Tuesday 26 July 2016

[JonnyT1234]

If you care to read my post again I did stress I wasn't comparing.It just set a train of thought.I really don't know what is contentious about saying sometimes in the real world,by which I mean the one I am in,to be clear, you may have to do things that transgress some principles,ie telling the truth etc,in defence of a higher priority.If you haven't had to you have been extremely lucky.Anybody that has but a fleeting knowledge of me would know I am not a meekly acquiescing sort of person.I have a habit of going off at tangents and this being misconstrued.

Apologies. Am in a foul mood having only got 3 hours disturbed sleep last night. We, as individuals always make compromises of course. We can't live without doing so. The state shouldn't make comprises like an individual, however. It should be 'blind' like the law.

[JonnyT1234]

If that is all he had to say about it, yes. But was that actually the case?

Good point. I'm being over reliant on believing the Guardian has reported something in full. Naturally, that is a very stupid mistake to make.

[TobyLatimer]

Courtesy of Andrew Sparrow, from The Times (paywall)

ScreenShot01505.jpg (217.04 KiB) Viewed 7571 times

[AnatolyKasparov]

To claim that certain areas have had a sudden large influx of migrants, that they have struggled to cope with, is not controversial. Surely.

The question is then how that is actually expressed, and I agree that needs to be done delicately. And, all too often, it is not.

[Willow904]

It's Ed Miliband's stance of acknowledging that immigration, although being positive overall, can have negative impacts locally and that much more needs to be done and money needs to be spent to mitigate those impacts on local communities. I agreed with this when Ed said it and I still agree with it now. Everything Smith says about immigration above is backed up by the evidence, so I don't see how it's anything other than being truthful. The fact he is pro-EU means that he isn't going to offer complete exit and stop immigration completely in the way McDonnell seemed to at one point. Acknowledging immigration isn't problem free is not the same as saying we must respect the Brexit vote and stop it altogether because we have to respect the mandate of a small majority, including many right wingers, in a binary choice in which immigration didn't even figure in the actual question - which I appreciate isn't something Corbyn has actually said but he and McDonnell have certainly implied it.

In terms of acknowledging that immigration can have impacts, it is not one iota different to what McDonnell and Corbyn have said about immigration on this aspect of it. But it also isn't highlighting the benefits of immigration as Wren-Lewis suggests Smith should and will do. It's focussing solely on the negatives.

The policy may not differ, but Smith's emphasis on the negatives is far greater than Corbyn's, and his emphasis on the context and policy solutions far less. Moreover, Smith is dragging the debate back to immigration and not following Corbyn's lead in throwing the focus right back onto austerity and arguing that immigration is just being made a scapegoat. Talking endlessly about immigration just benefits Ukip and the Tory right. Making any consessions just emboldens the people who want to limit free movement. The policy of reintroducing the mitigation fund is Corbyn's, anyway.

Btw McDonnell never said anything like what you're suggesting. He said that the political reality based on the Brexit vote was that free movement as it currently works will end - he did not say that movement would end, nor was he talking about Labour's position.

There was a lot of talk about respecting the Brexit mandate and giving people what they want. Given Corbyn is happy to oppose the majority view in things like unilateral nuclear disarmament rather than give them what they want, it suggests he's comfortable with complete withdrawal from the single market and stopping immigration if that's what a simple majority wants. It may not have been his and McDonnell's intention to convey this impression, but this is how it came across. I accept Smith may be onto a loser trying to appeal to those who dislike immigration, but his commitment to the EU or the single market at the very least, reassures me that he will never support complete withdrawal. I can't be certain of that with Corbyn.

[AnatolyKasparov]

Sparrow has gone to the Times, then?

[TobyLatimer]

Just found this, what I was thinking on Dec 2nd last year. I had a few wobbles, wavered a bit.

I decided to get behind him again and give him and the party time to get their act together. Events as we all know have proven otherwise.

I still think that if the some of front benchers from Ed's time had not flounced off from day one and refused to work with him, or argue their position from within the shadow cabinet things might not have got this far.

I've mentioned it here before too, that if the situation with Labour that they partly are responsible for creating is so apocalyptic then why aren't the so called big beasts standing now instead of Smith ?

The wave of euphoria I felt when Corbyn was campaigning around the towns for his leadership bid during the summer has rapidly diminished, the overwhelming almost obsessive/all consuming issue for me personally for a number of years now has been the destruction of our social security and Corbyn seemed to be the only one of the four contenders of the leadership nominees who appeared to be as concerned as I am.

I think we haven't got a cat in hells chance now. Apart from all the infighting I personally don't think it was a good idea to bring Livingstone back in to the public eye, ditto with Abbott, both of who should not be blessed with prominent roles, never mind being let loose in front of the cameras ad nauseum. The few idiots on twitter etc creating problems with the abuse are just as bad as Hodges and co trolling the media.

I'm seriously hoping Corbyn will step down before the next election, nothing personal but he's just not up to it. Some of us don't have the luxury of waiting another decade for a better party to shift this shower of evil cretins.

viewtopic.php?p=81679#p81679" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[JonnyT1234]

Sparrow has gone to the Times, then?

The Guardian has become as bad as the Times, so who can tell?

(It's from the Guardian PLB, not the Times)

[TobyLatimer]

Sparrow has gone to the Times, then?

No my bad punctuation and grammar probably makes it appear so.
Sparrow borrowed it from Murdoch and reproduced it on his blog.

[JonnyT1234]

Courtesy of Andrew Sparrow, from The Times (paywall)

ScreenShot01505.jpg

Wow, there are some snakes in the PLP aren't there!

Nothing at all stopped them from standing, either. My god, my tolerance for these idiots is at an all time low. And it wasn't exactly very high in the first place.

[JonnyT1234]

@Toby: the question is, just who are the big beasts?

Cooper? Benn? Burnham? Harman? Erm...

Problem highlighted via absence of any actual spades to show the problem in spades, I think.

[SpinningHugo]

ICM today

Conservatives 43% Labour 27% LibDems 8% UKIP 13% SNP 4% GreenParty 4% Plaid_Cymru 1%

Methodological changes of course, but there should have been a mid-term dip. Labour was 6-7 points ahead in 2011.

An outlier it should be emphasised.

Methodology changes, again? Why??

I can't help noticing how most of these changes seem to benefit the Tories, as well......

I mean methodological changes since 2015. And the why is obvious: the polls badly overestimated Labour support and so were wrong.

The adjustments made so far are fairly small. Smaller than that overestimate if you look at the raw numbers. I was trying to compare now with the same July 2011 under Miliband. From elsewhere

ICM: was 36%, now 29% – Labour doing 7% worse
Ipsos-MORI: was 39%, now 35% – Labour doing 4% worse
Opinium: was 38%, now 31% – Labour doing 7% worse
YouGov: was 44%, now 29% – Labour doing 15% worse

With figures like that, it must be very tempting for May to cut and run. I think if she delays she won't be able to do so as the economy is going to badly stall over the next 6 months. All the confidence indicators are terrible, nearly as bad as 2008. Unless the Tories respond very quickly and aggressively with fiscal policy, we're going to get a bad recession. We should pull out of it in 2/3 years, but for a while Labour should have an easy target to hit.

Which is interesting looking ahead. Assuming Corbyn stays, there may bizarrely be an uptick in Labour popularity next year. Which may make the PLP's task of removing him even harder still. By 2019 we'll be back here or worse though.

[TobyLatimer]

@Toby: the question is, just who are the big beasts?

Cooper? Benn? Burnham? Harman? Erm...

Problem highlighted via absence of any actual spades to show the problem in spades, I think.

Maybe I would consider Burnham from that list, but you are quite right in regarding the absence of any other contenders really.

Maybe there isn't anyone who might be a genuine unity candidate, but there might be someone who both sides could tolerate, with a view to melting the ice a bit. Jarvis has been quiet lately btw as has Starmer.

[JonnyT1234]

To claim that certain areas have had a sudden large influx of migrants, that they have struggled to cope with, is not controversial. Surely.

The question is then how that is actually expressed, and I agree that needs to be done delicately. And, all too often, it is not.

The how is not to say or imply that it's caused by the influx of immigrants, but by the absence of support and funding for the infrastructure to mitigate the potential problems. Like Corbyn and McDonnell have been doing. Smith's response has not been that, it's been to blame the victims.

This - either deliberate or lazy - use of language is extremely concerning from certain people in the PLP since the referendum. There is a black and white, right and wrong way to talk about this issue and, so far, too many in the PLP have definitely used the wrong way.

[yahyah]

Sparrow has gone to the Times, then?

Hope he wasn't edged out. His blog had been negatively affected by Claire 'Beyonce song of the day' Phipps recently.

[yahyah]

I see I got the wrong end of the stick again. Sparrow's not flown.

[JonnyT1234]

@Toby: the question is, just who are the big beasts?

Cooper? Benn? Burnham? Harman? Erm...

Problem highlighted via absence of any actual spades to show the problem in spades, I think.

Maybe I would consider Burnham from that list, but you are quite right in regarding the absence of any other contenders really.

Maybe there isn't anyone who might be a genuine unity candidate, but there might be someone who both sides could tolerate, with a view to melting the ice a bit. Jarvis has been quiet lately btw as has Starmer.

I'm sorry, I forgot Umunna. How could that have happened. <sarcasm>

[Willow904]

The policy may not differ, but Smith's emphasis on the negatives is far greater than Corbyn's, and his emphasis on the context and policy solutions far less. Moreover, Smith is dragging the debate back to immigration and not following Corbyn's lead in throwing the focus right back onto austerity and arguing that immigration is just being made a scapegoat. Talking endlessly about immigration just benefits Ukip and the Tory right. Making any consessions just emboldens the people who want to limit free movement. The policy of reintroducing the mitigation fund is Corbyn's, anyway.

Btw McDonnell never said anything like what you're suggesting. He said that the political reality based on the Brexit vote was that free movement as it currently works will end - he did not say that movement would end, nor was he talking about Labour's position.

There was a lot of talk about respecting the Brexit mandate and giving people what they want. Given Corbyn is happy to oppose the majority view in things like unilateral nuclear disarmament rather than give them what they want, it suggests he's comfortable with complete withdrawal from the single market and stopping immigration if that's what a simple majority wants. It may not have been his and McDonnell's intention to convey this impression, but this is how it came across. I accept Smith may be onto a loser trying to appeal to those who dislike immigration, but his commitment to the EU or the single market at the very least, reassures me that he will never support complete withdrawal. I can't be certain of that with Corbyn.

McDonnell has been very clear that he was talking about the political reality, not the Labour position. I think you're twisting Corbyn's words and putting an awful lot more of them in his mouth. That 'it suggests' is doing an awful lot of work.

If Smith is flirting with controls on immigration then his commitment to full single market membership cannot be total. If he is in favour of full single market membership then he cannot be in favour of any controls on immigration. He's looking very much like a man who wants to have his cake and eat it. It worries me that you are taking reassurance from things Smith has not said, and condeming Corbyn on the basis of things that he has not said.

In the Newsnight interview, Smith talked about the need to address the impact of immigration on some communities, I'm not aware he said anything about controlling it. I can only talk about the interviews I've seen.
As for McDonnell:

There was, he said, no point in seeking to argue against the outcome of last week’s referendum. “The people have spoken and their decision must be respected,” he said. “We know that the population voted to leave the European Union, but we now need to work to decide which elements of our European relationship we want to preserve, and which must be changed.”

Asked how this might change Labour’s policy on immigration, which is seen as having lost the party votes in former heartland areas, McDonnell said: “Let’s be absolutely clear on the immigration issue. If Britain leaves the European Union, the free movement of people, of labour, will then come to an end.”

If we leave the EU but stay in the single market, then the free movement of people won't come to an end, so it's not just stating facts, it's communicating a deliberate message. I'm not sure what he was trying to say with this emphasis, but to me it seems geared to appeal to those voting leave because of immigration, regardless of other things McDonnell may have said about austerity. The reason the anti-austerity stuff doesn't convince me in this specific context is because I think a lot of the "out" vote was right-wing, xenophobic and reactionary and I don't think ending austerity will necessarily make "out" voters less xenophobic or reactionary. This comes back to the way I feel Corbyn and McDonnell are over-interpreting the referendum vote to suit their own purposes. I don't mean it in a bad way and being anti-austerity is the right position (austerity is bad for the economy in general and in the hands of the Tories has been used specifically to transfer wealth from the poorest to the richest) but I'm unconvinced tying anti-austerity message to Brexit will work to attract voters in the way they think. Meanwhile, they are being very slow to take a specific position on how to respond to Brexit and it is in this that Smith appeals more to me because he has proposed quite a specific stance with the second referendum. I know I'm in a minority in this, but I'm not inventing things to dislike Corbyn on this issue. I may have misunderstood things, but then that comes back to competence. If he and McDonnell meant something different from what I got, they haven't said it very well. Media bias? Of course, to a degree, but I saw the whole of Corbyn's speech in response to the referendum live on the tv and it was what he said in full, un-edited, that lost my support initially and there hasn't been anything since convincing enough to undo that damage.

[JonnyT1234]

@Willow

If we leave the EU we de facto leave the single market at the same time. We will then have to renegotiate our readmittance to the single market, which to put McDonnell's comment you've quoted in context came on the same day as an EU spokesperson had implied would take anything up to 7 years to happen. Ergo, it appeared at the time to be a fact that freedom of movement ends at the same time as our exit from the EU and that it could be years before it could start again.

Since then, there have been mixed messages from EU heads of state about when exactly and what exactly will happen once article 50 is triggered that make this seemingly confused as a minimum and clear as mud either way.

Edit: in other words, what McDonnell stated was the accepted fact at the time. Freedom of movement is over once we leave the EU irrespective of whether or not we wish it to continue

[yahyah]

Paul Flynn has a go at 'gullible' Plaid twitter users

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/polit ... r-11662744" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[PorFavor]

Apologies. Am in a foul mood having only got 3 hours disturbed sleep last night. We, as individuals always make compromises of course. We can't live without doing so. The state shouldn't make comprises like an individual, however. It should be 'blind' like the law.

You were in a foul mood the other day, too, if I recall aright. You were waiting for a thunderstorm.
Did it arrive?

Hot and humid here - the cat doesn't like it much.

Hope you get a better night's sleep today.

[PorFavor]

Good morfternoon.

[yahyah]

Weather's making me moody too. Another cold, grey, damp day.
I blame the Brexit referendum. Nature is in revolt at the result.

[JonnyT1234]

Apologies. Am in a foul mood having only got 3 hours disturbed sleep last night. We, as individuals always make compromises of course. We can't live without doing so. The state shouldn't make comprises like an individual, however. It should be 'blind' like the law.

You were in a foul mood the other day, too, if I recall aright. You were waiting for a thunderstorm.
Did it arrive?

Hot and humid here - the cat doesn't like it much.

Hope you get a better night's sleep today.

No. Weather keeps getting close but failing to break. Which probably explains a lot. I should stop posting until I'm feeling more jocular again.

[JonnyT1234]

Well Umunna recently married that girlfriend of his and let's not forget's Umunna's partner in all things Labour - Tristram Hunt.

Alternatively, let's do forget Tristram Hunt. It'll be for the best.

[AnatolyKasparov]

Re the discussion of May "cutting and running" because of favourable polls - apart from the fact she has repeatedly said this will not happen, there now seems to be a consensus developing that repealing the FPA/contriving a vote of no confidence to dissolve parliament would be a simple matter. In fact, neither would be.

And the political reality is that she would need a good reason for calling a GE in (say) the next year - "the polls look good" won't cut it.

(I expect she could come up with one, but still......)

Another thing I will say is - look at what real votes are saying. There has been little sign of total Tory dominance, still less Labour collapse, in the last few weeks of local by-election results - this has historical relevance as well, because in the summer of 2007 the healthy opinion poll leads enjoyed by Brown's Labour (it peaked at 13 points IIRC, not far short of today's ICM and the same as their 1997 triumph) was not borne out that much by actual real election results. This made people around the PM cautious about an early election, until an incredibly good set of results in September - just in time for the Labour conference - helped get election fever spinning out of control. And the rest is, of course, history......

(On further examination, it turned out that freakishly good week of Labour results was to a significant extent down to local factors. Not blowing my own trumpet, but )

[JonnyT1234]

I see that Sparrow has given up on the pretence of ignoring polls after they kept getting everything so badly wrong and has gone full 'comments from a not at all one-sided view from the Twittersphere' on this one. Sigh.

[SpinningHugo]

Umunna is a new convert to the joys of proportional representation I see.

Which shows that he is aware of the prospects for his/my brand within the Labour party. Blairism is stone dead as a force in the Labour party.

But, my view is that the idea that this 'plot' is all down to a hardcore of Blairites pulling the wool over the eyes of the rest of the PLP is implausible. Now the trust required to make a Corbyn led PLP function is completely gone. We are at the endgame: either Corbyn goes or the PLP is replaced.

[Willow904]

@Willow

If we leave the EU we de facto leave the single market at the same time. We will then have to renegotiate our readmittance to the single market, which to put McDonnell's comment you've quoted in context came on the same day as an EU spokesperson had implied would take anything up to 7 years to happen. Ergo, it appeared at the time to be a fact that freedom of movement ends at the same time as our exit from the EU and that it could be years before it could start again.

Since then, there have been mixed messages from EU heads of state about when exactly and what exactly will happen once article 50 is triggered that make this seemingly confused as a minimum and clear as mud either way.

Edit: in other words, what McDonnell stated was the accepted fact at the time. Freedom of movement is over once we leave the EU irrespective of whether or not we wish it to continue

Yes, but what is the point to saying it? Lots of things will come to an end when we leave the EU, why not mention them too?

[SpinningHugo]

Re the discussion of May "cutting and running" because of favourable polls - apart from the fact she has repeatedly said this will not happen, there now seems to be a consensus developing that repealing the FPA/contriving a vote of no confidence to dissolve parliament would be a simple matter. In fact, neither would be.

And the political reality is that she would need a good reason for calling a GE in (say) the next year - "the polls look good" won't cut it.

(I expect she could come up with one, but still......)

Another thing I will say is - look at what real votes are saying. There has been little sign of total Tory dominance, still less Labour collapse, in the last few weeks of local by-election results - this has historical relevance as well, because in the summer of 2007 the healthy opinion poll leads enjoyed by Brown's Labour (it peaked at 13 points IIRC, not far short of today's ICM and the same as their 1997 triumph) was not borne out that much by actual real election results. This made people around the PM cautious about an early election, until an incredibly good set of results in September - just in time for the Labour conference - helped get election fever spinning out of control. And the rest is, of course, history......

(On further examination, it turned out that freakishly good week of Labour results was to a significant extent down to local factors. Not blowing my own trumpet, but )

FTPA is no biggie. I can't see the opposition not being goaded into an early GE. JC is not tactically fleet enough of foot to avoid it. if for some reason Labour opposes, you just need a majority to repeal it.

I also think there is an inherent contradiction in your post. Local elections are an uncomfortable guide: because they are local. The big GE issues, management of the economy and leadership, are only indirectly relevant.

You can't use them as much of a national guide because, as you say, local issues are in play.

but, as i say, i think May will delay and the opportunity gone. If,as I expect, Corbyn holds on, Labour's popularity may temporarily rise because of the recession. It surely can't get much worse. 25% must be bedrock.

Too weak to win, too strong to die.

[Temulkar]

At the very least, Hodge, Coffey, Benn, McGinn...

Okay, but I thought the idea was that Hodge and Coffey agreed to front the coup but that the brains (or not, as has been the case) behind the coup were others? Obviously, Hodge and Coffey wanted Corbyn gone also.

Benn probably orchestrating, with Eagle feeding info to Laura K. McGinn in the whip's office, leaking like the HoC water pipes. Hodge and Coffey evidently pretty heavily involved - months beforehand Hodge had been mooted as a stalking horse. TBH I think you can see from recent behaviour who's heart was with the coup and whose wasn't. Compare and contrast Sarah Champion with Seema Malhotra.

Oooh are we doing proscription lists - how very Roman - Jamie Reed, Hunt, Jess Phillips, Ian Austin.

[Temulkar]

And probably every name on this wiki page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_(organisation" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

[Temulkar]

Oooh are we doing proscription lists - how very Roman - Jamie Reed, Hunt, Jess Phillips, Ian Austin.

He shall not live; look, with a spot I damn him

It's a good play, one of my favourites actually.

[Willow904]

As for McDonnell:

There was, he said, no point in seeking to argue against the outcome of last week’s referendum. “The people have spoken and their decision must be respected,” he said. “We know that the population voted to leave the European Union, but we now need to work to decide which elements of our European relationship we want to preserve, and which must be changed.”

Asked how this might change Labour’s policy on immigration, which is seen as having lost the party votes in former heartland areas, McDonnell said: “Let’s be absolutely clear on the immigration issue. If Britain leaves the European Union, the free movement of people, of labour, will then come to an end.”

And the bit you're missing:

In the interim, McDonnell said, Labour needed to “consult with the British people on the nature of the relationship we have with regard to the free movement of people”.

“There will be a range of options which people will then have the opportunity to debate. The problem with a referendum is that it’s a binary choice. We have to respect the decision of it, but now we have to explore the details of those implications and allow the people in this country to participate in the debate about what sort of relationship we want with the European Union. That includes the issue of immigration itself.”

In a tweet to the Guardian after his speech, McDonnell stressed that he was talking about the “formal reality as it stands – not talking about Labour’s position on free movement”.

I'm not missing it at all. Nowhere is there a position from McDonnell or Corbyn of being pro-EU or pro-single market for me to get behind. It's all about respecting the choice of the people - the same people who just took us out of the EU because they wanted their country back. This is exactly the response that filled me with despair. I simply discovered on the 24th of June that I'm on a different page from a majority of the country and increasingly the Labour Party. It's clear that Corbyn's natural home is at odds to the establishment, in the protest movements, yet it's precisely that anti-Establishment movement and suspicion of all those in charge that has in part led to this cataclysmic vote to leave the EU. Indeed, Corbyn even wanted Brexit until extremely recently. I can't forgive him for that. It's not a logic thing, it's an emotional thing and the only way I can have got Corbyn all wrong is if his desire to leave the EU for many years didn't actually happen, but of course it did.

[AnatolyKasparov]

Okay, but I thought the idea was that Hodge and Coffey agreed to front the coup but that the brains (or not, as has been the case) behind the coup were others? Obviously, Hodge and Coffey wanted Corbyn gone also.

Benn probably orchestrating, with Eagle feeding info to Laura K. McGinn in the whip's office, leaking like the HoC water pipes. Hodge and Coffey evidently pretty heavily involved - months beforehand Hodge had been mooted as a stalking horse. TBH I think you can see from recent behaviour who's heart was with the coup and whose wasn't. Compare and contrast Sarah Champion with Seema Malhotra.

My goodness, I would never have put Eagle down as being so disloyal to the Labour Party and especially considering the opportunity that Corbyn gave her in the Front Bench. There wasn't so much as a whisper from her when Blair (mistakenly) sacked her in 2001 (because he forgot about her, how galling). Following the result in Sept, she can't be allowed to just continue as before. No wonder they were all jumping to the defense of Laura K. when she was called out for her obvious bias towards JC.

And then people have the audacity to say that Corbyn can't lead, seriously, who is he to trust other than McDonnell when he has been betrayed so badly.

Just for the record, there is no actual proof that Eagle was doing that - beyond the uncorroborated claims of one person.

There is rather more at least circumstantial evidence that the likes of Benn were up to no good from the start.

[AnatolyKasparov]

Umunna is a new convert to the joys of proportional representation I see.

Which shows that he is aware of the prospects for his/my brand within the Labour party. Blairism is stone dead as a force in the Labour party.

I was pro-PR back in the 1980s, it was quite a lonely thing to be in the Labour party and taking that line in those days

[HindleA]

A polite request to bear in mind some of us may know and have worked with MP's in the current hate fest.It is not so much I mind the vitriol enacted on them and by association on those that may view things differently.It is more that it risks the danger,as I have said before those with a free mind will just switch off in any attempt at engagement.

[citizenJA]

Freely admit I have lied,manipulated,and been devious in pursuance of defence of family and self.If someone asked me would I be willing to kill,i'd have to say yes.I'm not comparing the two situations,it just made me think.Would I throw my principles re.private medicine into the bin with alacrity if I thought that was the only way to save a life,of course I would.Personally,I would call that prioritising principles and living in the real world rather than the one I would like.

I love who you are. The world would be a poorer place without you. You help me think clearly. Invaluable, thank you.

[JonnyT1234]

Umunna is a new convert to the joys of proportional representation I see.

Which shows that he is aware of the prospects for his/my brand within the Labour party. Blairism is stone dead as a force in the Labour party.

I was pro-PR back in the 1980s, it was quite a lonely thing to be in the Labour party and taking that line in those days

Unfortunately, I think it still is despite some of the murmurings from some.

[citizenJA]

Good-afternoon.

I'm going away for a couple hours or so. I'll catch up the with thread when I come back.

[Rebecca]

And probably every name on this wiki page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_(organisation" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

Afternoon all.
Tem,I was pleased to see your book in the library today.

[Temulkar]

And probably every name on this wiki page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_(organisation" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

Afternoon all.
Tem,I was pleased to see your book in the library today.

Good god really? where is that? Reading? shit I better sort out my registration for royalties.

[Rebecca]

And probably every name on this wiki page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_(organisation" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

Afternoon all.
Tem,I was pleased to see your book in the library today.

Good god really? where is that? Reading? shit I better sort out my registration for royalties.

Gainsborough.In Linconshire.
I felt obliged to borrow it of course,even though I don't enjoy historical fiction.
So you must be famous now?

[Temulkar]

Afternoon all.
Tem,I was pleased to see your book in the library today.

Good god really? where is that? Reading? shit I better sort out my registration for royalties.

Gainsborough.In Linconshire.
I felt obliged to borrow it of course,even though I don't enjoy historical fiction.
So you must be famous now?

Ha! well Im not giving up the day job just yet, but that is a definite boost to the ego!

[Temulkar]

I was working on book 3 yesterday, and came to the conclusion that the main character is actually a bit of a Blaiite in the grand scheme of the English civil war. Ive said a couple of times that there is something of the Cromwell about Corbyn.

[Rebecca]

Good god really? where is that? Reading? shit I better sort out my registration for royalties.

Gainsborough.In Linconshire.
I felt obliged to borrow it of course,even though I don't enjoy historical fiction.
So you must be famous now?

Ha! well Im not giving up the day job just yet, but that is a definite boost to the ego!

Glad I told you about it then.
Who chooses which books the library buys?
Gainsborough is a horrid little town in some respect,which is reflected in its property prices,but the library is small and old,a lovely building,and stands opposite the historic Gainsborough Old Hall.
So a good home for The last Roundhead.Better not spill coffee on it.

[howsillyofme1]

I see that we have the Brexit la-la land stories again today

Fox is making up some future British trade deal that seems to exclude any existing relationship with the EU but apparently will all be wrapped up by 2020.

There is also our wonderfully electable and credible PM implying no land border with the EU in Ireland whilst her so-called Trade Minister is ruling out a customs union....how does this work then? Isn't there a good risk of a bit of smuggling going on......howe can she say anything like this when she has no idea what will ne negotiated

I do understand a bit about this type of border as we have one down the road between Switzerland and France. Due to Schengen there is free movement of people but I can tell you that the customs posts are fully manned (especially from the Swiss side) and all vehicles are subject to checks and lorries have to do a lot of peprwork to get through.

Isn't it a bit worrying that the 'electable leaders' we have in this country are all completely ignorant about all this....but it doesn't matter that they are all liars and incompetent....they are so much more leader-like and electable

[howsillyofme1]

I was working on book 3 yesterday, and came to the conclusion that the main character is actually a bit of a Blaiite in the grand scheme of the English civil war. Ive said a couple of times that there is something of the Cromwell about Corbyn.

Enjoyed the book very much....led me to start reading a bit around the subject to. Any views on when we will see future installments?

[howsillyofme1]

Sorry for third post in a row but just wanted to ask something before I left

To any Londoners here

How is Khan doing? Seems to be giving a good impression from where i stand, especially when compared to the buffoon he replaced. Is this the case?

[AnatolyKasparov]

Sorry for third post in a row but just wanted to ask something before I left

To any Londoners here

How is Khan doing? Seems to be giving a good impression from where i stand, especially when compared to the buffoon he replaced. Is this the case?

Seems to have started OK, apart from the stuff over fares. If the Boris vanity scheme really is pulled that has to be a plus for him.