Monday 8th August 2016

[refitman]

Morning all.

[utopiandreams]

Good morning.

I've just read Zoe Williams' Think the north and the poor caused Brexit? Think again (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... exit-myths), someone whose views often mirror mine. Although I agree that far too much has been made of societal divisions I'm not entirely sure what it is she says, perhaps I should re-read. Anyway I note that Laura Kuenssberg is on Beeb 2 at 9 this evening, Brexit: The Battle for Britain. I am interested in her take and whatever my general feelings of her I am prepared to offer an open mind.

[SpinningHugo]

https://www.byline.com/column/11/article/1177" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[HindleA]

http://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2016/08/05/tor ... ry-recess/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Alex Scott-Samuel: Tory plans for NHS privatisation released during parliamentary recess

[utopiandreams]

Thanks, A. although I haven't read all of the linked article yet you have reminded me that I still have to choose where I want more checks. As I said the other day two of them are at the same hospital so can only surmise they're offered by different bodies. Why else would there be two? It is scandalous that with restricted or diminishing resources duplication of provision such as this can only increase wastage. But of course I'm so conversant with their respective performance that I'm fully able to make my considered decision.

[PorFavor]

https://www.byline.com/column/11/article/1177

We did this over the weekend, thanks.

When you're posting links, could you please post the title (if nothing else so we can avoid seeing material we've already been over) and preferably give an idea of what the article is about.

And, as I recall, you loved it!

[PorFavor]

Good morfternoon.

[StephenDolan]

When it comes to the leadership process, Miliband seems to get it in the neck here and elsewhere. Unlike the Shapps and UKIP attempts to 'remove the past', there's plenty of evidence as to who was extremely pleased with this (at the time) new process. Hint:it wasn't the left of the party.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/com ... 62681.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"  the new rules leave the choice of Labour leader to the one section of the old electoral college that gave the greatest support to David Miliband in 2010: party members."

[HindleA]

Blaargh

[TobyLatimer]

We did this over the weekend, thanks.

When you're posting links, could you please post the title (if nothing else so we can avoid seeing material we've already been over) and preferably give an idea of what the article is about.

And, as I recall, you loved it!

It did wonders for my insomnia, yes

Did anyone see this riposte ? http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk ... ticle.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[StephenDolan]

Do you want the best for your own children? Absolutely.

Do you want government to decide what is the best for the population? Absolutely.

Be it separate tutoring, extra music lessons, considering whether to take up a scholarship, private schooling, grammar schools etc. An individual parent shouldn't have to become a standard bearer for the government. IMHO, naturally

[RogerOThornhill]

Julia Hartley-Brewer Verified account
‏@JuliaHB1

Questions to ask people who oppose grammar schools:
1. what kind of school did they attend?
2. what kind of school do their children attend?

i.e. questions because we know we have no answer to the data...

My parents chose my school - a technical high - when I passed the 11+ which I took like everyone else in those days. I don't remember having any say in it - they went to see it and came back and said that it looked OK.

Pretty sure that the first time I went inside was on my first day!

Forward 30+ years...we took both our kids to see the two schools closest to us and wanted to know what they thought. Daughter went to the same school so it wasn't really that hard a choice by then. And partly it was where their friends were going.

[SpinningHugo]

And, as I recall, you loved it!

It did wonders for my insomnia, yes

Did anyone see this riposte ? http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk ... ticle.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"It contains no abuse"

next paragraph heading

"Concern Trolling"

Alex Andreou, like Zoe Williams, has terrible judgement I'd accept. If he didn't he would never have backed Corbyn in the first place. Where we are was completely predictable. the soft left dupes make me angrier than the true Bennite believers.

[ephemerid]

https://www.byline.com/column/11/article/1177

We did this over the weekend, thanks.

When you're posting links, could you please post the title (if nothing else so we can avoid seeing material we've already been over) and preferably give an idea of what the article is about.

Now then, Robert, don't be a silly billy.

The object of the exercise is to drop in a reference to something that could cause a big discussion, or better still, an argument.
This provides a platform for a ("concern") troll to opine, patronise, etc.....then when things get heated, blame other for the fuss.

Obviously, ORTC is so important that reading earlier posts on the same reference is not the done thing, mainly because he missed the arguments (if there were any) and is suffering withdrawal. In fact, even if the reference has been posted several times, it gets dropped in again just to stir the pot a little bit more. After all, why settle for a half-hour argument when you can get a whole days' worth?

As someone might say, wait and see......

[ephemerid]

Well, that didn't take long.

Shame that the request of our lovely moderators/admin had such little effect.

[HindleA]

https://inews.co.uk/opinion/columnists/ ... t-suicide/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Comics, there is nothing funny in driving a disabled child to attempt suicide

[SpinningHugo]

Well, that didn't take long.

Shame that the request of our lovely moderators/admin had such little effect.

I wonder if I can fit 'soft left dupe' and 'Bennite true believer' on my avatar alongside 'socialist yahoo'?

Actually it was in praise of (current) Corbyn supporters. If you really are going to vote Corbyn again (and I know you personally have wobbled) fair play to you. That really does take commitment to the cause.

I was discussing the current position with some other 4.5%-ers. I expressed the view that the current best case scenario is that Smith comes close enough that next year there can be another challenger who can win.

My interlocutor argued that things couldn't get any worse. if the selectorate were still prepared to back Corbyn now, after all that we've seen over the last year, he can never lose. Similarly, Corbyn said yesterday that he wouldn't necessarily go if (really when) Labour loses the next General Election. And I suppose that may be right. It just doesn't matter any longer how appallingly badly Labour performs in Westminster terms: that is no longer the benchmark by which the leader is being measured by the selectorate. i have been seduced by the bubble.

It is awe inspiring commitment really. Fair play. I couldn't stick with it however much it chimed with my political standpoint. It is the kind of dedication our Olympians are currently showing. While the Bitterite slackers like me walk off bored with the whole thing, the seriously committed stick at it.

Surely we can all unite in mocking the fair-weather Corbyn supporter? So much easier to back him back last summer. *That* could be done by lightweights like Williams and Andreou. It is the resolute who deserve our applause.

[StephenDolan]

I may disagree with many a Labour supporter, MP, member, voter, whether current, former or potential future, with regards to policy.

Mocking? I try my utmost not to. There's one enemy. Yes, I choose that word deliberately. It is the Tory party and it's current incarnation, the Tory government. The one with a majority of 12.That one.

[SpinningHugo]

Not very surprising

Post-January joiners can vote, and the NEC ruling without any basis in the rules that they could not has been overturned by the High Court.

That means JC will win by an even bigger margin than last summer.

Frabjous day brothers and sisters!

Update: The Party is going to appeal. the problem is, there is no basis at all for the 'cut off' point in the rules.

Breaking: The Labour Party

[StephenDolan]

Well.

Labour must allow all members leadership vote, court rules

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

[PorFavor]

@SpinningHugo

I don't think "mocking" will produce the outcome I would prefer. Probably quite the opposite, in fact.

[PorFavor]

Well.

Labour must allow all members leadership vote, court rules

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

Will that have any knock-on effects (sorry have only skim-read the article but couldn't see anything to answer my query)? I'm thinking of CLP meetings called (or already taken place) for the purpose of endorsing a leadership candidate. We've got one coming up here and the January cut-off date applies to attendees.

[SpinningHugo]

Well.

Labour must allow all members leadership vote, court rules

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

Will that have any knock-on effects (sorry have only skim-read the article but couldn't see anything to answer my query)? I'm thinking of CLP meetings called (or already taken place) for the purpose of endorsing a leadership candidate. We've got one coming up here and the January cut-off date applies to attendees.

1. The major political impact will be the scale of Corbyn's victory. Clearly he will beat Smith easily, but with the recent members allowed in, the margin of victory may well be bigger than last year.

That has this consequence. The strategy of the PLP (if you can call it that, it is really an act of desperation after the farce of Corbyn's calls for immediate Brexit) would be to try again next year if Smith gets sufficiently close this year. If he is miles away (as he now will be) there is no point holding on to do that. Two options then present themselves

a. Give in (lots here would prefer that)

b. The semi-split. This involves having their own 'leader in Westminster' while leaving Corbyn as 'Leader of the Labour party'.

2. those who have paid £25 have to be given their money back.

TBF the Labour party is proving a constant source of black entertainment.

[fedup59]

So, if I've got this right. Part of the Labour party is going to continue to use Labour party funds to fight the right of some of its members to vote in a leadership election called up to six months after those members joined. Although when those members joined there was nothing in the rules that said they would not have a vote in any unexpected leadership election that might be called within six months of their joining. Is there a bit I'm missing here that means an appeal is either warranted or valid?

Morning all

[frightful_oik]

Give in
Or
Respect the views of the members?

[Willow904]

And like so many anti-Corbyn pieces at the moment, it doesn't actually say anything about why Smith might be better (never mind addressing why he might make things worse) - and that makes it fundamentally a bit pointless in my view.

It strikes me that no one is giving a huge amount of thought to what kind of leader Owen Smith might be because no one really thinks he's going to win.

His main positive quality is clearly in communication. Putting together a list of policies and giving them to the papers to print so they are easily accessible to anyone interested in reading them is a pretty simple thing, but something Corbyn didn't think to do until responding to Smith's lead.

Of course, this is something Corbyn can learn to do better and I'm not knocking the new approaches Corbyn is employing in trying to reach the electorate, just surprised it took Smith's challenge to remind him that pioneering new avenues doesn't mean you have to abandon traditional means. You can use both.

Smith's other advantage is that MPs appear to feel they would be able to work more easily with him, that he would make a better leader, although we're dependent on their judgement on that, being unable to evaluate this for ourselves.

Is this enough to promote Smith over Corbyn? Probably not, it's not very much, after all, as Smith is untried in most other areas. He has, however, formed a clear, specific response to the EU referendum that I, personally, find appealing. This is enough for me. Corbyn has lost my confidence on Europe and the lack of clarity on his views going forward, clouded by previous Euroscepticism that contrasts strongly with my own Europhile instincts, makes for a simple choice for myself as I don't think anyone has questioned Smith's pro-EU views. On this, an important issue for me, Smith simply reflects my own views more closely and regardless of how things turn out (much is in the hands of the Tories, after all) I feel my point of view will at least be represented in the mix of things if Smith is leader.

So an argument for Smith of sorts, though not much of one if you aren't especially pro-EU or pro-single market I admit, but for me he offers potential for improvement, something I'm not convinced Corbyn has. I know people feel 9 months isn't very long, but I've seen no signs of growth in style or substance in Corbyn over that time, which suggests that what you see is what you get and personally I'm looking for something rather different from what Corbyn is currently offering. I'm not really a "mass movement" kind of person, I guess.

[SpinningHugo]

Give in
Or
Respect the views of the members?

Or

sit idly by while as the UK's Social Deocratic party is destroyed

Text of the court judgment is here

https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content ... 160808.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

i wouldn't be advising to appeal, FWIIW.

[frightful_oik]

Give in
Or
Respect the views of the members?

Or

sit idly by while as the UK's Social Deocratic party is destroyed

Text of the court judgment is here

https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content ... 160808.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

i wouldn't be advising to appeal, FWIIW.

Or be pleased by the revival in social democracy. You make the mistake of assuming too much SH.

[SpinningHugo]

Give in
Or
Respect the views of the members?

Or

sit idly by while as the UK's Social Deocratic party is destroyed

Text of the court judgment is here

https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content ... 160808.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

i wouldn't be advising to appeal, FWIIW.

Or be pleased by the revival in social democracy. You make the mistake of assuming too much SH.

How have we had a revival in social democracy? Perhaps I missed it.

My understanding is that the Tories are in power.

[citizenJA]

Good-morning, everyone.

[StephenDolan]

If only there was a way for replies that quote 'hidden, blocked, ignored' postings to hide what's quoted. Both here and elsewhere, my thread view would accelerate dramatically!

[AnatolyKasparov]

We did this over the weekend, thanks.

When you're posting links, could you please post the title (if nothing else so we can avoid seeing material we've already been over) and preferably give an idea of what the article is about.

And, as I recall, you loved it!

It did wonders for my insomnia, yes

Heh. Have to say it read a bit like "I chose freedom" transplanted to our times.

[ephemerid]

Not only did Mr.Justice Higginbottom agree that the members should be allowed to vote, he also judged that people who had already paid ordinary membership dues should not have been expected to pay an additional £25 in order to secure that vote and should be refunded.

Good.

[AnatolyKasparov]

Have to say, despite what SH said this ruling has surprised me. And quite a few others, I suspect.

Are we going to see the "saving Labour" brigade chuntering on about the "capitalist courts" now, I wonder?

[mbc1955]

And there you all go again.

You know what he's like, you know what he does, you know how he messes this place up every time he posts, and yet it's all about him and the only thing he can talk about. Yet again. And he's still looking down his nose at everybody here, with his faux concern for how the deluded think and trying to understand our mindset, in the pretence that he's trying to educate himself and 'understand'. Here we go again.

People, today I'm not even going to read the thread.

[SpinningHugo]

Have to say, despite what SH said this ruling has surprised me. And quite a few others, I suspect.

Are we going to see the "saving Labour" brigade chuntering on about the "capitalist courts" now, I wonder?

It really shouldn't have done. There was no basis at all in the rules for the cut off date.

It was non-lawyers who said "the judges will want to keep out of it". No they won't: they'll just apply the rules.

[RogerOThornhill]

Have to say, despite what SH said this ruling has surprised me. And quite a few others, I suspect.

Are we going to see the "saving Labour" brigade chuntering on about the "capitalist courts" now, I wonder?

It really shouldn't have done. There was no basis at all in the rules for the cut off date.

It was non-lawyers who said "the judges will want to keep out of it". No they won't: they'll just apply the rules.

Maybe you should offer your services to the party to strengthen and sort out their rules - you being a top legal expert an'all...

[frightful_oik]

Or

sit idly by while as the UK's Social Deocratic party is destroyed

Text of the court judgment is here

https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content ... 160808.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

i wouldn't be advising to appeal, FWIIW.

Or be pleased by the revival in social democracy. You make the mistake of assuming too much SH.

How have we had a revival in social democracy? Perhaps I missed it.

My understanding is that the Tories are in power.

Yes we have. A social Democratic Party of over half a million members now exists. If the PLP can get their arses into gear and show some respect for the members it can do very well. Certainly better than one based on the thoughts of Streeting/Kinnock/Umuna or some other "we know best" managerial type.

[SpinningHugo]

Or be pleased by the revival in social democracy. You make the mistake of assuming too much SH.

How have we had a revival in social democracy? Perhaps I missed it.

My understanding is that the Tories are in power.

Yes we have. A social Democratic Party of over half a million members now exists. If the PLP can get their arses into gear and show some respect for the members it can do very well. Certainly better than one based on the thoughts of Streeting/Kinnock/Umuna or some other "we know best" managerial type.

What is your basis for the claim that it 'can do very well'? Surely the evidence of the last year points the other way?

[SpinningHugo]

Have to say, despite what SH said this ruling has surprised me. And quite a few others, I suspect.

Are we going to see the "saving Labour" brigade chuntering on about the "capitalist courts" now, I wonder?

It really shouldn't have done. There was no basis at all in the rules for the cut off date.

It was non-lawyers who said "the judges will want to keep out of it". No they won't: they'll just apply the rules.

Maybe you should offer your services to the party to strengthen and sort out their rules - you being a top legal expert an'all...

They couldn't afford me.

[frightful_oik]

How have we had a revival in social democracy? Perhaps I missed it.

My understanding is that the Tories are in power.

Yes we have. A social Democratic Party of over half a million members now exists. If the PLP can get their arses into gear and show some respect for the members it can do very well. Certainly better than one based on the thoughts of Streeting/Kinnock/Umuna or some other "we know best" managerial type.

What is your basis for the claim that it 'can do very well'? Surely the evidence of the last year points the other way?

The evidence of last year suggests it can't do much worse. It won't do well if the PLP keep undermining the leadership. Whom would or you blame if that happened?

[HindleA]

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


Child Poverty in the UK (Target for Reduction) Bill 2016-17

[AnatolyKasparov]

The deadline for "affiliated supporters" signing up for the Labour leadership contest has just expired.

[SpinningHugo]

The evidence of last year suggests it can't do much worse. It won't do well if the PLP keep undermining the leadership. Whom would or you blame if that happened?

I blame those who voted for a candidate with next to no support in the PLP. That was never going to work. And those who nominated him to "widen the debate."

But I'm not a Labour party member any longer, so can't complain. It merely provides me with blackly comic entertainment now.

Most of the PLP nobly gave it a go. Poor sods. Must be remorselessly grim being a Labour MP, with no end in sight.

[HindleA]

https://www.theguardian.com/public-lead ... witterfeed" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


The Housing and Planning Act is a direct attack on local government
David Cameron once promised greater powers for councils - but this new law is a real threat to local democracy

[HindleA]

http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/me ... m-link-up/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Mental health charity sparks concerns after Unum link-up

[HindleA]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 77656.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Government spends six times more per person on transport in London than the North, new figures reveal
New figures suggest the Government is spending more just on Crossrail in London than on all projects across the whole of northern England

[JonnyT1234]

It merely provides me with blackly comic entertainment now.

A bit like your thinking that you are a social democrat does us. It's been a hoot for years.

[HindleA]

http://irishpost.co.uk/bloody-sunday-pr ... es-age-83/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Bloody Sunday priest, Bishop Edward Daly, dies age 82


https://www.gov.uk/government/news/brok ... dward-daly" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[JonnyT1234]

That would have made sense Robert, but wouldn't have had the desired effect of reducing Corbyn's chances of winning.