Friday 22nd January 2016

[StephenDolan]

Morning all.

I've read this a couple of times and still can't see what point he's trying to make?

"On the doctors' strike, Lord Winston said: "I think the Labour Party is a shambles actually. I think the way we have handled this whole thing, as we do with many issues at the moment, is totally inadequate and I think we show appallingly poor leadership." https://www.politicshome.com/party-poli ... ersonality" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And
https://www.politicshome.com/party-poli ... its-mantra" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[utopiandreams]

Morning all.

I've read this a couple of times and still can't see what point he's trying to make? ...

My reading of it is that if he wishes to have his say on the NHS then do so, indeed with his TV background he should be shouting his views far and wide. Regarding the Labour leadership, it is possible that he has been asked direct questions and fallen into a trap. Given his media background he should know better and keep such things within the party and not allow the interviewer to set the narrative. Either way he's been taken for a fool and allowed the much more serious matter of the NHS to be overshadowed by his other comments.

[rebeccariots2]

Morning.

I would say good morning ... but not feeling jolly enough. This headline article has a lot to do with that. It is so depressing and overwhelming. The terrible plight of all these refugees - but how to cope? I feel as though the EU / Europe is pretty much over already. There is no unity of approach - and far right groups and sentiment on the rise.

French PM Manuel Valls says refugee crisis is 'destabilising' Europe
Speaking at the Economic Forum in Davos, Valls fears the flow of those fleeing war zones is placing the concept of Europe in grave danger
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/j ... ing-europe" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Willow904]

Morning all.

I've read this a couple of times and still can't see what point he's trying to make?

"On the doctors' strike, Lord Winston said: "I think the Labour Party is a shambles actually. I think the way we have handled this whole thing, as we do with many issues at the moment, is totally inadequate and I think we show appallingly poor leadership." https://www.politicshome.com/party-poli ... ersonality" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And
https://www.politicshome.com/party-poli ... its-mantra" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It strikes me that the necessary communication between the leadership team and the House of Lords just isn't there. Does Corbyn have regular contact with John Prescott? How do the Lords proceed on various issues? Based on the last manifesto? What counter arguments have Labour put out to challenge Hunt's weekend deaths misinformation? What is Labour's response to the latest alcohol guidelines, which seem designed to create greater confusion, rather than less? Lord Winston's outburst may not be helpful, but it does raise very serious concerns as it suggests that Corbyn's team are struggling to deal with the sheer volume of work involved in being an effective opposition. One or two new faces at the top have others around them to take up the slack while they find their feet, but if the whole leadership team are new to the job the ensuing chaos is inevitable and potentially very damaging. And he's right about Trident. Labour didn't have a defence problem and now they do and to what end? The Tories have a majority and will renew Trident anyway. All the debate in Labour will do is damage the party and lose more votes than it gains. I don't think there's anything wrong with Corbyn's principles but his timing is awful. Putting the NHS in the spotlight rather than nukes would have served the British public better. To be clear, it's not Corbyn's stance on Trident I object to, it's the amount of time and energy devoted to it. It's not a top issue for most Labour voters, let alone the public in general.

[rebeccariots2]

HuffPostUK Politics ‏@HuffPostUKPol 37m37 minutes ago
Tory MP denies BBC accusation she refused interview 'because she couldn't veto questions' http://huff.to/1PIukWH" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[utopiandreams]

@Willow904

Some good points, Willow, that I largely agree with, nevertheless I still ask who is setting the narrative? There is so much dissent being misdirected that this government literally gets away with murder. I very nearly reverted to my 'I despair' sign off that was common during the last parliament, but am not allowing myself to be so pushed.

[utopiandreams]

Duplicate post.

[rebeccariots2]

Morning all.

I've read this a couple of times and still can't see what point he's trying to make?

"On the doctors' strike, Lord Winston said: "I think the Labour Party is a shambles actually. I think the way we have handled this whole thing, as we do with many issues at the moment, is totally inadequate and I think we show appallingly poor leadership." https://www.politicshome.com/party-poli ... ersonality" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And
https://www.politicshome.com/party-poli ... its-mantra" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It strikes me that the necessary communication between the leadership team and the House of Lords just isn't there. Does Corbyn have regular contact with John Prescott? How do the Lords proceed on various issues? Based on the last manifesto? What counter arguments have Labour put out to challenge Hunt's weekend deaths misinformation? What is Labour's response to the latest alcohol guidelines, which seem designed to create greater confusion, rather than less? Lord Winston's outburst may not be helpful, but it does raise very serious concerns as it suggests that Corbyn's team are struggling to deal with the sheer volume of work involved in being an effective opposition. One or two new faces at the top have others around them to take up the slack while they find their feet, but if the whole leadership team are new to the job the ensuing chaos is inevitable and potentially very damaging. And he's right about Trident. Labour didn't have a defence problem and now they do and to what end? The Tories have a majority and will renew Trident anyway. All the debate in Labour will do is damage the party and lose more votes than it gains. I don't think there's anything wrong with Corbyn's principles but his timing is awful. Putting the NHS in the spotlight rather than nukes would have served the British public better. To be clear, it's not Corbyn's stance on Trident I object to, it's the amount of time and energy devoted to it. It's not a top issue for most Labour voters, let alone the public in general.

Can see all the points you make are valid Willow. But just to be devils advocate ... I'm guessing that the Tories want to make these things issues right now. They started off with the 'threat to security' stuff and have played it endlessly in the HoC and other public fora - so the media pick it up and it gathers yet more oomph. Plus - there is going to be a vote on Trident soon - so it is going to be an issue no matter what. The SNP were always going to make an issue of Labour's stance on Trident too. And then - Corbyn did stand as leader on very clear principles and won a resounding victory - so does he just ignore that many of those who voted for him would appear to endorse his stance on Trident or try to have a debate on it while it is still relevant - i.e. before rather than after the vote?

I share your frustration with the messiness of it all - it speaks yet again of the gap between many of the elected representatives and the membership.

[rebeccariots2]

To cheer myself up I'm posting these little snippets of better news. (Will look forward to Anatoly's round up later.)

John McDonnell MP Retweeted
Vince Maple ‏@vincemaple 10h10 hours ago
Newington Thanet result:
LAB: 288
UKIP: 229
CON: 156
IND (Hodder): 49
GRN: 20
LDEM: 12
IND (Birchall): 10

#LabGain

Sadiq Khan MP ‏@SadiqKhan 5m5 minutes ago East, England
Congratulations to @SJuryDada for her by-election win. She's a brilliant campaigner and will be a great councillor.

I think she's Southwark.

[rebeccariots2]

John Prescott ‏@johnprescott 11h11 hours ago
I see Andy Coulson has got a new job in PR.
I left him a good luck message on my mobile.

[ephemerid]

The "narrative" - the political weather, if you will - is set by government and propagated by a compliant, craven, and in some cases corrupt, media.

Much of the press is now accepting, without question or scrutiny, whatever emanates from the No.10 spokesthings; there are too many so-called journalists who simply regurgitate what they are told.
Our national broadcaster, supposedly impartial, has become so scared of threats to its' existence that it is now demonstrating a pro-government bias to an unprecedented degree. It's ridiculous.
We have broadsheet newspapers which, at best, dress up opinion as fact; at worst, they rely on the musings of morons in the Twattosphere for the soundbites they use in place of headlines.
We also know that no real scrutiny of the media will happen; Leveson 2 won't happen; and the likes of Brooks and Coulson escape the law, while ideologues like Dacre chair the oversight of our press.

The Tories are very clever at this sort of stuff. They will use the big guns of the other parties when it suits (eg. Indyref) then shaft them as soon as they've got what they want.
They are, with the connivance of the media, creating a climate of fear and fomenting hatred with their divide-and-rule tactics; and what passes for the Fourth Estate will not call them to account.

The Tories have manufactured the need for an in/out referendum because they had no expectation that they would win the election; at best, they were expecting another coalition. This is a "story" of their own making, and now they have to act on it.
So OGRPPFGTCC is busy flipping and flopping like the fish he so admires, pretending that he will get the change he claims he wants and tinkering about with the date of a plebiscite he doesn't actually want to have and will swerve if he can get away with it.
He and Osborne have used the media - for 6 long years now - to make Labour responsible for the global crash, to make Labour responsible for the collapsing welfare state, to make Labour responsible for all the ills in society caused entirely by the Tories.

In this dystopia, it seems the press thinks its' job is to assist government in creating a narrative - when its' job is actually to investigate what government does, scrutinise the effects of policy, base reporting on fact not magical thinking, and speak truth to power.

In all those issues, most of the press is failing. It fails itself, it fails us, and it fails to be a voice for the voiceless. It's a disgrace.

[StephenDolan]

The "narrative" - the political weather, if you will - is set by government and propagated by a compliant, craven, and in some cases corrupt, media.

Much of the press is now accepting, without question or scrutiny, whatever emanates from the No.10 spokesthings; there are too many so-called journalists who simply regurgitate what they are told.
Our national broadcaster, supposedly impartial, has become so scared of threats to its' existence that it is now demonstrating a pro-government bias to an unprecedented degree. It's ridiculous.
We have broadsheet newspapers which, at best, dress up opinion as fact; at worst, they rely on the musings of morons in the Twattosphere for the soundbites they use in place of headlines.
We also know that no real scrutiny of the media will happen; Leveson 2 won't happen; and the likes of Brooks and Coulson escape the law, while ideologues like Dacre chair the oversight of our press.

The Tories are very clever at this sort of stuff. They will use the big guns of the other parties when it suits (eg. Indyref) then shaft them as soon as they've got what they want.
They are, with the connivance of the media, creating a climate of fear and fomenting hatred with their divide-and-rule tactics; and what passes for the Fourth Estate will not call them to account.

They have manufactured the need for an in/out referendum because they had no expectation that they would win the election; at best, they were expecting another coalition. This is a "story" of their own making, and now they have to act on it.
So OGRPPFGTCC is busy flipping and flopping like the fish he so admires, pretending that he will get the change he claims he wants and tinkering about with the date of a plebiscite he doesn't actually want to have and will swerve if he can get away with it.
He and Osborne have used the media - for 6 long years now - to make Labour responsible for the global crash, to make Labour responsible for the collapsing welfare state, to make Labour responsible for all the ills in society caused entirely by the Tories.

In this dystopia, it seems the press thinks its' job is to assist government in creating a narrative - when its' job is actually to investigate what government does, scrutinise the effects of policy, base reporting on fact not magical thinking, and speak truth to power.

In all those issues, most of the press is failing. It fails itself, it fails us, and it fails to be a voice for the voiceless. It's a disgrace.

Perfectly summed up Ephie.

In the few times that a Labour MP is allowed to raise a question regarding this Government actions on Today etc, the first question is what is your policy and the second how exactly would you pay for it.

With the media reporting there's only one path for a government to take, and that's the one that they are currently taking. This path may change but that then of course is accepted to be the correct path.

How can this barrier be circumvented? I don't know.

[Willow904]

I agree with all the comments about the media setting the agenda, but the media aren't responsible for members of the Lords feeling adrift. It's easier for the media to find Labour MPs and Lords who are ready to complain if they already feel neglected. This for me stems from Corbyn's lack of experience. Because he hasn't worked his way up, he hasn't met influential people on the way who understand him and where he's coming from, people who can help smooth his way by reassuring their colleagues that they have confidence in his abilities. I don't think concerns about Corbyn's ability is unfair or purely down to media invention. He's untested and people just don't know him well enough to anticipate how he may react in various situations which creates an uncertainty that's putting the whole party on edge. I know people will respond with "it's early" days, but the probationary period in many jobs is just 3 months and in my experience that's ususlly long enough for both parties to judge whether it's going to work out. If Corbyn's team is failing to reach out to all parts of the parliamentary party, if its failing to communicate effectively within the PLP, that represents a huge problem and I hope they heed Winston's warning and redouble their efforts to get the Lords properly in the loop, especially as they are in the unique position of actually being able to slow down and hinder the government's more extreme measures.

[seeingclearly]

Morning all. Just a quick visit, I wonT be around for a few days, only just read yesterdays posts, would like to thank all for yesterdays posts on disability issues. I will admit to an increasing frustration with government and media misrepresentation of what disability benefits are actually for, why for instance DLA existed as it did. My main irritaion with the whole narrative is that anyway many people do not and did not get a lot of what is needed to navigate disability, most of that is down to supportive family and friends who keep things going on practical levels in a way no perching stool could ever replace. These benefits were there to help with the costs of being able to approximate a form of normal living that was seen as the minimum needed to be a part of and to participate in a decent humane and responsible society and to access the things that normal society regards as ordinary. Cleanliness and a hygenic home, access to the world outside your home, to be outdoors, for instance. To have the ability to have personal choices that shopping might allow you, or seeing the choices that are possible. Access to education at any level, to have interests and the ability to travel to places in order to live a life worth living. Not to be boxed in and left in squalor, desperation, or worse, with a bunch of inanimate objects that have been designated as aids and appliances. The normal world doesn't view a stool as a disability appliance, it is something to sit on. It doesn't keep you company or change your continence pants. No appliances do these essential tasks. It is shoddy thinking at best, and inappropriate and unwarranted cruelty at worst. I shan't even start on the inhumane treatment of those with mental health issues, I hope that the people who have thought up these policies get their spell in some hell-realm that will educate them on the realities of life in tory Britain for their victims. I declare a personal interest in this being parent to someone whose worsening mental health is a direct consequence of the PIP process. Someone with a history of intractable paranoid schizophrenia of 25 years whose only sin is that he presents as 'normal' to others.

When are people going to wake up to what is happening to our once mostly civilised nation and get rid of people who are terrorising the poor and disabled? I am still at a loss to understand how they were ever let back in again.

[AnatolyKasparov]

Its the media double standards, they crucify Corbyn (and did Miliband) for stuff they blithely wave aside when it comes to the Pigsticker.

[rebeccariots2]

I agree with all the comments about the media setting the agenda, but the media aren't responsible for members of the Lords feeling adrift. It's easier for the media to find Labour MPs and Lords who are ready to complain if they already feel neglected. This for me stems from Corbyn's lack of experience. Because he hasn't worked his way up, he hasn't met influential people on the way who understand him and where he's coming from, people who can help smooth his way by reassuring their colleagues that they have confidence in his abilities. I don't think concerns about Corbyn's ability is unfair or purely down to media invention. He's untested and people just don't know him well enough to anticipate how he may react in various situations which creates an uncertainty that's putting the whole party on edge. I know people will respond with "it's early" days, but the probationary period in many jobs is just 3 months and in my experience that's ususlly long enough for both parties to judge whether it's going to work out. If Corbyn's team is failing to reach out to all parts of the parliamentary party, if its failing to communicate effectively within the PLP, that represents a huge problem and I hope they heed Winston's warning and redouble their efforts to get the Lords properly in the loop, especially as they are in the unique position of actually being able to slow down and hinder the government's more extreme measures.

I'm going to be out canvassing with a Labour member of the Lords tomorrow. I will see if she has any views on how good or otherwise the communication is under the new leadership. She has been responsible for steering the Labour Lords response to the euroref bill so will have needed to liaise pretty closely. We perhaps shouldn't lose sight of the fact that the Labour Lords have been doing some sterling work ... if the communication is so poor their work and success in the areas of tax credits and now the TU Bill is even more astounding.

[rebeccariots2]

Dan Jarvis ‏@DanJarvisMP 58m58 minutes ago
Dan Jarvis Retweeted Peter Henley
Despite pressure of EU talks, PM finds time to continue role of leader of anti-austerity movement in Oxfordshire..

Peter Henley
‏@BBCPeterH
Prime MInister David Cameron urges Oxfordshire County Council to avoid cuts http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-35369556" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

How the F*** do they get away with this double facing? He's basically pretending it's nothing to do with him guv.

[Willow904]

I agree with all the comments about the media setting the agenda, but the media aren't responsible for members of the Lords feeling adrift. It's easier for the media to find Labour MPs and Lords who are ready to complain if they already feel neglected. This for me stems from Corbyn's lack of experience. Because he hasn't worked his way up, he hasn't met influential people on the way who understand him and where he's coming from, people who can help smooth his way by reassuring their colleagues that they have confidence in his abilities. I don't think concerns about Corbyn's ability is unfair or purely down to media invention. He's untested and people just don't know him well enough to anticipate how he may react in various situations which creates an uncertainty that's putting the whole party on edge. I know people will respond with "it's early" days, but the probationary period in many jobs is just 3 months and in my experience that's ususlly long enough for both parties to judge whether it's going to work out. If Corbyn's team is failing to reach out to all parts of the parliamentary party, if its failing to communicate effectively within the PLP, that represents a huge problem and I hope they heed Winston's warning and redouble their efforts to get the Lords properly in the loop, especially as they are in the unique position of actually being able to slow down and hinder the government's more extreme measures.

I'm going to be out canvassing with a Labour member of the Lords tomorrow. I will see if she has any views on how good or otherwise the communication is under the new leadership. She has been responsible for steering the Labour Lords response to the euroref bill so will have needed to liaise pretty closely. We perhaps shouldn't lose sight of the fact that the Labour Lords have been doing some sterling work ... if the communication is so poor their work and success in the areas of tax credits and now the TU Bill is even more astounding.

That would be a fascinating insight, if you're able to share it. RobertSnozers has put his finger on what's bothering me, the lack of an effective "team" at the top and he's right, its been missing for a while. No one can manage the volume of work involved in leading the opposition. There seems to be a paucity of able people with the necessary skills who are happy to serve Labour, no matter who the leader. John Prescott stands out in this regard as always working tirelessly for his party no matter what. Labour could do with more like him, able to express their opinion, have their own views, but always somehow communicating that sense that whatever its problems, Labour is still heads and shoulders above every other party.

Anyway, thanks for all the responses. I'm off out now. Will try to find some positivity before I return!

[rebeccariots2]

I agree with all the comments about the media setting the agenda, but the media aren't responsible for members of the Lords feeling adrift. It's easier for the media to find Labour MPs and Lords who are ready to complain if they already feel neglected. This for me stems from Corbyn's lack of experience. Because he hasn't worked his way up, he hasn't met influential people on the way who understand him and where he's coming from, people who can help smooth his way by reassuring their colleagues that they have confidence in his abilities. I don't think concerns about Corbyn's ability is unfair or purely down to media invention. He's untested and people just don't know him well enough to anticipate how he may react in various situations which creates an uncertainty that's putting the whole party on edge. I know people will respond with "it's early" days, but the probationary period in many jobs is just 3 months and in my experience that's ususlly long enough for both parties to judge whether it's going to work out. If Corbyn's team is failing to reach out to all parts of the parliamentary party, if its failing to communicate effectively within the PLP, that represents a huge problem and I hope they heed Winston's warning and redouble their efforts to get the Lords properly in the loop, especially as they are in the unique position of actually being able to slow down and hinder the government's more extreme measures.

We've seen the bickering and non supportive elements in the last 3 leaderships though Willow. The public dissings that went on under Brown were vile. Ed Miliband endured constant carping. Corbyn is getting it to the power of **** because he represents even more of a threat to the status quo. Most probationary periods aren't conducted in the full media glare and onslaught - with people out to deliberately sabotage - thank goodness.

[seeingclearly]

The influential people our governments play to may not be the right influences that are needed. To my mind this is at present an existential war, and it cannot be won by fighting on the ground that the enemy determines or by fighting under their rules. Which are a long way from being the same thing as the law of the land. I believe that Corbyn has had much more exposure to enlightened thinking than he has been given credit for, and if his influences are different then fine, thats ok by me. This same conversation was going on a few years ago about Bernie Sanders, before our media were even reporting on it. A good man, who has spent a lifetime equipping himself with the tools of reasoned humanism. Corbyn is the same, but in this distorted world we only get to see through a warped lens both have been labelled as extremists in their time while the real extremists in government get away with murder. You cannot restore democracy by being undemocratic. I have been surprised by how much I agree with the way Corbyn is trying to bring our politics back into some form of functionality. And with the way people in the wider world are responding to it. It certainly seems to be sorting people out, so to speak, the ones with negative agendas are becoming more visible. He is raising the arguments we always should have had raised on issues of importance. It is a start, and I think he knows that, that he hopes that others will start to be thinking people again instead of being merely reactive. It is a linger battle, for sure, but one that needs engaging in, because we can never win on the terms of our enemies. But we do have a different kind of power, we have just been tricked and cheated into thinking that we don't.

[HindleA]

A misanthropic attitude is endemic towards targeted groups as much in evidence among professionals reliant on them and irrespective of political view."should have been put down at birth" is a constant phrase I heard repeated at every level,whilst their public (mis)representation feigned another view on their way to a gong or two.

[utopiandreams]

Just noticed this, England schools: 10,000 pupils sidelined due to league-table pressures (http://www.theguardian.com/education/20 ... -pressures), which no doubt Roger shall have a view on, especially as academies are the worst offenders. Leaving a more in depth analysis to him I shall just point out the increase in home schooling plus the closing statement, which of course mentions local authorities that have been stripped of most of their duties by this and the last government.

Michael Wilshaw, the chief inspector of schools, has warned that it was not clear where pupils were being educated after they were taken out of school, and that in some cases they could be being put at risk of harm by schools and local authorities failing to track their destinations.

[HindleA]

(Very harsh,I feel harsh,maybe we need more harshness,or not,I have no idea.)



http://press.labour.org.uk/post/1378075 ... royal-navy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Not using British-made steel in major Royal Navy projects would make a mockery of government’s changes to procurement rules - Angela Eagle

[ephemerid]

Dan Jarvis ‏@DanJarvisMP 58m58 minutes ago
Dan Jarvis Retweeted Peter Henley
Despite pressure of EU talks, PM finds time to continue role of leader of anti-austerity movement in Oxfordshire..

Peter Henley
‏@BBCPeterH
Prime MInister David Cameron urges Oxfordshire County Council to avoid cuts http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-35369556" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

How the F*** do they get away with this double facing? He's basically pretending it's nothing to do with him guv.

£292 Million in agreed budget cuts between 2010 and 2020, plus another £69 Million in extra savings including closing childrens' centres.

£360 Million - which OGRPPFGTCC says will be "challenging" but he reckons that Oxfordshire County Council should be "more efficient".

This represents a massive 40% cut - the council's total budget was £892 Million in 2009/10.
This cut is ALL central funding, and some - local taxes come to £350 Million, so Westminster is actually clawing back local revenues.

At this rate, it won't be long before this happens everywhere - our council taxes will not only pay for what's left of our services locally but swell the coffers of the Treasury.

Quoth he - "We have made it possible for councils to sell property assets and use the capital to invest in transforming local services - and ensure further savings".

Riiiiiiiight.......
So the council sells off a load of stuff (what, exactly?) then spends the receipts on things which will effect a transformation (what, exactly?) and save more (how, exactly?).

Either Slimy Dave has absolutely no idea how the council works and is thus ignorant, or he does know how it works and is, er, ignorant.

Yeah. He's just fucking ignorant.

[seeingclearly]

The old view of a leader, and one understood by many gamers, is that leaders are rallying points, are nothing without followers and those who will loyally defend the principles that the leader embodies. Human rights battles were fought on such terms, the principles seen as being more important than the person. As humans we have a lot to (re)learn, we forget too fast what the inevitable results of rampant inequality are, minor inequality being very seductive to say the least unless you are on the way down rather than on the way up. If we really believe in our principles we need to be part of the defence of those principles, hard to see these days I know, even harder to do. I am not religious at all, but can see some biblical references that make sense, den of theives and by their fruits you shall know them seem to speak more to me of the world of privilege and oppression than religion.

[HindleA]

http://www.carersuk.org/news-and-campai ... enefit-cap" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Carers UK presses DWP to act on High Court ruling to exempt carers from benefit cap


http://www.parliament.uk/business/commi ... ce-15-16-/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

John Glen MP, Member of the Committee said:
“It is clear that the benefit cap was not intended to apply to the carers of adult disabled children




Bollox- yet again we are expected to believe such an obvious consequence was unintentional,including CA necessarilly results in that.

[utopiandreams]

... Yeah. He's just fucking ignorant.

I agree, ephe, but feel it's even worse, I think he's actually rather stupid too, which suggests no hope whatsoever.

[HindleA]

"MP's are shocked that inclusion of CA hits carers and people they help"-sometimes I think it is me.

[rebeccariots2]

Fancy George Osborne.jpg (35.79 KiB) Viewed 6327 times

Missing you Toby.

I am imagining what you could do with this.

[AnatolyKasparov]

RobertSnozers has put his finger on what's bothering me, the lack of an effective "team" at the top and he's right, its been missing for a while. No one can manage the volume of work involved in leading the opposition. There seems to be a paucity of able people with the necessary skills who are happy to serve Labour, no matter who the leader. John Prescott stands out in this regard as always working tirelessly for his party no matter what. Labour could do with more like him, able to express their opinion, have their own views, but always somehow communicating that sense that whatever its problems, Labour is still heads and shoulders above every other party.

Anyway, thanks for all the responses. I'm off out now. Will try to find some positivity before I return!

This is the crux. Where are those people with the utterly tribal loyalty (with no apologies to Daud al-Hadyuz) who will serve their party through thick and thin?

I'm not saying people should have unthinking devotion - but for God's sake, address problems you see behind closed doors. Act for the good of the party, not your own wing of the party, or your own ego. (And Liz, if you're reading, we can take it as read that Labour is good for the country thankyou very much).

Oh, there are quite a few of those even now.

Including several who agreed to serve under Jez and are doing so without fuss, despite not sharing his entire world view.

They aren't the ones who get the media attention and plaudits, though......

[HindleA]

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016 ... nouncement" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Home Office misspells 'language' in English tests announcement

[PorFavor]

Good morfternoon.

Have we had this? If so, the usual . . . .

Home Office misspells 'language' in English tests announcement

Bulletin on department’s website about latest exam for migrants was headed ‘New English langauge test’
(Guardian)

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016 ... nouncement

[ephemerid]

"MP's are shocked that inclusion of CA hits carers and people they help"-sometimes I think it is me.

If it's you, dear HindleA, it's me too. And a million others......

"MPs are shocked...." and they are being shocked all the time.

I suspect that the reason for this is that they do not read the Bills put before them, they do not understand what they are reading even if they do; and they have been set a fine example by no less an exalted personage than our erstwhile Deputy Prime Minister who voted for legislation on health and social security he hadn't even bothered to read let alone understand.

If they seriously think that it was not the governments' intention to subject carers to IDS' pernicious "reforms" they are very very stupid. It is clear to me that they have not read the legislation either, or failed to understand its' implications.

It has been obvious to most people who know anything about these issues that DWP's "mission creep" would move on from people who are sick/disabled/unemployed/whatever to carers/lone parents/low-paid workers in time - and the pensioners are already in their sights with much worse to come for anyone who needs support from our social security or health care.

The benefit cap is just one of literally hundreds of policy changes enacted since 2010 - they are ALL aimed at clawing back money from the undeserving, yet have no chance of actually saving any money whatsoever - and Osborne will happily spend whatever it takes to bring in policies which he knows will kill people and which he will allow IDS to pursue for purely ideological reasons.

I'm not a politician. I don't have a posh degree from a Russell Group university. I don't have a responsibility, for which I am paid very handsomely, to scrutinise the law I expect my constituents to comply with.
I'm just an ordinary person who can read. If I can do it, why can't they? It's their fucking JOB.

[ohsocynical]

Morning all. Just a quick visit, I wonT be around for a few days, only just read yesterdays posts, would like to thank all for yesterdays posts on disability issues. I will admit to an increasing frustration with government and media misrepresentation of what disability benefits are actually for, why for instance DLA existed as it did. My main irritaion with the whole narrative is that anyway many people do not and did not get a lot of what is needed to navigate disability, most of that is down to supportive family and friends who keep things going on practical levels in a way no perching stool could ever replace. These benefits were there to help with the costs of being able to approximate a form of normal living that was seen as the minimum needed to be a part of and to participate in a decent humane and responsible society and to access the things that normal society regards as ordinary. Cleanliness and a hygenic home, access to the world outside your home, to be outdoors, for instance. To have the ability to have personal choices that shopping might allow you, or seeing the choices that are possible. Access to education at any level, to have interests and the ability to travel to places in order to live a life worth living. Not to be boxed in and left in squalor, desperation, or worse, with a bunch of inanimate objects that have been designated as aids and appliances. The normal world doesn't view a stool as a disability appliance, it is something to sit on. It doesn't keep you company or change your continence pants. No appliances do these essential tasks. It is shoddy thinking at best, and inappropriate and unwarranted cruelty at worst. I shan't even start on the inhumane treatment of those with mental health issues, I hope that the people who have thought up these policies get their spell in some hell-realm that will educate them on the realities of life in tory Britain for their victims. I declare a personal interest in this being parent to someone whose worsening mental health is a direct consequence of the PIP process. Someone with a history of intractable paranoid schizophrenia of 25 years whose only sin is that he presents as 'normal' to others.

When are people going to wake up to what is happening to our once mostly civilised nation and get rid of people who are terrorising the poor and disabled? I am still at a loss to understand how they were ever let back in again.

Stark and concise ... Have put most of this on the Bracknell Labour page...

[ohsocynical]

Fancy George Osborne.jpg

Missing you Toby.

I am imagining what you could do with this.

I hope Toby doesn't fall out of bed laughing.

[HindleA]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/gr ... ar-7223683" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Grieving mum found hanged near Bedroom Tax eviction letter had written poverty plea to David Cameron

[HindleA]

@Eph I had a signed letter from a former DWP Minister confirming among other things that we would be worse off under UC in work(unlike the present system)she still parrotted the script repeatedly.

[utopiandreams]

... The benefit cap is just one of literally hundreds of policy changes enacted since 2010 - they are ALL aimed at clawing back money from the undeserving, yet have no chance of actually saving any money whatsoever - and Osborne will happily spend whatever it takes to bring in policies which he knows will kill people and which he will allow IDS to pursue for purely ideological reasons.

I'm not a politician. I don't have a posh degree from a Russell Group university. I don't have a responsibility, for which I am paid very handsomely, to scrutinise the law I expect my constituents to comply with.
I'm just an ordinary person who can read. If I can do it, why can't they? It's their fucking JOB.

I probably shouldn't have cropped your quote, ephe, because I couldn't agree more. On the penultimate para I'm minded of a recent post by HindleA regarding the secondary legislation being used for many of the 'welfare' reforms and the insufficient nature of their reports submitted to parliamentary committees as I am of the poor standard of governmental risk registers and impact assessments. One would think that Cameron, Osborne et al want no scrutiny whatsoever of their policies.

As for the legislators, failure to examine in detail what they pass is beyond censure; it's not only their job but their duty.

[HindleA]

The DWP state 98% of carers are exempt from the benefit cap,to me that only confirms the fascistic targeted intent.

[utopiandreams]

I see George is on top of the deficit after his joyous Autumn statement with the extra 20 something billion. If only there were someone who could quantify the extra costs his cuts have incurred.

Edit: replace 'imposed' with 'incurred'

[HindleA]

Not that I agree with the policy,only obsess about that particular aspect as it should reveal willingness to spend as much as it takes to further misanthropic ends.

[Willow904]

http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... -of-growth" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Osborne: 'We need every country acting as one in search of growth'

I can give him a tip - it's in the bin with 'tax and spend'. If you actively help a handful of bi!lionaires to acquire ever higher proportions of the world's collective wealth with political policies that transfer wealth from the poorest to the richest (which is what Osborne means by 'austerity') it stands to reason there's less left over for ordinary folk to spend on toasters, tablets and trousers. Osborne's exhortation to the global community to follow through with their economic reforms is not intended to stave off a global recession, but a desperate attempt to ensure the new political bias toward the asset rich wealthy at the expense of the cash dependent poor is locked in before the shit hits the fan.

[ephemerid]

The thing about "secondary legislation" is that the WRA was designed very specifically for that to be a feature of any future "reform".

Throughout the text there is a recurring phrase which basically says that the government is empowered to revise or amend the clause the phrase relates to.....which is pretty much all of them. IDS can change absolutely anything he wants, he can impose any conditions he wants.
Lest we forget, despite all the hot air in both Houses and pages of tabled amendments, Grayling pushed the WRA through anyway by invoking Commons Financial Privilege - and they'll do it again if they have to, or simply change the rules retrospectively. They've done that, too.

The H&SC Act changed the duty of the Secretary of State to "provide a comprehensive health service free at the point of use" to "promote a health service" - and the WRA has altered the responsibility of the Secretary of State to provide social security based on need alone.
What this linguistic sleight-of-hand has done is effectively give the Tories carte blanche to do whatever they like.

With health, as long as "any willing provider" can tootle along and bid to run services, all the Secretary of State has to do is..... nothing.
It's up to the CCGs or whoever. He doesn't have to challenge them if they make a bad decision - in fact, he can't.
With social security, even if a claimant can prove need, he/she must comply with the conditions on the date of the claim - and they can be changed at any point from then on. Failure to comply with those conditions will remove entitlement.

The idea that hundreds of well-educated legislators have utterly failed to understand this beggars belief. Are they morons?

[Maeght]

I have just been depressing myself by reading the Guardian readers’ edition blog and I wanted to thank Refitman very much for his comments. Accurate, articulate and measured. I just don’t have the guts to respond like you do.

Today once again we have a discussion between commenters, some of whom actually describe themselves as Labour supporters who attend local CLP, about how useless Corbyn is and related insults. In addition there is a thread about who they think a good, new leader might be.

Never mind those who can’t spell ‘language’ . These people would have to look the word ‘loyalty’ up in the dictionary.

[rebeccariots2]

I have just been depressing myself by reading the Guardian readers’ edition blog and I wanted to thank Refitman very much for his comments. Accurate, articulate and measured. I just don’t have the guts to respond like you do.

Today once again we have a discussion between commenters, some of whom actually describe themselves as Labour supporters who attend local CLP, about how useless Corbyn is and related insults. In addition there is a thread about who they think a good, new leader might be.

Never mind those who can’t spell ‘language’ . These people would have to look the word ‘loyalty’ up in the dictionary.

I think I might have seen some of the comments you refer to ... I had to swerve away from reading - just too depressing. So is that new article on predicted Labour losses in May. I cannot take such losses as really indicative of Corbyn's leadership though ... so much of any decline, should it happen, will be about stuff that well predates him. Just as I think that Khan's currently buoyant lead in the mayoral race is very largely down to him and putting in serious hard work on the campaigning and listening side across London a long way in advance of the actual election. His success won't necessarily be that indicative of Corbyn's leadership either ... more down to him and the London effect.

[refitman]

I have just been depressing myself by reading the Guardian readers’ edition blog and I wanted to thank Refitman very much for his comments. Accurate, articulate and measured. I just don’t have the guts to respond like you do.

Today once again we have a discussion between commenters, some of whom actually describe themselves as Labour supporters who attend local CLP, about how useless Corbyn is and related insults. In addition there is a thread about who they think a good, new leader might be.

Never mind those who can’t spell ‘language’ . These people would have to look the word ‘loyalty’ up in the dictionary.

I may have gotten a bit miffed

[HindleA]

http://press.labour.org.uk/post/1378135 ... y-around-a" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
cuts to Universal Credit - Owen Smith

Owen Smith MP, Labour’s Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary, commenting in response to the OBR’s downgrading of the National Living Wage,

[seeingclearly]

The thing about "secondary legislation" is that the WRA was designed very specifically for that to be a feature of any future "reform".

Throughout the text there is a recurring phrase which basically says that the government is empowered to revise or amend the clause the phrase relates to.....which is pretty much all of them. IDS can change absolutely anything he wants, he can impose any conditions he wants.
Lest we forget, despite all the hot air in both Houses and pages of tabled amendments, Grayling pushed the WRA through anyway by invoking Commons Financial Privilege - and they'll do it again if they have to, or simply change the rules retrospectively. They've done that, too.

The H&SC Act changed the duty of the Secretary of State to "provide a comprehensive health service free at the point of use" to "promote a health service" - and the WRA has altered the responsibility of the Secretary of State to provide social security based on need alone.
What this linguistic sleight-of-hand has done is effectively give the Tories carte blanche to do whatever they like.

With health, as long as "any willing provider" can tootle along and bid to run services, all the Secretary of State has to do is..... nothing.
It's up to the CCGs or whoever. He doesn't have to challenge them if they make a bad decision - in fact, he can't.
With social security, even if a claimant can prove need, he/she must comply with the conditions on the date of the claim - and they can be changed at any point from then on. Failure to comply with those conditions will remove entitlement.

The idea that hundreds of well-educated legislators have utterly failed to understand this beggars belief. Are they morons?

Yet we as ordinary, not particularly better educated and informed, but rather self aware to some degree and thus able to apply a little critical thinking and thus to see the dangers inherent to these two bits of legislation, along with others who could see the same were regularly poo-pooed on a variety of forums or ridiculed outright for asserting that this was dangerous damaging stuff, or else were ignored entirely, with a few regular exceptions, I still see the same people posting the same things on the same issues and the same bizarre responses. I am now very tired of the left wing right wing divide that has marked what often seems to to me the end of rational debate. I'd like to see the arguments and the divide being more on are you humanist, benign socialist, lover of equality or are you a believer in the market and dog eat dog values, because thats where the real divide is and I can see that divide in Labour people, and the SNP, Libdems, and Greens too. The Tories only differ in terms of you have to look very hard to find the humanist ones and even then it is not always convincing. But back to these two bits of legislation, it was all there, and the consequences, and they were visible to those who read the darn things. The point being, as Ephie said, that it is .ike.y that many did not read them, or were conscienceless enough to dismiss the real concerns that even a brief reading raised. The rough ride so many are enduring with some not surviving it was all there, and all vociverously denied by its proponents. I think warching all that has cured me of the notion that we need career politicians, I think we need people with a good humanist view of the world, people responsible to more than their careers and their tribalisms. Ed Miliband was a first green shoot of what I would like to see, but could only be that from a career position, Corbyn is what Ed delivered, the promise that things can change. No one said things would be easy, it is a big ship to turn around. All the bad legislation of nearly a decade. So to see beyond Corbyn, and think about the world we would like to see is also a good thing. It never was perfect, what we had but it was better than now, so how would we have improved on that? what would have helped move us forward. And how can we ensure nothing like this will happen again? That should be the filter that we use. Because otherwise we are just failing to many people.

These days I feel the weight of the many hundreds of disabled people who we promised a better future to. You will be accepted, and visible, and live with everyone else, you will not get left behind, or neglected or hidden, you will not have to fear, and you will not have to have your life limited because of other peoples ignorance. Then we got this, legislated discrimination against the poor, the disabled and the sick. All people first and foremost, and except in all but the saddest of cases, with hopes and dreams of their own. And even these last have families with hopes and dreams.

[HindleA]

Woody Guthrie, “Old Man Trump” and a real estate empire’s racist foundations
Guthrie’s two-year tenancy in one of Fred Trump’s buildings produced some of his most bitter writings.
BY WILL KAUFMAN



http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/201 ... oundations" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[HindleA]

Welfare and Work Bill Report Stage Monday Lords-list of Amendments:-

http://services.parliament.uk/bills/201 ... ments.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;