Tuesday 23rd September 2014

Post by **refitman** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 7:28 am

Morning. Labour lead at 2 points on Yougov:

Latest YouGov / The Sun results 22nd Sept -

Con 33%, (+2)
Lab 35%, (-1)
LD 7%, (no change)
UKIP 14%; (-2)

APP -21 (+4)

ErnstRemarx · Post by **ErnstRemarx** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 7:39 am

Apols to FO for deleting the duplicate thread - one of you had to go!

Spacedone · Post by **Spacedone** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 7:45 am

If there were any doubt about what the Guardian thinks of Miliband, here is the first item on their politics page this morning.

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

I look forward to their Iain Duncan Smith dodgy statistic generator or the David Cameron random fish pointing tool.

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 7:51 am

ErnstRemarx wrote:Apols to FO for deleting the duplicate thread - one of you had to go!

Gutted!

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 7:56 am

Morning.

Plaid Cymru has announced that Dafydd Wigley [remember him ?] will be running their general election 2015 campaign, and are aiming for a balance of power holding bloc with the SNP.

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales ... al-7812320" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Post by **adam** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 8:10 am

RobertSnozers wrote:
Spacedone wrote:If there were any doubt about what the Guardian thinks of Miliband, here is the first item on their politics page this morning.

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

I look forward to their Iain Duncan Smith dodgy statistic generator or the David Cameron random fish pointing tool.
I shouldn't be surprised, or indeed, disappointed, but still...

It's a shame it's not open for comments, it would be a good chance both to tell the guardian what I think of them and to get my account deleted.

danesclose · Post by **danesclose** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 8:19 am

Morning all. BBC Breakfast first item on local South West news "Labour party delegates are defending Ed Miliband today"

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 8:25 am

Another bash Labour headline:

''Labour councils spend most with private suppliers
New analysis of local government spending dispels myths about Labour being anti-private sector''
http://www.theguardian.com/public-leade ... nservative" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If this research is accurate, it is disappointing to say the least, but maybe the fact that Labour councils have been so hit by funding cuts explains it ?

Also, although the Guardian links to the Porge Research website it fails to mention in the article that they are not disinterested bystanders.

Their website mission statement is:
'Porge provides market insight services that help suppliers win public sector contracts
For 14 years Porge has given its clients a significant headstart on public sector procurements.
http://www.porge.co.uk/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 8:27 am

danesclose wrote:Morning all. BBC Breakfast first item on local South West news "Labour party delegates are defending Ed Miliband today"

Maybe we should take a leaf out of the uber-Yessers strategy book and demonstrate outside the BBC & Guardian buildings

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 8:33 am

Did we have this last night ? Haven't caught up yet.

New: Ashcroft National Poll: Con 27%, Lab 33%, Lib Dem 9%, UKIP 17%, Green 6%

Lonewolfie · Post by **Lonewolfie** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 8:52 am

danesclose wrote:Morning all. BBC Breakfast first item on local South West news "Labour party delegates are defending Ed Miliband today"

Morning all...on the same theme...BBC 10 o'clock news last night...began by trailing what Ed 'might' say in his speech about the NHS and a 'Mansion' tax, followed by 'we're going to analyse what the changes would mean'.

That would mean that the BBC Newsroom would have to understand what has already been done in the 'no top down re-organisation of the NHS' - their (and the rest of the Westminster bubble MSMs') understanding is outlined here...

https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourbeeb/o ... d-distorti

JackPranker · Post by **JackPranker** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 8:52 am

yahyah wrote:
danesclose wrote:Morning all. BBC Breakfast first item on local South West news "Labour party delegates are defending Ed Miliband today"

Maybe we should take a leaf out of the uber-Yessers strategy book and demonstrate outside the BBC & Guardian buildings

Uber-Yessers? Are they the same as cybernats?

Say what you like about that campaign, but previous to that demonstration (and the subsequent reporting of it (by other news organisations)) Douglas Alexander was getting his own personal ranting space on BBC News. After that demo the BBC would at least have a member of the Yes campaign on later on in the programme to reply.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 9:15 am

JackPranker wrote:
yahyah wrote:
danesclose wrote:Morning all. BBC Breakfast first item on local South West news "Labour party delegates are defending Ed Miliband today"

Maybe we should take a leaf out of the uber-Yessers strategy book and demonstrate outside the BBC & Guardian buildings
Uber-Yessers? Are they the same as cybernats?

Say what you like about that campaign, but previous to that demonstration (and the subsequent reporting of it (by other news organisations)) Douglas Alexander was getting his own personal ranting space on BBC News. After that demo the BBC would at least have a member of the Yes campaign on later on in the programme to reply.

I mean the less rational, angrier end of the Yes campaign Jack.
I view them in the same way as the sectarian loyalist unionists who were out causing trouble the other night.

[& I did see quite a few depressed Yes supporters sporting kilts on Thursday night & Friday morning, but to be fair not one of them was a haggis

]

Lonewolfie · Post by **Lonewolfie** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 9:20 am

JackPranker wrote:
yahyah wrote:
danesclose wrote:Morning all. BBC Breakfast first item on local South West news "Labour party delegates are defending Ed Miliband today"

Maybe we should take a leaf out of the uber-Yessers strategy book and demonstrate outside the BBC & Guardian buildings
Uber-Yessers? Are they the same as cybernats?

Say what you like about that campaign, but previous to that demonstration (and the subsequent reporting of it (by other news organisations)) Douglas Alexander was getting his own personal ranting space on BBC News. After that demo the BBC would at least have a member of the Yes campaign on later on in the programme to reply.

Sorry Jack - but isn't that the point? A demo outside the BBC gets airtime for the opposing viewpoint...so if we/someone turned up 'mob-handed' we might get some balance around the reporting of the austerity/NHS/nose-in-troughery 'valid truths' believed(TM) and promoted by the MSM (and ALL the mainstream parties - including the SNP)...but then, we don't have a certain very important Australian-American Scotsman to back us up

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 9:25 am

Did I just hallucinate all the people supporting Yes that I heard on the BBC then ?

On everything from Radio 4 science programmes to early morning farming there were both Yes & No people given similar airtime to discuss/debate their views.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 9:30 am

Shall we try not to start scrapping about this again?

Given we know there is broad political alignment among posters here in general, it follows for me that it must be rational to hold FTN type views yet be either for or against independence.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 9:35 am

Anyone who has been sent a long political survey from YouGov this morning-

Don't do it yet as there seem to be problems.
Have finished it but cannot log the points as the site is stuck.

JackPranker · Post by **JackPranker** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 9:38 am

Lonewolfie wrote:
JackPranker wrote:
yahyah wrote:
Maybe we should take a leaf out of the uber-Yessers strategy book and demonstrate outside the BBC & Guardian buildings
Uber-Yessers? Are they the same as cybernats?

Say what you like about that campaign, but previous to that demonstration (and the subsequent reporting of it (by other news organisations)) Douglas Alexander was getting his own personal ranting space on BBC News. After that demo the BBC would at least have a member of the Yes campaign on later on in the programme to reply.
Sorry Jack - but isn't that the point? A demo outside the BBC gets airtime for the opposing viewpoint...so if we/someone turned up 'mob-handed' we might get some balance around the reporting of the austerity/NHS/nose-in-troughery 'valid truths' believed(TM) and promoted by the MSM (and ALL the mainstream parties - including the SNP)...but then, we don't have a certain very important Australian-American Scotsman to back us up

Lonewolfie: I don't understand your point here. I don't disagree with the demonstration, I think anyone wanting something to change without recourse to (or result from) other methods should at least make themselves heard peacefully. Are you saying that the demonstration was backed by Rupert Murdoch? My aunt was present at that and I assure you the only Murdoch sponsored event she'd attend would be his funeral.

Yahyah: The demonstration was specifically about the BBC News coverage. This seems to be a strange site to be suggesting that anyone with a different point of view should be quiet about it.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 9:39 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Shall we try not to start scrapping about this again?

Given we know there is broad political alignment among posters here in general, it follows for me that it must be rational to hold FTN type views yet be either for or against independence.

Well said. I've lost one friend over this whole sorry episode, I'd rather not lose anymore thank you.

Morning all.

danesclose · Post by **danesclose** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 9:47 am

yahyah wrote:Anyone who has been sent a long political survey from YouGov this morning-

Don't do it yet as there seem to be problems.
Have finished it but cannot log the points as the site is stuck.

I received one yesterday. One of the questions was "Which animal does Ed Miliband most remind you of"

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 9:52 am

Good morning everyone.

I have been reading the transcript of the speech given to Conference yesterday by Rachel Reeves. I am deeply unimpressed.

She has a little list of what the coalition is doing wrong. Well done, Rachel.

There is nothing in it that we haven't heard before. The "Six Steps" are old news; and the only truly commendable item is the abolition of the bedroom tax - which, like the other items, has already been announced.

Then she says this -
"And as for the Work Capability Assessment, we need real reform, with disabled people given clear rights and a real say. And I give you this commitment: as Secretary of State I will come down hard on any contractor that gets these critical assessments wrong, or fails to treat disabled people with the decency and respect they deserve".

This is meaningless. This has been said many times before. This takes us not further - and demonstrates Reeves' paucity of understanding.
She refers to "disabled people". ESA is a benefit for ill people. Some of them might be disabled, but that's not what ESA is for.
"Real reform" - what reform? She doesn't say. "...disabled people given clear rights and a real say" - what rights? She doesn't say.
She will "come down hard" on contractors etc. So the WCA will still be tendered out to contractors, then.
What does "come down hard" mean? She doesn't say. How will she know if they get it wrong? She doesn't say.

Nothing about - mandatory reconsideration or restoring the right to immediate appeal; reducing the rapid reassessments for people who win appeals; the destitution and deaths attributable to ESA "reforms"; the draconian descriptor changes; the 700,000-plus still waiting for a first assessment; "paper" assessments for IB claimants converting to ESA who are frequently put into WRAG on the basis of no evidence.

Nothing about DLA or PIP, nothing on the Independent Living Fund, nothing about the abolition of Severe Disablement Allowance, zilch.
An assumption that disabled people and ill people are one and the same thing - and the whole thing is still all about work with a nod towards "dignity" for those "disabled people" (forget the ill ones - they're "disabled" too) who aren't capable of it.

Apart from general moaning about UC, Labour's "Universal Credit Rescue Committee" continues to try to find a way to keep the thing going as Labour are in favour of it; apart from general moaning about the failure of the Work Programme, the same programme will be delivered by different people; and after a lot of moaning about why work doesn't pay under the coalition, not much on how Labour will make a difference.

Abolition of one of IDS's nasty policies, yes - good.
Otherwise? No change. No reform. No improvement. And a woman who has no ideas.

Useless.

Lonewolfie · Post by **Lonewolfie** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 9:56 am

JackPranker wrote:
Lonewolfie wrote:
JackPranker wrote: Uber-Yessers? Are they the same as cybernats?

Say what you like about that campaign, but previous to that demonstration (and the subsequent reporting of it (by other news organisations)) Douglas Alexander was getting his own personal ranting space on BBC News. After that demo the BBC would at least have a member of the Yes campaign on later on in the programme to reply.
Sorry Jack - but isn't that the point? A demo outside the BBC gets airtime for the opposing viewpoint...so if we/someone turned up 'mob-handed' we might get some balance around the reporting of the austerity/NHS/nose-in-troughery 'valid truths' believed(TM) and promoted by the MSM (and ALL the mainstream parties - including the SNP)...but then, we don't have a certain very important Australian-American Scotsman to back us up
Lonewolfie: I don't understand your point here. I don't disagree with the demonstration, I think anyone wanting something to change without recourse to (or result from) other methods should at least make themselves heard peacefully. Are you saying that the demonstration was backed by Rupert Murdoch? My aunt was present at that and I assure you the only Murdoch sponsored event she'd attend would be his funeral.

Yahyah: The demonstration was specifically about the BBC News coverage. This seems to be a strange site to be suggesting that anyone with a different point of view should be quiet about it.

Morning Jack - my comment was more based around the fact that other demonstrations against various things (disability rights/anti-austerity/privatisation of the NHS) are totally ignored (and affect the country of Britain as it is now, not how it might be)...but 'independence' was a political 'hot potato', Tory Nick Robinson was deemed to have overstepped the mark, so that particular demo got airtime and, ultimately, more coverage for Yes. On Murdoch, you can't ignore the fact that he flew in to Scotland and spent time with Salmond (I don't particularly blame any politician for doing that - if you choose to be a Westminster/national politician, there are certain hoops to jump through before you will be endorsed and allowed to assume power.)

As I've said here before, I can see both sides of the Yes/No argument...and I'm definitely not one for falling out

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 10:07 am

Tend to agree with the above on Reeves. It wouldn't hurt to put some serious effort into addressing the worst aspects of the IDS agenda. Why doesn't she bother.

This morning 5 live had a Tory plant - aka first time voter saying she wouldn't vote Labour because she didn't like Ed Miliband and David would have been better. She would have been 14 at the election so that was bollocks.

The Labour youth guy they had on was pretty impressive though, he batted the whole lot away effortlessly. Despite the BBC relentless questions about Ed being weird.

Seriously, the BBC establishment has clearly moved on from hammering the Nats and back to having a go at Labour.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 10:43 am

I am less bothered about Reeves than Balls - deeply, deeply underwhelming yesterday.

The main substantive criticism of Darling is that he is too in hock to economic orthodoxy - but he surely couldn't be worse than that?

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 10:55 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:I am less bothered about Reeves than Balls - deeply, deeply underwhelming yesterday.

The main substantive criticism of Darling is that he is too in hock to economic orthodoxy - but he surely couldn't be worse than that?

I think Darling is the answer, does Miliband have the stones to bring him in. He would immediately add 10-20 points on economic competence.

JackPranker · Post by **JackPranker** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 10:56 am

I’ve just visited the Miliband phrase generator – such wonderful constituent phrases such as “Bacon sandwich” and “The Wrong Trousers”…

Jeebers-baby-Costco-in-a-cherry-red-sidecar!

I think I’m just going to sit here in a stunned, just-saw-Deborah-Meadon-naked, kind of glass-eyed, slightly pained way. Maybe, when someone notices that I’ve not moved for an hour or two and that a dangerously conductive amount of drool has pooled around my keyboard, they’ll hit me around the head just hard enough to cause my sense of humour to reset. Maybe.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 11:02 am

Steve Richards well worth reading today in the Indie, as usual. The contrast between his output and the now usual Graun drivel speaks for itself.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 11:06 am

Good morning, everyone.

AnatolyKasparov wrote:I am less bothered about Reeves than Balls - deeply, deeply underwhelming yesterday.

The main substantive criticism of Darling is that he is too in hock to economic orthodoxy - but he surely couldn't be worse than that?

I think that they were both less than inspiring. I'm starting to believe that they* are more concerned for their own images with the MSM (ie whatever you do - don't appear to be too Labour) than they are with anything else. (A bit shorthand, that. Sorry.)

Maria Eagle is speaking now at the Labour Party Conference (BBC Parliament, Freeview Ch131). I like the Eagles.

Edited to add -

*Someone should tell them (Rachel Reeves and Ed Balls) that it's a waste of time and effort. Although you'd think they'd have the nous to realise that for themselves.

Like the cut of that chap Manuel's jib (didn't catch his name properly - Darlingron CLP?). Nationalise water - that's one of my pet hopes.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 11:26 am

What a relief it is not to have Keith Vaz preening himself on stage today. God, he's obnoxious and pompous.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 11:29 am

PorFavor wrote:Good morning, everyone.

AnatolyKasparov wrote:I am less bothered about Reeves than Balls - deeply, deeply underwhelming yesterday.

The main substantive criticism of Darling is that he is too in hock to economic orthodoxy - but he surely couldn't be worse than that?
I think that they were both less than inspiring. I'm starting to believe that they* are more concerned for their own images with the MSM (ie whatever you do - don't appear to be too Labour) than they are with anything else. (A bit shorthand, that. Sorry.)

Maria Eagle is speaking now at the Labour Party Conference (BBC Parliament, Freeview Ch131). I like the Eagles.

Edited to add -

*Someone should tell them (Rachel Reeves and Ed Balls) that it's a waste of time and effort. Although you'd think they'd have the nous to realise that for themselves.

Like the cut of that chap Manuel's jib (didn't catch his name properly - Darlingron CLP?). Nationalise water - that's one of my pet hopes.

(my bold)

Yeah, Don Henley's voice was on repeat in my teenage years until my Mum yelled at me to turn the bloody record player off......

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 11:35 am

@pk1

Hello, there! Can't wait to get my record deck up and running again - my Eagles stuff (and much else) is all on vinyl. And that's the way it'll stay.

JackPranker · Post by **JackPranker** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 11:41 am

PorFavor wrote:@pk1

Hello, there! Can't wait to get my record deck up and running again - my Eagles stuff (and much else) is all on vinyl. And that's the way it'll stay.

I've just bought a vinyl player to access me maws old collection. Looking forward to an evening of Jethro Tull "Heavy Horses" at full whack!

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 11:43 am

Well, I'm back where I was on Friday, despairing for the future and seeing little hope for any of us.

I get that Labour aren't perfect. I get that they aren't the radical party of old that so many want. I also get the fact that if we don't keep shooting ourselves in our collective foot we are all sunk, something that seems difficult for others to grasp.

I made a comment on CIF, is being right more important than being helpful? I just hope that all of those so-called socialists who are condemning Labour without offering a real alternative can live with the price, the blood that will stain their hands over the next five years.

Ach, what is the point. Coming to the conclusion we need our own Mohamed Bouazizi to shake people out of their complacency, wondering if I have the guts to do it; it would certainly be more meaningful than a squalid death under another Cameron Government.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 11:47 am

JackPranker wrote:
PorFavor wrote:@pk1

Hello, there! Can't wait to get my record deck up and running again - my Eagles stuff (and much else) is all on vinyl. And that's the way it'll stay.
I've just bought a vinyl player to access me maws old collection. Looking forward to an evening of Jethro Tull "Heavy Horses" at full whack!

You've got a treat in store, then, with a cache of vinyl at your disposal.

(By the way - who slapped you round the head, in the end?)

Tish · Post by **Tish** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 11:54 am

Here's an article that manages to be both inspiring and depressing at the same time. A group of single mums who took on the London council that tried to evict them and make them move to Birmingham, won their fight, but who are now living in squalid private rented accommodation while 600 ex-council houses stand boarded up and empty in the same borough.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ing-estate" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 12:14 pm

Aha!

It was this Manuel -

Manuel Cortes, general secretary of the TSSA [Transport Salaried Staffs' Association] transport workers union, called for wholesale nationalisation of the rail, water and energy industries in a speech earlier. He got a very good reception in the hall.(Andrew Sparrow (who is invaluable on occasions such as these), Guardian)

(Conference is now adjourned until 2.15pm)

Post by **adam** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 12:20 pm

Lots on the progress of Plan A/B/Whatever in the Guardian's Business Blog

“August’s public finances data suggest that deficit reduction remains a grindingly slow process.

“The chances of the Chancellor enjoying a fiscal windfall from the strong economic recovery in time for the Autumn Statement are looking increasingly slim. Rather than being in a position to offer some tax or spending sweeteners to kick in before next May’s General Election, he may be faced with the unpalatable choice of announcing further fiscal tightening or a slippage of deficit reduction plans.

“The period from April to July had seen the fiscal year get off to a disappointing start, with borrowing running ahead of the deficit in the same period in 2013/14. August’s deficit has, if anything, worsened this picture, running £700m above the level in August 2013. With the effect of last year’s income shifting fading, near-stagnant pay growth seems to be playing the chief role in holding back tax receipts growth.”

JackPranker · Post by **JackPranker** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 12:27 pm

Who'da thunk. More people "employed" but earning less means lower tax receipts plus higher benefit costs.

PF: My colleague obliged via a shot of the old "pony expresso" (his words, not mine).

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 12:33 pm

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Well, I'm back where I was on Friday, despairing for the future and seeing little hope for any of us.

I get that Labour aren't perfect. I get that they aren't the radical party of old that so many want. I also get the fact that if we don't keep shooting ourselves in our collective foot we are all sunk, something that seems difficult for others to grasp.

I made a comment on CIF, is being right more important than being helpful? I just hope that all of those so-called socialists who are condemning Labour without offering a real alternative can live with the price, the blood that will stain their hands over the next five years.

Ach, what is the point. Coming to the conclusion we need our own Mohamed Bouazizi to shake people out of their complacency, wondering if I have the guts to do it; it would certainly be more meaningful than a squalid death under another Cameron Government.

I too am finding the whole thing depressing.

So many keen to lob bricks declaring Labour not socialist enough so they won't vote ! So, they must be happy with another 5 years of the Cons then ? Nope, they don't want that either !

Why do they refuse to see that unless they vote, a) the Cons will be back for another 5 years & this time, maybe without the LDs so would force through legislation that even the LDs would object to and b) surely the way to get Labour to become more like the old Labour (that ultimately became unelectable but never mind such inconvenient details) is to fight from within instead of yelling from the sidelines.

I admit to being worried though by the low energy at the Conference from a party supposedly heading into government but I accept the explanation of exhaustion from the referendum campaign - another indication of Cameron's incompetence in agreeing to have the referendum so close to conference season.

I hope my disquiet is alleviated as the year progresses.

Tish · Post by **Tish** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 12:58 pm

As well as the damage another Tory government would do to the country as a whole, I think the left wing critics pushing the "Labour are just the same, there's no point voting for them" line need to face up to what will happen to Labour if they do lose this election. It won't just be Ed Milliband who will be out, it will be any hope of Labour becoming the progressive left wing party that many of us still hope it will become. The Jim Murphy's and Dan Hodges of the party will use any defeat to argue that the country is inherently hostile to even the fairly tepid left wing policies that Milliband has been touting and swing it right back to the path of full on Blairite neo-liberalism, and that will essentially be the end of any major party pushing a left wing agenda. The Greens may well grow into that role eventually, but with our electoral system god knows how long that would take.

If Labour lose next year we really will end up with two identical market obsessed parties pushing the same right wing agenda, all the time being pushed further and further to the far right by the extremists from UKIP. The LibDems will be dead, the SNP won't give a toss what goes on in the rest of the country once they've got their extra legislative powers and the Greens will be too weak and poor to act as a defence. It really will be the end.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 1:00 pm

Tish wrote:Here's an article that manages to be both inspiring and depressing at the same time. A group of single mums who took on the London council that tried to evict them and make them move to Birmingham, won their fight, but who are now living in squalid private rented accommodation while 600 ex-council houses stand boarded up and empty in the same borough.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ing-estate" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Aditya Chakrabortty columns are always worth reading - shining a light onto injustices the women & their children undergo. We aren't alone. Most people aren't ghastly. Those women stood together. With media coverage & their truth, the eviction notices were revoked.
From the article:

This story is really about how the apolitical get radicalised. Because first the 29 mothers did as told: registering as homeless, spending days phoning all the landlords on the three-page sheet given to them as the sole help by the council. When that didn’t work, they chanced upon a revolutionary communist market stall and enlisted their help in formatting the petition. They set up their own stall, which can still be seen every Saturday in Stratford centre. They drew in help and information from other campaigners, passers-by, the internet.

Then they began storming council offices. An impromptu party was held in the luxury show flat of the housing association that was evicting them. They got into the local media. At which point it turned out that their eviction notices were “a mistake” – all 29 of them. For the time being, they could stay in their hostel – and the council would help house them locally.

(my bold)

Please read the rest of the article - they're not out of a tough spot yet.

I need your help, my friends. Please don't give up on me. Please ask me for more information here, on the threads elsewhere or in private messages if I've caused offensive or don't make sense - ask in peace, without guile & I give you my word I'll endeavour to do the same.

I'm not speaking of anything specific when I wrote that paragraph above.

After reading Tish's recommendation article, I noted it was solidarity, peaceful communication doing the good work of correcting injustice.

I'm shocked by the number of commentators below the line on that website who write blatant lies with an imaginary concern a five year old child will see through. Most of the commentators I'm writing about aren't contributors of long standing - any questions I ask of those writers are either ignored or are abusive. In my opinion, the purpose of their posting isn't to communicate & exchange ideas - the posts are meant to divide people & make ugliness seem stronger than community. Derision isn't stronger than unity.

Disagreement is healthy; mouthing polite nothing words may be well-intentioned but it's superficial. Disagreeing & communicating with respect are possible; I've learned more about it from you all.

Polarity - forced into answering yes or no, forced to choose one or the other - with us or against us - how the hell do we retain respectful communication, disagree with one anther in a healthy way, move real life into the conversation demanding yes or no?

I need your help, my friends, to draw us together with different ideas instead of unnecessary locked combat of two-dimensional communication, lest we find ourselves making bland speeches with no soul at all. That would be a tragedy. The current bland speeches we've read or heard recently create impatience within me for the people speaking them. I know the speakers to be human beings capable of a lot of good - I want to hear about that - I'll have to ask more from them.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 1:02 pm

Rachel Reeves, the shadow work and pensions secretary, came unstuck on LBC this morning. Nick Ferrari asked her how much the basic state pension was. Around £100, she replied. He told her it was £113.

(It’s actually not a simple question. The £113 figure is based on a full national insurance contribution record. There are more details in this DWP paper - pdf.) (Andrew Sparrow, Guardian - my emphasis)

So - in what way did she "come unstuck", then?

Edited to make Rachel bold. (Worth a try.)

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 1:15 pm

Tish wrote:As well as the damage another Tory government would do to the country as a whole, I think the left wing critics pushing the "Labour are just the same, there's no point voting for them" line need to face up to what will happen to Labour if they do lose this election. It won't just be Ed Milliband who will be out, it will be any hope of Labour becoming the progressive left wing party that many of us still hope it will become. The Jim Murphy's and Dan Hodges of the party will use any defeat to argue that the country is inherently hostile to even the fairly tepid left wing policies that Milliband has been touting and swing it right back to the path of full on Blairite neo-liberalism, and that will essentially be the end of any major party pushing a left wing agenda. The Greens may well grow into that role eventually, but with our electoral system god knows how long that would take.

If Labour lose next year we really will end up with two identical market obsessed parties pushing the same right wing agenda, all the time being pushed further and further to the far right by the extremists from UKIP. The LibDems will be dead, the SNP won't give a toss what goes on in the rest of the country once they've got their extra legislative powers and the Greens will be too weak and poor to act as a defence. It really will be the end.

Yep.

Lookit - I joined the Labour party. I didn't do that in order to demand my way or nothing. Labour is the currently in the strongest position to form an effective government. No, I don't agree with everything the current Labour party are doing - I'd fear for my sanity if I did. There are some genuine conscientious people in the Labour party I admire.

In my opinion, many people, may I venture to say, most of the people of this country, are left-wing or centre-left-wing politically speaking. I may be wrong. The current Labour party, its members & supporters are still capable of left-wing policies. Again, it's my opinion. There it is.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 1:21 pm

PorFavor wrote:
Rachel Reeves, the shadow work and pensions secretary, came unstuck on LBC this morning. Nick Ferrari asked her how much the basic state pension was. Around £100, she replied. He told her it was £113.

(It’s actually not a simple question. The £113 figure is based on a full national insurance contribution record. There are more details in this DWP paper - pdf.) (Andrew Sparrow, Guardian - my emphasis)
So - in what way did she "come unstuck", then?

Edited to make Rachel bold. (Worth a try.)

Reminiscent of the Miliband weekly shop cost harassment interview.

I know the question asked of Reeves is of greater significance & I struggle to understand how anyone can call Reeves "unstuck" in her reasonable answer.

Was that from Sparrow?

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 1:23 pm

citizenJA wrote:[

Was that from Sparrow?

Hello.

Yes, it was.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 1:28 pm

PorFavor wrote:
citizenJA wrote:[

Was that from Sparrow?
Hello.

Yes, it was.

He ought to know better.

JackPranker · Post by **JackPranker** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 1:38 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:This is the story bar on the Labour conference on the homepage of the Guardian website:

Labour conference

Welcome to the political future
John Harris video: Britain after the referendum.
John Harris visits Glasgow, Leeds and Manchester and meets people engaged, fired-up – and disconnected from the big parties, not least Labour

Dearth of big Labour beasts at conference bodes ill for party's future
Michael White

Ed Miliband phrase generator
Use our random phrase generator to rearrange Ed Miliband's words into exciting new political quotes
Why personal ratings may not matter
Miliband joins Instagram, is offered biscuit
Fuck off Guardian. Just fuck off. That's the last time I visit your website ever.

It's infuriating, isn't it?

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 1:40 pm

@pk1

So many keen to lob bricks declaring Labour not socialist enough so they won't vote ! So, they must be happy with another 5 years of the Cons then ? Nope, they don't want that either !

I don't think those people are for real.

If they are, I apologise & respectfully request they find an effective way to personally bring their political values into the democratic representation they yearn for.

Join some organisation, write pamphlets, talk with others, walk with others, ask the 29 women & their children living in London illegally served eviction notices how they got those eviction notices rescinded successfully.

Make a peaceful, consistent, persistent stand in solidarity with other people who are mostly like most of us though we disagree about some things.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 1:45 pm

Perfectly summed up by RobertSnozers -

Fuck off Guardian. Just fuck off. That's the last time I visit your website ever.

JackPranker -

It's infuriating, isn't it?

I flew the nest today because of it.

I'm a real human being & what I write below the line is done for the love of communicating & learning information from others.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 23 Sep, 2014 1:51 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:This is the story bar on the Labour conference on the homepage of the Guardian website:

Labour conference

Welcome to the political future
John Harris video: Britain after the referendum.
John Harris visits Glasgow, Leeds and Manchester and meets people engaged, fired-up – and disconnected from the big parties, not least Labour

Dearth of big Labour beasts at conference bodes ill for party's future
Michael White

Ed Miliband phrase generator
Use our random phrase generator to rearrange Ed Miliband's words into exciting new political quotes
Why personal ratings may not matter
Miliband joins Instagram, is offered biscuit
Fuck off Guardian. Just fuck off. That's the last time I visit your website ever.

Hello.

I can't be bothered to read the Michael White article which you mention above. But that doesn't stop me from wondering who Michael White considers to be the "big beasts". I'd take a guess that he means super-annuated "Blairites", though.