it would have been better on this occasion just to vote against.

I think that the government from 97-10 was a good successful one that I want returned.

You should not buy into Corbyn's Bennite narrative of betrayal by the " grandees".

But it never can be Hugo. That was 1997 to 2010.

This is 2015. Everything is different. The next government will be operating in 2020.
The next government may be sooner than 2020, yahyah.
Many of the Labour MPs that would've make up Ed Miliband's government are still part of the team.
I'm glad because the country requires genuine competence.

Things we can be certain of include that there will be no new government before 2020. It looks unlikely that there will be any change before 2025.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 6:30 pm

Tonibel wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
TechnicalEphemera wrote: No UKIP don't pose as real Labour, they pose as the - "stop those filthy immigrants stealing your jobs and abusing your kids party"

Hence those disgusting adverts linking child abuse and ethnicity.

The Labour loves welfare scroungers party.

They do not stand as a left wing alternative to Labour.

Jarvis and Creasy both screwed it up. Both of them could have stood and won. They probably won't get a second chance.

Also why do you think I believe in Labour me-too-ism. I don't and really only Kendall was advocating that approach.

You want a slogan - Labour Tough on Welfare, Tough on the causes of Welfare.

Which means very little but gives cover for a generous welfare system aimed at those that need it, whilst portraying a party cracking down on the tiny number that abuse the system. I don't see a "hard left" Labour Party managing that sort of messaging.

Scotland - different country. What works in Scotland won't work in England.
I don't think Creasy would have got 35 votes to stand for leader. She struggled to get them for deputy. I voted for her, but I don't think she'll come close to Watson. A campaign of selfies.

Watson (who I have no time for) told the best joke of the campaign. He rang up someone to canvass them yesterday.

Member: "I gave you the most votes"
Watson: how did you...?
Member: You 5, Stella 4, Ben 3 ....

Jarvis has the quality of being a blanksheet. Not to be dismissed at this point.

I think that Jarvis' reasons for not standing this time round were very valid. He may feel they are no longer so relevant in two or three years time. I have always felt that JC does not really want to go into the next election as leader sothere may well be changes. From that viewpoint fixed term parliaments may be a blessing

I hope he doesn't, but it would betray his political life if Corbyn quit before 2020.

He is either removed, or will be in place.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 6:33 pm

yahyah wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:Off on a tangent.

Mr Riots and I are more than a little disappointed that we were too late to snap up a dinky little tractor that's been done up and put on sale in our favourite garden / machinery centre. It's 42 years old but runs like a dream now ... and would have been just perfect for getting the big logs up from down in the boggy woods. It had just been sold for £500 before we saw it this morning .......................... Such is life.

Today is a grizzly drizzly day.

How about one of those lovely big horses, there's a chap round here who uses one for logging ?

Yes they're fantastic, aren't they. If we had the right land to keep a horse on Mr Riots would have one without a second thought - but we don't. Collecting the fallen / felled wood is an on/off job that he does throughout the year. We had a friend who used to do a lot of horse drawn logging but she has, sadly, moved away and I don't have any other contacts that are local.

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 6:33 pm

In case anyone is wondering I am not a vegetarian, but eat very little meat. I used to be, even a vegan for a while. You do get sensitive to stuff, I was tee-total and didn't drink coffee and knew what full of beans meant. Even wheat was speedy, but I still enjoyed my dope and acid. After thirteen or so years I compromised because of fussy eating kids; their health was far more important. I wasn't the bullying sort, don't you just hate them? Blimey I even knew idots who didn't even allow their cats and dogs any meat. When I say bullying, I did insist on cohabiting ladies not eating meat, well not at home or in my presence that is, which may explain why only two of them stayed any length of time. They said bacon sarnies were missed the most. Neither was I demanding for dalliances, although meals out were obviously vegetarian.

'And for all you meat eaters who think that sex is better, no doubt Russell Brand and others can tell you otherwise. I certainly can, you're no less hungry, meat eating just adds to the urgency, which is probably no good thing for the ladies. It was probably as well we went out to a carvery for our first taste of meat. I could feel the fangs growing with blood dripping down my chin. Had we not been in public I'd have cast the table aside and taken my wife there and then.

Sorry about that folks, I'd forgotten to prepare the rice, which is still cooking.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 6:33 pm

citizenJA wrote:The storm cometh.
Thunder.
Dark sky.

Rain.

Are you talking about the weather or the state of the Labour party, JA? It's hard to tell the difference at the mo, both feel a little ominous!

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 6:55 pm

Iain Martin retweeted
Glaswegian Yoko Ono ‏@YokoOnoGlasgow Aug 20
Pour Special Brew into a puddle. Give the can owner a tambourine. Mark time together until the puddle is still and reflects back the clouds.

Iain Martin retweeted
Glaswegian Yoko Ono ‏@YokoOnoGlasgow Aug 17
When a police car stops at the lights, breathe on the window. Trace the symbol for Moon in Tai Kadai with your tongue on the misted glass.

I love this twitter persona ... thanks to Iain Martin for retweeting them. They always make me smile.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 6:59 pm

Labour leadership vote result 'will be final', insists interim party boss amid legal challenge threat

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 67027.html

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 6:59 pm

I think it is worth restating that I am not SH. While he is from the Blairite wing of the party I am from the centre left.

Therefore I am arguing the answer is definitely not Corbyn's left wing ghetto, but equally it is not Blairism.

We need a third way - erm hang on I am sure I have heard that somewhere.

Blairism worked because at the time the economy was growing, business was seen as the engine of growth, but the country was falling to bits and the Tories were hated because of their callous attitude.

Blair said vote for us, we will work with business and we will invest the spoils of success in fixing the country (health, education) and helping people at the bottom get a fair shout.

Nobody cared about immigration from the EU because when it finally happened suddenly the ability to actually get a plumber was a good thing.

But - then the economy crashed, people started getting poorer and there aren't enough jobs. Now immigration from the EU is a big issue and business is no longer seen as the engine of growth. Now people want to pay less tax (hang on to their cash) want the immigrants gone (so they can get a better paid job) and if they are working long hours for peanuts an end to welfare which they see as giving free stuff to idle people. Oh and keep those lefty Scots away from our money.

Blairism and Corbynism won't work in that environment. I think you need a broadly anti corporate, pro small business, anti migration, pro living wage kind of approach. People will pay tax but would rather the wealthy paid more tax to pay for their needs.

It is just about possible to construct a progressive agenda that addresses that "market", the biggest challenge is migration.

Post by **refitman** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 7:14 pm

In news that will surprise no-one:

Government's trade union proposals not fit for purpose, watchdog says

Red tape watchdog criticises initial costings and rationale for three sets of proposals designed to make it harder for workers to organise strike action

The RPC (regulatory policy committee) said the government had been too hasty in pushing through its proposals, which were first set out in the Conservative party manifesto ahead of the general election, and called on it to undertake further consultations.

The RPC looked at the initial impact assessments of three sets of proposals in the trade union bill, which MPs will debate when parliament reconvenes after the summer recess, and classified them as “not fit for purpose”.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... chdog-says" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ScarletGas · Post by **ScarletGas** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 7:14 pm

Just caught Sky News on the Labour leadership elections.

The self important Barry Sherman and Jack McConnell (who most people would pass in the street without recognising) both giving their "considered views" the former blaming Ed Miliband.

Firstly, who asked them for their opinions? Why the media again looking for a stick to beat us with again. Could they not find anyone at all to defend the process or shock, horror perhaps they didn't look to hard.................

Secondly, has a Blairite politician (or should I say Grandee) ever thought better of doing an interview in the interests of the party rather than thinking of their own self interest?

Two quotes come to mind: Mark Twain."It is better to keep your mouth shut rather than open it and remove all doubt" and Clement Atlee to Harold Laski "A period of silence from you would be welcome"

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 7:25 pm

Willow904 wrote:
citizenJA wrote:The storm cometh.
Thunder.
Dark sky.

Rain.
Are you talking about the weather or the state of the Labour party, JA? It's hard to tell the difference at the mo, both feel a little ominous!

The weather here in Stoke!

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 7:28 pm

ScarletGas wrote:Just caught Sky News on the Labour leadership elections.

The self important Barry Sherman and Jack McConnell (who most people would pass in the street without recognising) both giving their "considered views" the former blaming Ed Miliband.

Firstly, who asked them for their opinions? Why the media again looking for a stick to beat us with again. Could they not find anyone at all to defend the process or shock, horror perhaps they didn't look to hard.................

Secondly, has a Blairite politician (or should I say Grandee) ever thought better of doing an interview in the interests of the party rather than thinking of their own self interest?

Two quotes come to mind: Mark Twain."It is better to keep your mouth shut rather than open it and remove all doubt" and Clement Atlee to Harold Laski "A period of silence from you would be welcome"

I don't think Miliband was responsible for permitting votes from people who hadn't gone through a long qualifying period (but I could be wrong).

Miliband specifically put rules in place to stop candidates like Corbyn (who lack parliamentary support).

Finally as well known Miliband fan boy Hodges point out it was Progress pushing for "open primaries" that resulted in this mess.

So I concur the two individuals named are indeed muppets.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 7:40 pm

Labour leadership contest awash with excitement and despair
By James Naughtie BBC News
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34018704" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Pretty fair assessment I think.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 7:48 pm

UK Parliamentary Inquiries
Communities and Local Government Committee

The housing association sector and the Right to Buy inquiry
Inquiry status: open - accepting written evidence

The Committee is currently accepting written evidence, the deadline is Friday 28 August 2015.

Scope of the inquiry
The Communities and Local Government Committee will examine the viability and sustainability of housing associations. This inquiry will look at the proposed extension of Right to Buy and how this and a number of other government measures may impact on the ability of housing associations to build and develop.

Latest evidence
No evidence has been published by the committee yet.

http://www.parliament.uk/business/commi ... ht-to-buy/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Inquiry announced 29 July 2015
No written evidence published yet according to the Parliamentary website.
The deadline for submitting written evidence is six days from now.
Does anyone want to submit anything?
Someone is going to submit something, right?
This is an important inquiry.

http://www.parliament.uk/business/commi ... lications/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 7:50 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Labour leadership contest awash with excitement and despair
By James Naughtie BBC News
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34018704" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Pretty fair assessment I think.

The only despair I feel is over current Tory government.
Labour has nothing to do with that.

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 8:04 pm

If anyone needs reminding of the importance of Leveson's press recommendations, other than their nonsensical propaganda, I've just noticed 'Lost Honour Christpher Jefferies' is on ITV shortly. I have seen it before but may watch again even if it does irk me.

'And on that score, knowing there's no going back, I cannot imagine what the press would have said if any of the after-parties at our house were ever busted, especially as I tutored both at HE and FE levels. I never ever encouraged drug use, more steered away from danger and tempered excess. Mail readers wouldn't see it that way of course.

I've no idea what it were about but am pretty sure DrJazz in the other place has spoken of the nightmare of press intrusion. Good night, am shutting the lid on this now.

Postscript: I did know of one or two junkies that schooled with my lads, but they never came to ours, which is more the pity. I may have been able to stop them, you never know.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 8:13 pm

Death of buy-to-let: landlords wake up to Osborne's 150pc tax
Buy-to-let investors paying more than 100pc of their profits in tax are already selling up

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/pers ... c-tax.html

Is this correct? I haven't read much about it, if it is.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 8:16 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
Death of buy-to-let: landlords wake up to Osborne's 150pc tax
Buy-to-let investors paying more than 100pc of their profits in tax are already selling up

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/pers ... c-tax.html
Is this correct? I haven't read much about it, if it is.

I'd like to think it is ... death of buy to let is a good phrase in my book. If there is suddenly a lot of property being let go by landlords it should help prices and those people who actually want to buy a home to live in.

I'll read the link now!

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 9:11 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
ohsocynical wrote:
Death of buy-to-let: landlords wake up to Osborne's 150pc tax
Buy-to-let investors paying more than 100pc of their profits in tax are already selling up

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/pers ... c-tax.html
Is this correct? I haven't read much about it, if it is.
I'd like to think it is ... death of buy to let is a good phrase in my book. If there is suddenly a lot of property being let go by landlords it should help prices and those people who actually want to buy a home to live in.

I'll read the link now!

I loved the hard done by woman who had five buy to let properties and was so badly hit by the tax she was thinking of giving up her career as a teacher.

The Telegraph must think the median income in this country is £150K.

Laughing aside it is an odd change because it only hurts people using mortgages to purchase properties (effectively taxing on turnover not profit). So if you are super rich it doesn't matter at all but if you are very rich it hurts.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 9:15 pm

Apologies already mentioned.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 9:36 pm

Professor John Curtice, the only pollsters to predict a Conservative majority at the general election, also told the Huffington Post UK the only major survey of the election battle would have to be "horrendously wrong" for Jeremy Corbyn to lose.

So-called "shy Tories", Conservative voters embarrassed to tell pollsters who they are backing, were cited as explaining the party's unexpected 1992 general election victory.

While ruling nothing out, Prof Curtice is cool on the idea a "shy Blairite" faction could lurk in the Labour leadership polling, not least since "shy Tories" could not explain May's election result.
He said Labour supporters were "not terribly shy".
"These are people who are really exercised about the issues they care about. They are not a bunch of provincial Tory people who think that polls are run by left-wing sociologists, which is a reasonable case to explain why Tories are shy. These are paid up members of the Labour Party."

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/08 ... _hp_ref=uk

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 9:40 pm

"The membership of the Labour Party looks more left-wing than even at the time Ed Miliband was elected. They were the ones who were put off by the Iraq War and New Labour. They are more pro-Corbyn.

"If the data is correct there may have been a process going on even before these latest sign-ups."

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/08 ... _hp_ref=uk

MsChin · Post by **MsChin** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 9:47 pm

citizenJA wrote:
UK Parliamentary Inquiries
Communities and Local Government Committee

The housing association sector and the Right to Buy inquiry
Inquiry status: open - accepting written evidence

The Committee is currently accepting written evidence, the deadline is Friday 28 August 2015.

Scope of the inquiry
The Communities and Local Government Committee will examine the viability and sustainability of housing associations. This inquiry will look at the proposed extension of Right to Buy and how this and a number of other government measures may impact on the ability of housing associations to build and develop.

Latest evidence
No evidence has been published by the committee yet.

http://www.parliament.uk/business/commi ... ht-to-buy/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Inquiry announced 29 July 2015
No written evidence published yet according to the Parliamentary website.
The deadline for submitting written evidence is six days from now.
Does anyone want to submit anything?
Someone is going to submit something, right?
This is an important inquiry.

http://www.parliament.uk/business/commi ... lications/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The evidence won't be published until after the deadline, CitizenJ, so don't worry! The committee clerk notifies whoever has sent stuff in that it's been accepted before publication - I rather think there will be no shortage of submissions. My (Labour) MP chairs that particular committee and usually does a pretty good job of it. They looked at the private rented sector last year and some of their recommendations became Labour policy for the GE.

There's a House of Lords select committee looking at where the Equality Act is working with regard to disability and a Commons (Women & Equalities, a new one) sekect committee looking at trans equality. The deadline for evidence for both of these is pretty tight.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 10:05 pm

MsChin wrote:
citizenJA wrote:
UK Parliamentary Inquiries
Communities and Local Government Committee

The housing association sector and the Right to Buy inquiry
Inquiry status: open - accepting written evidence

The Committee is currently accepting written evidence, the deadline is Friday 28 August 2015.

Scope of the inquiry
The Communities and Local Government Committee will examine the viability and sustainability of housing associations. This inquiry will look at the proposed extension of Right to Buy and how this and a number of other government measures may impact on the ability of housing associations to build and develop.

Latest evidence
No evidence has been published by the committee yet.

http://www.parliament.uk/business/commi ... ht-to-buy/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Inquiry announced 29 July 2015
No written evidence published yet according to the Parliamentary website.
The deadline for submitting written evidence is six days from now.
Does anyone want to submit anything?
Someone is going to submit something, right?
This is an important inquiry.

http://www.parliament.uk/business/commi ... lications/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The evidence won't be published until after the deadline, CitizenJ, so don't worry! The committee clerk notifies whoever has sent stuff in that it's been accepted before publication - I rather think there will be no shortage of submissions. My (Labour) MP chairs that particular committee and usually does a pretty good job of it. They looked at the private rented sector last year and some of their recommendations became Labour policy for the GE.

There's a House of Lords select committee looking at where the Equality Act is working with regard to disability and a Commons (Women & Equalities, a new one) sekect committee looking at trans equality. The deadline for evidence for both of these is pretty tight.

Many thanks!

Goodnight, everyone.
love
cJA

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 10:57 pm

Here you go for some Corbyn balance.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... orbynomics

Not sure what policies they are talking about. In general Labour should be opposing austerity, that I agree with.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 11:00 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
"The membership of the Labour Party looks more left-wing than even at the time Ed Miliband was elected. They were the ones who were put off by the Iraq War and New Labour. They are more pro-Corbyn.

"If the data is correct there may have been a process going on even before these latest sign-ups."

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/08 ... _hp_ref=uk

The Labour membership has always been more left wing than the unions and the mainstream party. The Tory membership is similarly more extreme than the mainstream party.

Trimming your members enthusiasm is essential to win elections. Which is why the muppets who nominated Corbyn, but don't want him to lead the party, win my award for most stupid people in Labour politics.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 11:32 pm

How could I have missed this corker from a few days ago? The worst I've read so far ... and that's saying something.

Ed Miliband Didn't Just Lose Us The Election - He Killed the Labour Party Stone Dead
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/paul-bl ... mg00000067" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Labour Party is about to expire. In a few short weeks' time this once-proud political force will be officially reduced to an ineffective, screeching ball of 'passion', chanting 'Tory Scum' and crying foul from the sidelines. Meanwhile, the vast majority of the voting public will shrug their shoulders and get on with their lives, safe in the knowledge that there's one less credible choice to be made at the next general election.

At the moment, genuine Labour supporters are still clinging on to the idea that perhaps, by some miracle, Jeremy Corbyn won't win the leadership contest. But they're kidding themselves. I hope I'm wrong but Ed Miliband's restructuring of the voting system means that Corbyn will win and probably by a long margin. So come the 12 September, we'll have one man to thank for the death of the Labour Party: Ed Miliband...

So you can only be a 'genuine Labour supporter' if you think Corbyn shouldn't win the contest?

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Sat 22 Aug, 2015 11:39 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:How could I have missed this corker from a few days ago? The worst I've read so far ... and that's saying something.

Ed Miliband Didn't Just Lose Us The Election - He Killed the Labour Party Stone Dead
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/paul-bl ... mg00000067" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Labour Party is about to expire. In a few short weeks' time this once-proud political force will be officially reduced to an ineffective, screeching ball of 'passion', chanting 'Tory Scum' and crying foul from the sidelines. Meanwhile, the vast majority of the voting public will shrug their shoulders and get on with their lives, safe in the knowledge that there's one less credible choice to be made at the next general election.

At the moment, genuine Labour supporters are still clinging on to the idea that perhaps, by some miracle, Jeremy Corbyn won't win the leadership contest. But they're kidding themselves. I hope I'm wrong but Ed Miliband's restructuring of the voting system means that Corbyn will win and probably by a long margin. So come the 12 September, we'll have one man to thank for the death of the Labour Party: Ed Miliband...
So you can only be a 'genuine Labour supporter' if you think Corbyn shouldn't win the contest?

I suspect in his eyes genuine Labour supporter equals people who believe Labours primary aim is winning elections.

But who knows, blaming Miliband for this mess is bollocks anyway. If stupid Labour MPs hadn't nominated Corbyn "to have a debate" this wouldn't be happening. So if you believe Corbyn is going to destroy the Labour Party the people to blame are clear - and don't include Ed Miliband.