Friday 8th.July 2016

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 8:26 pm

Is there any credible source outlining beneficial outcomes for most UK people or the UK being outside the EU, please?

pala · Post by **pala** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 8:26 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
pala wrote:
Talking of freedom of movement as "wage undercutting", "freedom to exploit workers",
I didn't get that from what he said:
If freedom of movement means the freedom to exploit cheap labour in a race to the bottom, it will never be accepted in any future relationship with Europe.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... eap-labour
Please explain. The word 'if' is small but crucial.
It's based on a fallacy that there's a limited amount of work and capital in an economy. If there were then, wages would be going through the roof in Poland as the ones who haven't emigrated get offered telephone number salaries to get out of bed.

Immigration makes very little difference to wages, and it's foolish to muddle it up with working rights and austerity. Plus there's the silliness that Britain isn't in any position to tell the 27 what sort of single market it wants.

That's not what I was asking. I was asking how you arrived at your reading.

You have explained some things I already knew and revealed either that your were not paying attention while reading Corbyn or that your attitude to towards him precludes your understanding him correctly.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 8:29 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Bernadette Meaden
‏@BernaMeaden

Now we've taken back control, 150,000 elderly, southern, middle class readers of the Daily Mail and Telegraph will choose our PM #r4today

We've got to take the Tory party's word on that six digit membership claim, too - which is worthless.

mbc1955 · Post by **mbc1955** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 8:29 pm

citizenJA wrote:Is there any credible source outlining beneficial outcomes for most UK people or the UK being outside the EU, please?

What's that got to do with anything?

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 8:37 pm

citizenJA wrote:
ohsocynical wrote:Bernadette Meaden
‏@BernaMeaden

Now we've taken back control, 150,000 elderly, southern, middle class readers of the Daily Mail and Telegraph will choose our PM #r4today
We've got to take the Tory party's word on that six digit membership claim, too - which is worthless.

We'll know soon as they'll have to say how many votes each of the two worthy (sic) candidates got.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 8:47 pm

Apparently this place is in "Total meltdown because someone challenged the consensus of the echo chamber."

Bless.

I'm reminded of these two...

*awaits predictable response*

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 8:52 pm

mbc1955 wrote:
citizenJA wrote:Is there any credible source outlining beneficial outcomes for most UK people or the UK being outside the EU, please?
What's that got to do with anything?

Good point.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 9:04 pm

Three local council byelections this week:

Eden DC - Independent hold, beating the Tories by nearly 3 to 1 in a straight fight. This area is one of the last where old style "Independents" continue to maintain a significant presence, and that is certainly borne out in the results for this particular ward - an Independent was returned unopposed not just last year but also in 2011 and 2007. We have to go back to 2003 for the previous actual contest, which in contrast to this one was close - indeed, with just one vote in it things couldn't have been closer - but it was an Independent against another Independent! It remains to be seen if actual party candidates get more success here in future.....

Suffolk CC - Tory hold a safe division (they have always polled over half here) with just over 60% of the vote, slightly up on three years ago. They were doubtless assisted in this by the absence of a UKIP candidate after they had come second (albeit fairly distantly) last time in their first contest here, but in actual fact both Labour and the LibDems benefited by more (both were up by 4%) though the latter are still some way short of the second places they got in the 2009 and 2005 pre-coalition days. Greens stood for the first time on this occasion, and came last but with a fairly respectable 9%.

Conwy - Labour hold in a fairly fragmented contest (as is quite often the case in Welsh by-elections) with just under a third of the vote; this is a bit down on four years ago but is complicated by the fact they only stood one candidate in this two member ward then (one of no fewer than five Independents taking the other place - one of the unsuccessful Indies reappeared as the UKIP hopeful this time round) and last won both councillors here back in 2004. Tories (who took the other seat here in 2008, before losing out to Labour in a previous 2010 by-election) up slightly in second, as were the third placed LibDems. There were "just" two Independents this time, and the most successful took over 11% of the vote - some way short of their winning candidate in 2012. UKIP just behind, and lastly another Independent styling themselves on the ballot paper as "The Lion" - but for whatever reason they failed to roar on this occasion, getting just 3% of the vote.

Next week is a busy one, with no fewer than ten contests.

mbc1955 · Post by **mbc1955** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 9:07 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:Apparently this place is in "Total meltdown because someone challenged the consensus of the echo chamber."

Bless.

I'm reminded of these two...

*awaits predictable response*

Lives in a world of his own, folks. Classic case.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 9:10 pm

There's some good stuff in this from Freedland.

Cameron really was the true heir to Blair: both were totally reckless

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... y-reckless

But it’s the common elements of the two decisions that are more intriguing. Chilcot saved some of his most stringent criticism for Blair’s plans for the aftermath of the invasion. They were, he said, “wholly inadequate”. Cameron is under fire now for his failure to ensure that Whitehall did sufficient contingency planning for Brexit. In the latter case, what was missing was not simply a Treasury to-do list in the event of a leave vote.

Cameron’s greater failure was that he did not think through the implications of his actions. He failed to realise what he was risking by holding this vote in this way at this time. The Scotland factor alone should have stayed his hand. And, much as Chilcot said of Blair, these dangers did not require hindsight. They were foreseeable and foreseen at the time.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 9:23 pm

: 13612386_10153697210583240_9141615054242858691_n.jpg (52.5 KiB) Viewed 6074 times

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 9:28 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:There's some good stuff in this from Freedland.

Cameron really was the true heir to Blair: both were totally reckless

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... y-reckless

But it’s the common elements of the two decisions that are more intriguing. Chilcot saved some of his most stringent criticism for Blair’s plans for the aftermath of the invasion. They were, he said, “wholly inadequate”. Cameron is under fire now for his failure to ensure that Whitehall did sufficient contingency planning for Brexit. In the latter case, what was missing was not simply a Treasury to-do list in the event of a leave vote.

Cameron’s greater failure was that he did not think through the implications of his actions. He failed to realise what he was risking by holding this vote in this way at this time. The Scotland factor alone should have stayed his hand. And, much as Chilcot said of Blair, these dangers did not require hindsight. They were foreseeable and foreseen at the time.

Lest we forget

despite some people trying to make this about Labour, there is one person who has the lion's share of the responsibility

Shame he seems to have got way with it......

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 9:33 pm

Another view of that Bristol CLP meeting.

https://medium.com/@s.sadjady/so-i-went ... .uy48udai2" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 9:37 pm

That is a good point from Freedland and posters here.

I think I remarked the other day that it is very rare that a single person affects history in quite the way that Dave has done here. There is no reason to think that if he hadn't existed the referendum would have happened and been lost anyway.

He did it.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 9:48 pm

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

Struggling families underpaid £1.8BILLION last year in vital benefits by bungling DWP officials

NAO chief Sir Amyas Morse, announced he could not sign off the DWP accounts because of the levels of fraud and error.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 9:51 pm

Loving the #TrotsRabbleDogs hashtag

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 9:55 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:unjustified moan about the EU forcing privatization-

I must admit I was perplexed by this - does he mean TTIP?

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 9:55 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Another view of that Bristol CLP meeting.

https://medium.com/@s.sadjady/so-i-went ... .uy48udai2" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It is interesting that there seems to be an acceptance that our politics to be sterile, well-behaved and compliant

I like provocation and tension....I think this is where we see the sparks of transformational change, opportunity and creativity

There is no need to be overtly rude (although this is quite subjective) but when passions run high there is will be argument and disagreement

There seems to be an intolerance to protest, to argument, to passion, to debate

We have to conform and we have to accept the opinions of our 'betters'

I love the analogy in the above article about the teacher speaking to kids...with that overweening sense of 'what do you know....we know better'

We see that is the disparaging of the Labour membership....we see over half a million members but these is seen as a threat rather than an opportunity. How long have we called for greater participation in politics, but the moment it happens then there are insults and contempt

According to certain members of the Labour establishment and some on here - there are 150 000 SWP members (more than the Tory membership) just waiting to take over a party...the image is as ridiculous as it is insulting

There is an undercurrent in the UK, which the referendum is only part of. Lack of participation in 'standard' politics is a real threat to legitimacy of the political classes but no-one seems to want to reach out further

Corbyn is a symptom of this - he is an old-fashioned radical....and in the absence of a new, young radical leader he is the one that this mass of people want to offer them something different

You can mock and insult.....but the reality at the moment is against you, and the PLP.....

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 9:59 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:Worth pointing out that the areas that most concerned people about immigration was the pressure it put on housing, health and education. So, in the 2010-15 period we had...

1. Housing starts were nowhere near back to pre-2009 levels.
2. The NHS was going through huge and pointless structural changes that no-one wanted or voted for
2. Gove made it so that LAs had to find academy sponsors to open new schools. Consequently there is now a lack of places.

And we're now at the point where Osborne has abandoned his target of achieving a surplus by 2020 after making it the central plank of his policy ion the 2010-15 administration.

2010-15 - the wasted years.

Well to be fair, lots of fish got pointed at. That's always useful.

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 10:00 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote:Worth pointing out that the areas that most concerned people about immigration was the pressure it put on housing, health and education. So, in the 2010-15 period we had...

1. Housing starts were nowhere near back to pre-2009 levels.
2. The NHS was going through huge and pointless structural changes that no-one wanted or voted for
2. Gove made it so that LAs had to find academy sponsors to open new schools. Consequently there is now a lack of places.

And we're now at the point where Osborne has abandoned his target of achieving a surplus by 2020 after making it the central plank of his policy ion the 2010-15 administration.

2010-15 - the wasted years.
Well to be fair, lots of fish got pointed at. That's always useful.

That made me giggle to myself...wife looking at me in an odd way now

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 10:04 pm

Christ on a bike!

She really is a loathsome individual coming out with stuff like this.

TR'sGhost · Post by **TR'sGhost** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 10:09 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:unjustified moan about the EU forcing privatization-
I must admit I was perplexed by this - does he mean TTIP?

There are EU directives about anti-competitive practices concerned with tendering for contracts that can affect state/public sector functions once tendered out for contract bids.

The simple answer to that problem being not to offer services out for tender in the first place. As the French and Germans have demonstrated for decades, while successive UK governments have followed a policy of tendering out everything possible, whether the body responsible for providing the service wants to tender it out or not.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 10:11 pm

http://metro.co.uk/2016/07/08/court-dat ... t-5995638/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;?
‘However, the prime minister has stated on numerous occasions that it is his intention to give effect to the referendum decision and organise the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union.

I can't help thinking that if he'd intended to organize said withdrawal he would have held back on the resignation thing, thus rendering any other of Dave's claims fundamentally irrelevant.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 10:12 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:Christ on a bike!

She really is a loathsome individual coming out with stuff like this.

As I said yesterday, the woman makes my blood run cold.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 10:12 pm

Just read that Theresa May can't have kids "for health reasons (says wiki).

Leadsom wins the prize for "most horrible Tory" by a long way.

And she could be our next PM?

WTF?

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 10:17 pm

As an experiment I pointed at a piece of cod ,for some time,it didn't make feel prime ministerial in the slightest,probably final confirmation it was simly not meant to be.The waiting customers in the chippy would no doubt agree.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 10:18 pm

That's fucking bordering on evil,excuse language.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 10:18 pm

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 27626.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
It is more important for Britain to keep full access to the European single market than to control immigration coming from Europe, voters believe.

Great - pity that's not how we voted.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 10:20 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:Just read that Theresa May can't have kids "for health reasons (says wiki).

Leadsom wins the prize for "most horrible Tory" by a long way.

And she could be our next PM?

WTF?

Yes - I know Theresa May has referred, in the past, to her inability to have children.

Andrea Leadsom may be a "mother", as she kept banging on about in the EU TV debate, but she's also a top-flight bitch (apologies to the canine variety). Ruth Davidson made a creditable attempt at shutting her up on the subject, as I recall.

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 10:23 pm

Women who have had children can be as selfish, ignorant, pig shit thick as anyone else.

But hey I'm just someone who has no stake in the future.

Silly cow.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 10:23 pm

HindleA wrote:That's fucking bordering on evil,excuse language.

Bordering? Like I said, she and Iain Smith are soul-mates.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 10:23 pm

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/busin ... 27246.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Pound sterling beats Argentine peso to become 2016's worst performing currency

Cracking. Dave, you were a natural.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 10:25 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/busin ... 27246.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Pound sterling beats Argentine peso to become 2016's worst performing currency
Cracking. Dave, you were a natural.

Well, he said he thought he'd be good at it. Right as usual!

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 10:29 pm

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 27221.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Jeremy Corbyn will face a leadership challenge, probably within the next 72 hours, as talks about whether he can be persuaded to resign run into the sand....“She will challenge him,” one of her allies said... We’re not putting a date on it,

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 10:30 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 27221.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Jeremy Corbyn will face a leadership challenge, probably within the next 72 hours, as talks about whether he can be persuaded to resign run into the sand....“She will challenge him,” one of her allies said... We’re not putting a date on it,

Yaawwwnnnnn

Is this a good idea seeing what her CLP has said?

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 10:30 pm

TR'sGhost wrote:
tinyclanger2 wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:unjustified moan about the EU forcing privatization-
I must admit I was perplexed by this - does he mean TTIP?
There are EU directives about anti-competitive practices concerned with tendering for contracts that can affect state/public sector functions once tendered out for contract bids.

The simple answer to that problem being not to offer services out for tender in the first place. As the French and Germans have demonstrated for decades, while successive UK governments have followed a policy of tendering out everything possible, whether the body responsible for providing the service wants to tender it out or not.

Are you sure? Educational authorities were outsourced by some LAs, but we're then brought back in house easily enough. No problem with Hitchingbrooke coming back to the NHS either, was there? Nor East Coast.

That's education, health and transport.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 10:31 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 27221.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Jeremy Corbyn will face a leadership challenge, probably within the next 72 hours, as talks about whether he can be persuaded to resign run into the sand....“She will challenge him,” one of her allies said... We’re not putting a date on it,

And I'm not putting money on it.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 10:34 pm

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 27751.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Professor Dorling adds that any anger from Remain voters over the referendum result should "be directed squarely at all the post 1979 UK governments that have allowed economic inequalities to rise so high; that prevented a fair proportional voting system being introduced; that have harmed people of all ages; and that have placed future generations in peril."

1979 - rings a bell ... May ... Loathsome...what was the name again?

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 10:39 pm

pala wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
pala wrote: I didn't get that from what he said: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... eap-labour
Please explain. The word 'if' is small but crucial.
It's based on a fallacy that there's a limited amount of work and capital in an economy. If there were then, wages would be going through the roof in Poland as the ones who haven't emigrated get offered telephone number salaries to get out of bed.

Immigration makes very little difference to wages, and it's foolish to muddle it up with working rights and austerity. Plus there's the silliness that Britain isn't in any position to tell the 27 what sort of single market it wants.
That's not what I was asking. I was asking how you arrived at your reading.

You have explained some things I already knew and revealed either that your were not paying attention while reading Corbyn or that your attitude to towards him precludes your understanding him correctly.

I can't be any clearer. Freedom of movement is doing virtually nothing to wages, all things being equal. There's no "if" about it. Because there's not a fixed amount of work that the immigrants undercut people for.

If he wants to improve labour law, that's great. But do it for its own sake, not because of what some people think is true about immigration.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 10:42 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:Just read that Theresa May can't have kids "for health reasons (says wiki).

Leadsom wins the prize for "most horrible Tory" by a long way.

And she could be our next PM?

WTF?

Tebbitt made a similar point about Portillo IIRC. Mrs Portillo can't have children.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 10:45 pm

This is being roundly condemned on all sides:

margot james Retweeted
Wes Streeting MP ‏@wesstreeting 44m44 minutes ago

Wes Streeting MP Retweeted Sam Coates Times

Ugly. Really nasty and ugly. Theresa May called out the"nasty party". Now she's on receiving end of it.

Might well be her Ratners moment...

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 10:48 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote:Just read that Theresa May can't have kids "for health reasons (says wiki).

Leadsom wins the prize for "most horrible Tory" by a long way.

And she could be our next PM?

WTF?
Tebbitt made a similar point about Portillo IIRC. Mrs Portillo can't have children.

Wasn't there another one more recently about not having a stake in the future - was it said about Stephen Twigg when he was Shadow Education Secretary?

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 11:14 pm

The general contention is loathsome in itself IMHO,for the supposed lacking look at the proponents of such a view.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 11:16 pm

HindleA wrote:As an experiment I pointed at a piece of cod ,for some time,it didn't make feel prime ministerial in the slightest,probably final confirmation it was simly not meant to be.The waiting customers in the chippy would no doubt agree.

I read that Nigel Farage intends to engage in a spot of fishing in his new-found spare time.

There's an opening there for a new double-act.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 11:17 pm

HindleA wrote:As an experiment I pointed at a piece of cod ,for some time,it didn't make feel prime ministerial in the slightest,probably final confirmation it was simly not meant to be.The waiting customers in the chippy would no doubt agree.

I read that Nigel Farage intends to engage in a spot of fishing in his new-found spare time.

There's an opening there for a new double-act.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 11:19 pm

Oh, bumboils.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 11:20 pm

Bumboils.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 11:23 pm

Always never understood warts,I went through a phase of having them,but they disappeared of own accord.Occasional boils,thankfully never on the bum.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 11:28 pm

There are enough pain in the arses.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Fri 08 Jul, 2016 11:28 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Another view of that Bristol CLP meeting.

https://medium.com/@s.sadjady/so-i-went ... .uy48udai2" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I saw this earlier but couldn't find it again when the tweet linking to an article which featured it was deleted. The article was deleted too, as far as I could tell, when I finally found the website that had been hosting it.

I have two observations. The first is that I read a tweet from January 2016 saying there were nearly 70 people at a Bristol West CLP meeting, so it's not surprising the large number of people (300 - 500 reportedly) took organisers by surprise and caused genuine practical problems ( fire safety could well have been compromised by going ahead ). The other is that the writer of this piece is extremely well informed about Labour CLP meeting rules and regulations for someone attending their first meeting. One assumes she has attended Labour meetings elsewhere or has done a lot of homework.

I don't quite get why she presents her comment as countering that of the girl Ruth. Both comments reflect the same things - too many people in too small a place, presiding organisers forced to go ahead despite their concerns, hostility towards the local MP and ensuing chaos as attempts by a large body of newcomers to hold a motion of confidence in Corbyn is thwarted by regulars. It bodes ill, to be frank. Right now I'm hoping Eagle makes her challenge and the party gets on and splits, as I see little future for Labour as things are. Hopefully I'll feel less bleak in the morning.