The future of the Labour Party

[Fife-Hibee]

You couldn't make this stuff up.
https://twitter.com/MikeSegalov/status/1097487967730483201

[hibsbollah]

Emily Thornberry has it just right this morning;

My message to every friend in the Labour movement today is this: if you criticise or abuse these individuals, if you impugn their motives, and if you encourage any others to join them, you are helping them not hurting them, because you are taking your eyes off the prize and allowing our movement to be distracted and divided, which is exactly what they want. The only thing that anyone should do in response to the action of these MPs today is to respectfully and politely ask them a simple question: do they intend to put up candidates in Labour-Tory marginals, and split the Labour vote?

Will they stand in Hastings, and keep Amber Rudd – the overseer of the Windrush Scandal – in office? Will they stand in Uxbridge and South Ruislip, and keep Boris Johnson – the arch-proponent of a hard Brexit – in office? And will they stand in Chingford and Woodford Green, and keep Iain Duncan Smith – the architect of Universal Credit – in office?

Because if they do, we all know that the only effect of their actions will be to keep the Tories in power for another generation, and make a Tory Brexit more likely, not less, the one thing that everyone in our movement should be pledged to avoid

The individuals should resign their seat and fight a by-election as an 'Independent Group' candidate.

[Hiber-nation]

You couldn't make this stuff up.
https://twitter.com/MikeSegalov/status/1097487967730483201

That was horrendous. I think she was trying to respond to another panellist (Ash somebody) who was slavering earlier about her own skin being various tints or something equally bizarre. But made a complete arse of it.

[JeMeSouviens]

The more I think about this the more tragic it seems. There is a massive opportunity for Labour to take up the mantle of anti-Brexit and run on a hopeful optimistic internationalist agenda versus the nostalgia inspired xenophobic twattery of the Tories.

Instead we're getting a split Labour, major damage to chances of ref#2 and much increased chance of a GE that the Tories will fancy winning.

**** Corbyn, McCluskey, Milne, Umunna. **** May, the ERG, the DUP, Tories in general. **** the ****ing ****faced ****witted ****ing lot of them. ****ers.

Not happy.

[Fife-Hibee]

The more I think about this the more tragic it seems. There is a massive opportunity for Labour to take up the mantle of anti-Brexit and run on a hopeful optimistic internationalist agenda versus the nostalgia inspired xenophobic twattery of the Tories.

Instead we're getting a split Labour, major damage to chances of ref#2 and much increased chance of a GE that the Tories will fancy winning.

**** Corbyn, McCluskey, Milne, Umunna. **** May, the ERG, the DUP, Tories in general. **** the ****ing ****faced ****witted ****ing lot of them. ****ers.

Not happy.

You could shorten that all down to **** the UK. :wink:

[Ozyhibby]

Emily Thornberry has it just right this morning;

My message to every friend in the Labour movement today is this: if you criticise or abuse these individuals, if you impugn their motives, and if you encourage any others to join them, you are helping them not hurting them, because you are taking your eyes off the prize and allowing our movement to be distracted and divided, which is exactly what they want. The only thing that anyone should do in response to the action of these MPs today is to respectfully and politely ask them a simple question: do they intend to put up candidates in Labour-Tory marginals, and split the Labour vote?

Will they stand in Hastings, and keep Amber Rudd – the overseer of the Windrush Scandal – in office? Will they stand in Uxbridge and South Ruislip, and keep Boris Johnson – the arch-proponent of a hard Brexit – in office? And will they stand in Chingford and Woodford Green, and keep Iain Duncan Smith – the architect of Universal Credit – in office?

Because if they do, we all know that the only effect of their actions will be to keep the Tories in power for another generation, and make a Tory Brexit more likely, not less, the one thing that everyone in our movement should be pledged to avoid

The individuals should resign their seat and fight a by-election as an 'Independent Group' candidate.

Except most lefties are saying good riddance so they can’t have it both ways. Either they are better off without them or they will split the Labour vote. It can’t be both.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cabbageandribs1875]

well done the seven, muchos respect :aok:they've freed themselves from the bearded bully and his groupies, hopefully many more to follow, terrorist lovers, anti-semites, Corbyn and Co have killed the Labour party :agree:

[hibsbollah]

The more I think about this the more tragic it seems. There is a massive opportunity for Labour to take up the mantle of anti-Brexit and run on a hopeful optimistic internationalist agenda versus the nostalgia inspired xenophobic twattery of the Tories.

Instead we're getting a split Labour, major damage to chances of ref#2 and much increased chance of a GE that the Tories will fancy winning.

**** Corbyn, McCluskey, Milne, Umunna. **** May, the ERG, the DUP, Tories in general. **** the ****ing ****faced ****witted ****ing lot of them. ****ers.

Not happy.

Its only 7 MPs. I think some perspective needs to be applied. Its impossible to predict how this is going to play out, how relevant this group are going to be, particularly in relation to Brexit.

Labour and Tories neck and neck in latest poll.


https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/16/labour-pulls-level-with-tories-in-latest-opinion-poll?CMP=twt_gu

[One Day Soon]

Corbyn's latest cluster****.

Just how bad do you have to be to be unable to pull ahead of Theresa May in either Party or personal poll ratings? Theresa May for God's sake.

The cultists most fervently supporting him like to heap abuse on anyone they deem centrist and now they're screaming like children because some of the people they've been telling to GTF have chosen to do just that.

If this group can grow its numbers, develop a membership and compete in some key marginals even in just the short term it will at least put some pressure on both the ERG within the Tories and the loonier left in Labour. We might have had some more rational discussion on Brexit by now if they'd done this a year ago.

[JeMeSouviens]

Corbyn's latest cluster****.

Just how bad do you have to be to be unable to pull ahead of Theresa May in either Party or personal poll ratings? Theresa May for God's sake.

The cultists most fervently supporting him like to heap abuse on anyone they deem centrist and now they're screaming like children because some of the people they've been telling to GTF have chosen to do just that.

If this group can grow its numbers, develop a membership and compete in some key marginals even in just the short term it will at least put some pressure on both the ERG within the Tories and the loonier left in Labour. We might have had some more rational discussion on Brexit by now if they'd done this a year ago.

What key marginals can they compete in that they won't just be handing the seat to the Tories?

[Ozyhibby]

What key marginals can they compete in that they won't just be handing the seat to the Tories?

If there is an election tomorrow and the stand on a second brexit vote they will likely win.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[One Day Soon]

What key marginals can they compete in that they won't just be handing the seat to the Tories?


Interesting question and the very one that should perhaps give Corbyn and crew pause for thought.

[GlesgaeHibby]

What key marginals can they compete in that they won't just be handing the seat to the Tories?

Will hand Tories more seats sadly. Splitting the Labour vote in marginals like Amber Rudds seat.

[Mibbes Aye]

Corbyn's latest cluster****.

Just how bad do you have to be to be unable to pull ahead of Theresa May in either Party or personal poll ratings? Theresa May for God's sake.

The cultists most fervently supporting him like to heap abuse on anyone they deem centrist and now they're screaming like children because some of the people they've been telling to GTF have chosen to do just that.

If this group can grow its numbers, develop a membership and compete in some key marginals even in just the short term it will at least put some pressure on both the ERG within the Tories and the loonier left in Labour. We might have had some more rational discussion on Brexit by now if they'd done this a year ago.

:agree:

Abysmal party management by Corbyn, Milne and the other acolytes.

It's utterly shameful that a sitting Labour MP, who has three people in jail for death threats and threats of violence against her because of her faith, has to leave the party because she doesn't feel the leadership are behind her.

The biggest problem for the Corbynites is pretty simple. In 2017 they couldn't topple Theresa May, despite her being the biggest car crash of a PM in a long, long time.

Corbyn got the biggest vote swing and the biggest share of the popular vote since Tony Blair in 1997 and 2001.

Tony Blair turned that into super-majorities of 179 and 167.

Jeremy took those shifts and managed to finish 55 seats behind the Tories.

He can't win swing voters or marginals, despite having an open goal in front of him.

More Labour party members want to stay in the EU than voted for him, but hey, the will of the people doesn't count when you have your decades-long wet dream of exiting Europe becoming a reality.

He is no leader. The decent thing to do would be to resign and get back to reading Pablo Neruda and lobbying for statues to Salvador Allende, that's pretty much all he is interested in.

[Ozyhibby]

:agree:

Abysmal party management by Corbyn, Milne and the other acolytes.

It's utterly shameful that a sitting Labour MP, who has three people in jail for death threats and threats of violence against her because of her faith, has to leave the party because she doesn't feel the leadership are behind her.

The biggest problem for the Corbynites is pretty simple. In 2017 they couldn't topple Theresa May, despite her being the biggest car crash of a PM in a long, long time.

Corbyn got the biggest vote swing and the biggest share of the popular vote since Tony Blair in 1997 and 2001.

Tony Blair turned that into super-majorities of 179 and 167.

Jeremy took those shifts and managed to finish 55 seats behind the Tories.

He can't win swing voters or marginals, despite having an open goal in front of him.

More Labour party members want to stay in the EU than voted for him, but hey, the will of the people doesn't count when you have your decades-long wet dream of exiting Europe becoming a reality.

He is no leader. The decent thing to do would be to resign and get back to reading Pablo Neruda and lobbying for statues to Salvador Allende, that's pretty much all he is interested in.

The Seamus Milne who said this....?

“[T]here was a group of people in power who saw that they stood to benefit from the restoration of capitalism, and many ordinary people who benefited in many ways from the form of socialism there was in Eastern Europe didn’t really feel ownership of the system, and they didn’t necessarily see what was happening, or what they could do to stop it.

But […] most people in a good number of those countries regret the loss of […] the positive aspects of that system […] 1989 was an important shift, and an important loss, for many millions of people. As well as some gains. […]

In Eastern Germany most people today have a positive view of […] the GDR, and regret its passing […] [T]he huge social benefits that have been lost, not only in Eastern Germany but across Eastern Europe and in the Soviet Union are mourned by the people of those countries”.

When labour lose again they will blame those who broke away just as they did in the 80’s and not the fact that they are promoting policies that very few people want.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

Thanks for the good times, but we're keeping the house.

The house is derelict and not fit for living in.

The Labour movement is and always has been bigger than the parliamentary party.

It will survive the brief reign of entryists and their rag, tag and bobtail approach to policy.

You posted before that Labour hadn't done anything progressive since Attlee. I listed tons of legislation that came from Wilson, Callaghan, Blair and Brown that were entirely progressive. You never replied because you were caught out. You're not Labour, you're an entryist.

There's no shortage of folk who aren't Labour but paid their three or four quid to join. Lots of whom wanting to indulge their fantasies about trying Blair for war crimes and so on and so boring.

The problem is they live in echo chambers. Any Labour leader worth their salt would be promoting Remain and be twenty points ahead in the polls.

Instead we have Jeremy.

[Mibbes Aye]

The Seamus Milne who said this....?

“[T]here was a group of people in power who saw that they stood to benefit from the restoration of capitalism, and many ordinary people who benefited in many ways from the form of socialism there was in Eastern Europe didn’t really feel ownership of the system, and they didn’t necessarily see what was happening, or what they could do to stop it.

But […] most people in a good number of those countries regret the loss of […] the positive aspects of that system […] 1989 was an important shift, and an important loss, for many millions of people. As well as some gains. […]

In Eastern Germany most people today have a positive view of […] the GDR, and regret its passing […] [T]he huge social benefits that have been lost, not only in Eastern Germany but across Eastern Europe and in the Soviet Union are mourned by the people of those countries”.

When labour lose again they will blame those who broke away just as they did in the 80’s and not the fact that they are promoting policies that very few people want.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

:agree:

I used to enjoy Seamas Milne's articles in the Guardian, this was maybe twenty years ago when it was still broadsheet. Maybe the passing of time ameliorates things but I don't recall him being as so incendiary. Saying that, I was probably more firebrand in my beliefs being younger, and maybe didn't read it as such.

There's a definite cult that has been established. The nature of society and communication allows these things to flourish. It's tragic that the timing can have such an effect though. Half or slightly more than half the country is crying out for someone to say 'Remain', we don't leave, we stay.

[Colr]

Corbyn's latest cluster****.

Just how bad do you have to be to be unable to pull ahead of Theresa May in either Party or personal poll ratings? Theresa May for God's sake.

The cultists most fervently supporting him like to heap abuse on anyone they deem centrist and now they're screaming like children because some of the people they've been telling to GTF have chosen to do just that.

If this group can grow its numbers, develop a membership and compete in some key marginals even in just the short term it will at least put some pressure on both the ERG within the Tories and the loonier left in Labour. We might have had some more rational discussion on Brexit by now if they'd done this a year ago.

If the Tories manage to squeeze some kind of Brexit deal through then put in a half way competant leader Labour will struggle. Their strategy of parachuting their favourite trot mates into key marginals is just daft. If a seat is marginal its more likely to be centrist so they’ll just hand the seat straigh back to the Tories.

[hibsbollah]

The house is derelict and not fit for living in.

The Labour movement is and always has been bigger than the parliamentary party.

It will survive the brief reign of entryists and their rag, tag and bobtail approach to policy.

You posted before that Labour hadn't done anything progressive since Attlee. I listed tons of legislation that came from Wilson, Callaghan, Blair and Brown that were entirely progressive. You never replied because you were caught out. You're not Labour, you're an entryist.

There's no shortage of folk who aren't Labour but paid their three or four quid to join. Lots of whom wanting to indulge their fantasies about trying Blair for war crimes and so on and so boring.

The problem is they live in echo chambers. Any Labour leader worth their salt would be promoting Remain and be twenty points ahead in the polls.

Instead we have Jeremy.

"You're not Labour, you're an entryist."

This, in a nutshell, is your problem. You are basically a liberal extremist. You use language in almost fascist way, by labelling somebody something so you don't have to listen to an alternative point of view. An 'entryist' is a new member, it is a good thing for a political party. Using a pejorative term for something that is good is illogical.

I am not a trot, or an entryist, or a corbynista. These kind of words demean the conversation. I am a supporter of the Labour Party and it's manifesto.

As to your ludicrous casting up of a conversation we perhaps had five? ten years ago, the fact you even remember it and feel the need to recall it, along with a childish, playground 'i caught you out' :faf: suggests you lead rather a sad existence. You didn't beat me in an argument, old bean, you just have an alternative interpretation of what constitutes progressive policies.

Try and play nice and don't make it so personal.

[Mibbes Aye]

"You're not Labour, you're an entryist."

This, in a nutshell, is your problem. You are basically a liberal extremist. You use language in almost fascist way, by labelling somebody something so you don't have to listen to an alternative point of view. An 'entryist' is a new member, it is a good thing for a political party. Using a pejorative term for something that is good is illogical.

I am not a trot, or an entryist, or a corbynista. These kind of words demean the conversation. I am a supporter of the Labour Party and it's manifesto.

As to your ludicrous casting up of a conversation we perhaps had five? ten years ago, the fact you even remember it and feel the need to recall it, along with a childish, playground 'i caught you out' :faf: suggests you lead rather a sad existence. You didn't beat me in an argument, old bean, you just have an alternative interpretation of what constitutes progressive policies.

Try and play nice and don't make it so personal.

You get very hostile when you are challenged, don't you?

[One Day Soon]

If the Tories manage to squeeze some kind of Brexit deal through then put in a half way competant leader Labour will struggle. Their strategy of parachuting their favourite trot mates into key marginals is just daft. If a seat is marginal its more likely to be centrist so they’ll just hand the seat straigh back to the Tories.


Sounds about right. There will be Tory marginals too where the incumbent can be punished for May's horrendous premiership. If this lot played their cards right they could certainly be a bigger parliamentary group than the Lib Dems, though that's not saying much.

Let's see if disaffected voters are willing to put their votes where their mouths are. Big test for Farage and this new bunch too.

And the Lib Dems can't make headway amid all these losers. :faf:

[hibsbollah]

You get very hostile when you are challenged, don't you?

Not at all, you're the one name calling. Personally I'm very relaxed about the developments today. No accusations, no calling anyone names, I'm taking the Thornberry approach, in fact.

[Mibbes Aye]

Not at all, you're the one name calling. Personally I'm very relaxed about the developments today. No accusations, no calling anyone names, I'm taking the Thornberry approach, in fact.

I think I called you an entryist, which I think you admitted you were.

I think you called me a liberal extremist (what does that even mean?!!).

Edit: I see you've edited that epitaph

[One Day Soon]

The Seamus Milne who said this....?

“[T]here was a group of people in power who saw that they stood to benefit from the restoration of capitalism, and many ordinary people who benefited in many ways from the form of socialism there was in Eastern Europe didn’t really feel ownership of the system, and they didn’t necessarily see what was happening, or what they could do to stop it.

But […] most people in a good number of those countries regret the loss of […] the positive aspects of that system […] 1989 was an important shift, and an important loss, for many millions of people. As well as some gains. […]

In Eastern Germany most people today have a positive view of […] the GDR, and regret its passing […] [T]he huge social benefits that have been lost, not only in Eastern Germany but across Eastern Europe and in the Soviet Union are mourned by the people of those countries”.

When labour lose again they will blame those who broke away just as they did in the 80’s and not the fact that they are promoting policies that very few people want.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I almost feel sorry for Corbyn, having someone like Milne as his boss.

[hibsbollah]

I think I called you an entryist, which I think you admitted you were.

I think you called me a liberal extremist (what does that even mean?!!).

Edit: I see you've edited that epitaph

I don't think I edited anything in my post.

We already had the 'entryist' conversation. You must have missed how I answered. I'm not one, but it wouldn't affect my right to be a Labour Party member if I was. What are you suggesting, that we should base membership on longevity?
I've already explained the way you use that word, fairly regularly, to stifle debate.
The rest is all boring, playground stuff. Elevate the debate. Don't be bitter and angry.

[Mibbes Aye]

"You're not Labour, you're an entryist."

This, in a nutshell, is your problem. You are basically a liberal extremist. You use language in almost fascist way, by labelling somebody something so you don't have to listen to an alternative point of view. An 'entryist' is a new member, it is a good thing for a political party. Using a pejorative term for something that is good is illogical.

I am not a trot, or an entryist, or a corbynista. These kind of words demean the conversation. I am a supporter of the Labour Party and it's manifesto.

As to your ludicrous casting up of a conversation we perhaps had five? ten years ago, the fact you even remember it and feel the need to recall it, along with a childish, playground 'i caught you out' :faf: suggests you lead rather a sad existence. You didn't beat me in an argument, old bean, you just have an alternative interpretation of what constitutes progressive policies.

Try and play nice and don't make it so personal.

Five or ten years ago?

I don't think so.

The conversation arose when Corbyn got elected.

Own it. And if you think Labour never did anything progressive after Attlee then reply to my post listing all the legislation that Wilson, Callaghan, Blair and Brown passed. It's there and it is detailed.

I suspect you can't respond and you don't have a real point.

[hibsbollah]

Five or ten years ago?

I don't think so.

The conversation arose when Corbyn got elected.

Own it. And if you think Labour never did anything progressive after Attlee then reply to my post listing all the legislation that Wilson, Callaghan, Blair and Brown passed. It's there and it is detailed.

I suspect you can't respond and you don't have a real point.

Does it make you angry that others have different views from you?

[Mibbes Aye]

I don't think I edited anything in my post.

We already had the 'entryist' conversation. You must have missed how I answered. I'm not one, but it wouldn't affect my right to be a Labour Party member if I was. What are you suggesting, that we should base membership on longevity?
I've already explained the way you use that word, fairly regularly, to stifle debate.
The rest is all boring, playground stuff. Elevate the debate. Don't be bitter and angry.

First up, what's a 'liberal extremist'? It sounds like a mistype but I'm willing to take your interpretation.

Second up, when did you actually join the party? And were you a member of any party before that or during?

Third of all, you say you want to elevate the debate. I'm fine with that but to elevate it means going beyond slavish defenses of what Jeremy and Seamas say and actually debating where the Labour movement stands.

The funny thing is, I don't think you are in favour of Brexit but you seem to be backing a Labour leadership that will let it happen for pure ideolgical views even though the membership massively opposes it. Happy days :confused:

[Mibbes Aye]

Does it make you angry that others have different views from you?

:greengrin

No, but it amuses me that you can't reply properly.

[hibsbollah]

:greengrin

No, but it amuses me that you can't reply properly.

That's a bit rude.

Look, I've had a good day. Sun on my back, excellent progress made in the garden, had a nice spaghetti with pesto. My mate got us tickets for the Celtic game. I'm settling down with Mrs Bollah now to watch some Ozark. If you want to use my lack of engagement to make a claim that you've won the argument, and that I am stupid and that Corbyn is in fact, a ****, that's absolutely fine with me. You're entitled to your opinion.

Have a great evening:aok:

[Ozyhibby]

Just to ram home where the Labour Party is going, Derek Hatton was re-admitted to the party today.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pretty Boy]

Just to ram home where the Labour Party is going, Derek Hatton was re-admitted to the party today.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The irony there is Hatton has recently been an outspoken critic of Corbyns stance, or lack thereof, on Brexit.

[One Day Soon]

The irony there is Hatton has recently been an outspoken critic of Corbyns stance, or lack thereof, on Brexit.

Imagine being such a muppet that Derek Hatton can criticise you.

To paraphrase a twitter post from earlier today, the Labour Party is in such as state that it can't keep seven of its MPs in and it can't keep Derek Hatton out.

[Colr]

George Galloway can’t be far behind him, then.

[RyeSloan]

The irony there is Hatton has recently been an outspoken critic of Corbyns stance, or lack thereof, on Brexit.

Derek Hatton, dear oh dear.

Maybe that just sums Labour up just now and loved the quote from the Liverpool mayor suggesting Hatton now believes in ‘sensible socialism’.

A term that made me laugh almost as much as liberal extremist. [emoji2957]

[G B Young]

:agree: 100%. Luciana Berger getting all upset about the Labour party talking to the Palestinians. How very dare they!

She's a brave woman. If you read about some of the quite disgusting abuse and bullying she's been subjected to and will doubtless continue to endure it took some guts to stand up there yesterday, eight months pregnant, and denounce Corbyn and his cronies for what they are.

[G B Young]

Corbyn's latest cluster****.

Just how bad do you have to be to be unable to pull ahead of Theresa May in either Party or personal poll ratings? Theresa May for God's sake.

The cultists most fervently supporting him like to heap abuse on anyone they deem centrist and now they're screaming like children because some of the people they've been telling to GTF have chosen to do just that.

If this group can grow its numbers, develop a membership and compete in some key marginals even in just the short term it will at least put some pressure on both the ERG within the Tories and the loonier left in Labour. We might have had some more rational discussion on Brexit by now if they'd done this a year ago.

And while all this has been kicking off where on earth is the Labour leader? Tending his allotment? Nothing from him but a bland 'I'm disappointed' statement and a no-show at the Parliamentary Labour Party meeting last night. Great leadership as always from the blessed Jeremy, though you wonder sometimes if his cohorts keep him away from the cameras whenever possible to avoid further damage to the party's reputation. Guy's a bitter, dim-witted old curmudgeon who should never have ended up in such a position of responsibility. As you say, the fact he's contrived to remain behind May and the Tories in the polls at a time when the government stumbles from one impasse to another sums up his ineptitude.

Edit: Seems he really WAS at his allotment. Surely that can be the only excuse for those clothes!

https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/6978/production/_105700072_dailymail.jpg

[Curried]

She's a brave woman. If you read about some of the quite disgusting abuse and bullying she's been subjected to and will doubtless continue to endure it took some guts to stand up there yesterday, eight months pregnant, and denounce Corbyn and his cronies for what they are.

Brave woman or Mossad mouthpiece ……you take your pick.

According to the Jerusalem Post she is the 28th most influential Jew on the planet:

“As a prominent member of the Jewish community in the UK and a vocal opponent of antisemitism in her party, Berger’s role in combating the resurgence of various forms of this scourge could become even greater should Labour take the reins of power in the country.”

I’d bet London-to-a-brick this stalwart of democracy won’t have the guts to go to a by-election and put her cushy MP’s salary on the line in a peoples vote.

Anyway, more important than her haltered for socialist values is her haltered for Scots and her love of nuclear weapons. She can’t get out of her scratcher when there is any vote on Scotland. A-grade tosser fawned over by the metropolitan elite and Guardian readers.

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24924/luciana_berger/liverpool%2C_wavertree/votes (https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24924/luciana_berger/liverpool%2C_wavertree/votes)

PS She voted against any investigation into the Iraq war:-0

[cabbageandribs1875]

some conservative mp's could join the breakaways, jeezo before we know it they will start amalgamating up here as well and run some scottish councils....oops, wait a minute

[G B Young]

Brave woman or Mossad mouthpiece ……you take your pick.

According to the Jerusalem Post she is the 28th most influential Jew on the planet:

“As a prominent member of the Jewish community in the UK and a vocal opponent of antisemitism in her party, Berger’s role in combating the resurgence of various forms of this scourge could become even greater should Labour take the reins of power in the country.”

I’d bet London-to-a-brick this stalwart of democracy won’t have the guts to go to a by-election and put her cushy MP’s salary on the line in a peoples vote.

Anyway, more important than her haltered for socialist values is her haltered for Scots and her love of nuclear weapons. She can’t get out of her scratcher when there is any vote on Scotland. A-grade tosser fawned over by the metropolitan elite and Guardian readers.

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24924/luciana_berger/liverpool%2C_wavertree/votes (https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24924/luciana_berger/liverpool%2C_wavertree/votes)

PS She voted against any investigation into the Iraq war:-0

Is opposing antisemitism not a good thing?

[Bristolhibby]

Why should they stand in a bye-election?

You vote for the Person. That’s how our Parlimentary Democracy works.

Those people happen to be in a political party. It’s up to them if they choose to remain in that party post Election Day.

Wonder if Georgeous George will be allowed back in the Labour Party?

J

[Beefster]

Brave woman or Mossad mouthpiece ……you take your pick.

According to the Jerusalem Post she is the 28th most influential Jew on the planet:

“As a prominent member of the Jewish community in the UK and a vocal opponent of antisemitism in her party, Berger’s role in combating the resurgence of various forms of this scourge could become even greater should Labour take the reins of power in the country.”

I’d bet London-to-a-brick this stalwart of democracy won’t have the guts to go to a by-election and put her cushy MP’s salary on the line in a peoples vote.

Anyway, more important than her haltered for socialist values is her haltered for Scots and her love of nuclear weapons. She can’t get out of her scratcher when there is any vote on Scotland. A-grade tosser fawned over by the metropolitan elite and Guardian readers.

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24924/luciana_berger/liverpool%2C_wavertree/votes (https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24924/luciana_berger/liverpool%2C_wavertree/votes)

PS She voted against any investigation into the Iraq war:-0

What's your opinion on the antisemitism and death threats she's faced though?

[Curried]

Is opposing antisemitism not a good thing?

Of course not. But the fallacious claim that antisemitism will would increase under Labour is quite simply a work of Jewish fiction.

Play the ball not the man, and try to defend for me this brave woman's voting record on Trident, Iran and particularly Scotland.

[Curried]

What's your opinion on the antisemitism and death threats she's faced though?

See above. Such actions can never be condoned, but I have little doubt that this politician promotes Zionism.

[cabbageandribs1875]

21711


https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/young-labour-slammed-for-tweet-calling-mps-who-left-party-cowards-and-traitors-a4069446.html




jeremy will be so proud

[Curried]

Why should they stand in a bye-election?

You vote for the Person. That’s how our Parlimentary Democracy works.

Those people happen to be in a political party. It’s up to them if they choose to remain in that party post Election Day.

Wonder if Georgeous George will be allowed back in the Labour Party?

J

You may. I don't. I vote for a Party Manifesto. If your constituent MP resigns from the Party and no longer supports that Manifesto he/she/it no longer represents you/me.

I bet, none of these Slekit 7 will give up their well-paid London jobs and let the people decide on whether they still represent their manifesto commitments.

[hibsbollah]

What's your opinion on the antisemitism and death threats she's faced though?

Absolutely appalling and should be condemned unequivocally.

I think it was you a while back who came up with 'its like saying landmines aren't an issue, until you step on one' analogy, which is quite funny and also apt here. Too many people saying it doesn't exist because they haven't seen it themselves. There is also the issue of the word 'Zionism', which is an actual thing, and there are lots of Zionists who, on my view, have unpleasant views who need to be called out and have their views challenged. If the word is now considered anti Semitic, there needs to be a new word invented for the thing, otherwise it's an exercise in censorship of criticising the state of Israel, which is what I guess is at the root of almost all of these cases.

But let's be honest, there is very little chance of having a serious discussion on this thread about anti-Semitism, is there?

[JeMeSouviens]

See above. Such actions can never be condoned, but I have little doubt that this politician promotes Zionism.

Do you know any Jewish people?

The relationship between Judaism, the state of Israel and the folk memory of centuries of persecution, pogroms, ghettos, etc culminating in the holocaust is very complex. Even the most liberal jews who recognise the Palestinians have been largely shafted and with no time for Netanyahu and co take comfort in Israel's existence and have a certain amount of reflexive defensiveness of it. At the same time they see Corbyn supporting the likes of Hamas which is steeped in Islamic fundamentalism and would cheerfully see the Jewish population obliterated.

Separating anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism is not an easy task. Tread lightly.

[JeMeSouviens]

Absolutely appalling and should be condemned unequivocally.

I think it was you a while back who came up with 'its like saying landmines aren't an issue, until you step on one' analogy, which is quite funny and also apt here. Too many people saying it doesn't exist because they haven't seen it themselves. There is also the issue of the word 'Zionism', which is an actual thing, and there are lots of Zionists who, on my view, have unpleasant views who need to be called out and have their views challenged. If the word is now considered anti Semitic, there needs to be a new word invented for the thing, otherwise it's an exercise in censorship of criticising the state of Israel, which is what I guess is at the root of almost all of these cases.

But let's be honest, there is very little chance of having a serious discussion on this thread about anti-Semitism, is there?

No, now you come to mention it. Probably hopeless.

[Curried]

Do you know any Jewish people?

The relationship between Judaism, the state of Israel and the folk memory of centuries of persecution, pogroms, ghettos, etc culminating in the holocaust is very complex. Even the most liberal jews who recognise the Palestinians have been largely shafted and with no time for Netanyahu and co take comfort in Israel's existence and have a certain amount of reflexive defensiveness of it. At the same time they see Corbyn supporting the likes of Hamas which is steeped in Islamic fundamentalism and would cheerfully see the Jewish population obliterated.

Separating anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism is not an easy task. Tread lightly.


Yes. And thanks for the sage advice.

[JeMeSouviens]

Yes. And thanks for the sage advice.

Sorry if came across patronising.

[Hibbyradge]

Play the ball not the man, and try to defend for me this brave woman's voting record on Trident, Iran and particularly Scotland.

That's a straw man, if I've ever seen one.

[Curried]

Sorry if came across patronising.


All good.
I'm still planning to get to Sacotra one day!

[Curried]

That's a straw man, if I've ever seen one.


Knock it down bro.

[G B Young]

Of course not. But the fallacious claim that antisemitism will would increase under Labour is quite simply a work of Jewish fiction.

Play the ball not the man, and try to defend for me this brave woman's voting record on Trident, Iran and particularly Scotland.

Nearly 700 allegations of antisemitism against the party in 10 months seems like a lot to me. Or was that about average pre-Corbyn?

As for Luciana Berger, I've never taken any interest in her career until recently so I'll take your word for it on her voting record, but she gets a good write-up here:

https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/luciana-berger

[Hibbyradge]

Knock it down bro.

I'm not sure what her voting record on Trident, Iran and particularly Scotland, has to do with the reasons that she left the Labour party.

And I'm not sure why you mentioned it.

[Curried]

Nearly 700 allegations of antisemitism against the party in 10 months seems like a lot to me. Or was that about average pre-Corbyn?

As for Luciana Berger, I've never taken any interest in her career until recently so I'll take your word for it on her voting record, but she gets a good write-up here:

https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/luciana-berger


Take a step back and ask yourself who would benefit from spurious claims about antisemitism:-)

I also suggest you to stay away from magazines and go tho the facts:

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24924/luciana_berger/liverpool%2C_wavertree/votes


Night, Night

[Curried]

I'm not sure what her voting record on Trident, Iran and particularly Scotland, has to do with the reasons that she left the Labour party.

And I'm not sure why you mentioned it.

I suggest you re-read my post above and you will observe that i am not suggesting her departure from Labour has anything to do with her hideous voting record on Trident, Iran and Scotland.

Night, Night.

[Hibbyradge]

I suggest you re-read my post above and you will observe that i am not suggesting her departure from Labour has anything to do with her hideous voting record on Trident, Iran and Scotland.

Night, Night.

As I said, I'm not sure why you mentioned it in a discussion about her departure from the Labour party.

[Bristolhibby]

You may. I don't. I vote for a Party Manifesto. If your constituent MP resigns from the Party and no longer supports that Manifesto he/she/it no longer represents you/me.

I bet, none of these Slekit 7 will give up their well-paid London jobs and let the people decide on whether they still represent their manifesto commitments.

Not saying that’s how I vote. But it’s how a representative Parlimentary Democracy works.

The person is elected to be your Member of Parliament. They are there until voted out.

J

[HappyAsHellas]

And while all this has been kicking off where on earth is the Labour leader? Tending his allotment? Nothing from him but a bland 'I'm disappointed' statement and a no-show at the Parliamentary Labour Party meeting last night. Great leadership as always from the blessed Jeremy, though you wonder sometimes if his cohorts keep him away from the cameras whenever possible to avoid further damage to the party's reputation. Guy's a bitter, dim-witted old curmudgeon who should never have ended up in such a position of responsibility. As you say, the fact he's contrived to remain behind May and the Tories in the polls at a time when the government stumbles from one impasse to another sums up his ineptitude.

Edit: Seems he really WAS at his allotment. Surely that can be the only excuse for those clothes!

https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/6978/production/_105700072_dailymail.jpg

It's like Michael Foot's duffel coat all over again, but what do you expect from the Mail?

[G B Young]

It's like Michael Foot's duffel coat all over again, but what do you expect from the Mail?

Indeed, although Michael Foot was at least a very intelligent man with no dress sense. Corbyn simply has no dress sense.

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190219/4fa1341128041a13fae853961c3bcd11.jpg
Labour mp suggesting that the breakaway group are funded by Israel. No anti-semitism problem right enough.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Beefster]

Absolutely appalling and should be condemned unequivocally.

I think it was you a while back who came up with 'its like saying landmines aren't an issue, until you step on one' analogy, which is quite funny and also apt here. Too many people saying it doesn't exist because they haven't seen it themselves. There is also the issue of the word 'Zionism', which is an actual thing, and there are lots of Zionists who, on my view, have unpleasant views who need to be called out and have their views challenged. If the word is now considered anti Semitic, there needs to be a new word invented for the thing, otherwise it's an exercise in censorship of criticising the state of Israel, which is what I guess is at the root of almost all of these cases.

But let's be honest, there is very little chance of having a serious discussion on this thread about anti-Semitism, is there?

Not much to disagree with there tbh. My post was in response to a bit of a rant about Berger without any kind of acknowledgement that she’s been subjected to horrendous stuff. We can’t really have a serious discussion about anything that elicits passion and entrenched opinions on here. Anti-Semitism isn’t unique there.

FWIW I agree with the point you’re making (I think) about the eagerness of some to frame any criticism of Zionism as anti-Semitic.

I really hope I said that about landmines too!

[G B Young]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190219/4fa1341128041a13fae853961c3bcd11.jpg
Labour mp suggesting that the breakaway group are funded by Israel. No anti-semitism problem right enough.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, let's just endorse that funding claim, based on nothing other than the fact that it's 'possible'. It's pitiful stuff and underlines the serious problems Labour have here.

[hibsbollah]

Yes, let's just endorse that funding claim, based on nothing other than the fact that it's 'possible'. It's pitiful stuff and underlines the serious problems Labour have here.

Obviously, if you read it, the MP is not endorsing it. She's making the point, as discussed in the post above, that the tweet referred to them being in Labour Friends of Israel (a lobbying group of MPs, who will be unpopular with many people for reasons nothing to do with prejudice), and hence wasn't a reference to being Jewish and therefore isn't in itself anti Semitic.

Aw no I've just ignored my own advice about this subject. Best to leave it alone.

[cabbageandribs1875]

21716


One in three (34%) say Labour is institutionally antisemitic, with 23% saying the party is not and 43% unsure - and similarly 35% think Mr Corbyn himself is personally antisemitic, 24% think he is not and 41% answered "don't know".



give it 12 months and IG will be in 2nd spot :greengrin

[Pete]

This seven got increased majorities by piggybacking on Jeremy Corbyns manifesto.

By-elections now please and let the constituents decide.

There won’t be because we know what the outcome will be.

[hibsbollah]

This seven got increased majorities by piggybacking on Jeremy Corbyns manifesto.

By-elections now please and let the constituents decide.

There won’t be because we know what the outcome will be.

**** me. Another Labour Party supporter on the 'future of the Labour Party' thread. How strange. Surely this can't catch on :confused: Beware, it can be a cold and lonely place out here

[Colr]

This seven got increased majorities by piggybacking on Jeremy Corbyns manifesto.

By-elections now please and let the constituents decide.

There won’t be because we know what the outcome will be.

Corbyn doesn’t believe in re-running polls. The candidates won, get over it!

[Colr]

21716


One in three (34%) say Labour is institutionally antisemitic, with 23% saying the party is not and 43% unsure - and similarly 35% think Mr Corbyn himself is personally antisemitic, 24% think he is not and 41% answered "don't know".



give it 12 months and IG will be in 2nd spot :greengrin

I was sceptical but I’ve spoken to a fair few Jewish ex-members of Labour to think otherwise now.

[Pretty Boy]

I don't get the calls for by elections.

In theory the constituency vote is for an individual. If it's a vote for an endorsement of a party manifesto then surely Corbyn himself should have stood down on the several hundred occasions he defied the whip and habitually voted against policy that was included in the Labour manifesto of the time?

I don't doubt Corbyn often voted against New Labour for what he, and many others, saw as valid moral and ideological reasons but you can't have it both ways. If a constituency vote is for an individual then there's no reason to call an immediate by election; if it's for a party then how often can someone reject their own parties manifesto before they can be said to no longer be truly representing said party in whatever guise it is operating under?

[Pete]

The candidates won, get over it!

LABOUR candidates won. It’s a nonsense to think that the majority of people head to the ballot box and consider the person standing and their personal traits before the party they are affiliated with.
Manifestos and wanting to make a difference as far as the big picture goes..THATS what influences people and the way it is just now is letting MP’s like this betray the people who voted for them.

The increased majorities speak for themselves. Let the same candidates stand with their agenda against a Labour candidate and the people will have a real choice. Independent Group v Labour.

As I said, it won’t happen and deep down we all know why. The whole thing reeks of narcissism and Labour will move forward. 👍🏼

[Pretty Boy]

LABOUR candidates won. It’s a nonsense to think that the majority of people head to the ballot box and consider the person standing and their personal traits before the party they are affiliated with.
Manifestos and wanting to make a difference as far as the big picture goes..THATS what influences people and the way it is just now is letting MP’s like this betray the people who voted for them.

The increased majorities speak for themselves. Let the same candidates stand with their agenda against a Labour candidate and the people will have a real choice. Independent Group v Labour.

As I said, it won’t happen and deep down we all know why. The whole thing reeks of narcissism and Labour will move forward. 👍🏼

So would you then agree that when Corbyn was repeatedly rejecting the Labour manifesto, however valid his reasons, he should have resigned the whip and stood as an independent rather than piggybacking on the popularity of New Labour for many years?

After all if the people of Islington where voting for the party and not the man they weren't being fairly represented in parliament.

[Hibbyradge]

LABOUR candidates won. It’s a nonsense to think that the majority of people head to the ballot box and consider the person standing and their personal traits before the party they are affiliated with.
Manifestos and wanting to make a difference as far as the big picture goes..THATS what influences people and the way it is just now is letting MP’s like this betray the people who voted for them.

The increased majorities speak for themselves. Let the same candidates stand with their agenda against a Labour candidate and the people will have a real choice. Independent Group v Labour.

As I said, it won’t happen and deep down we all know why. The whole thing reeks of narcissism and Labour will move forward. 👍🏼

It never happens and it never will.

The fact that a large percentage of the electorate vote for the party they'd prefer instead of considering the candidate is irrelevant.

Some independent candidates win so it's clearly not a universal phenomenon and add to that the many MPs who do receive a high personal vote.

[Ozyhibby]

So would you then agree that when Corbyn was repeatedly rejecting the Labour manifesto, however valid his reasons, he should have resigned the whip and stood as an independent rather than piggybacking on the popularity of New Labour for many years?

After all if the people of Islington where voting for the party and not the man they weren't being fairly represented in parliament.

[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[weecounty hibby]

I don't get the calls for by elections.

In theory the constituency vote is for an individual. If it's a vote for an endorsement of a party manifesto then surely Corbyn himself should have stood down on the several hundred occasions he defied the whip and habitually voted against policy that was included in the Labour manifesto of the time?

I don't doubt Corbyn often voted against New Labour for what he, and many others, saw as valid moral and ideological reasons but you can't have it both ways. If a constituency vote is for an individual then there's no reason to call an immediate by election; if it's for a party then how often can someone reject their own parties manifesto before they can be said to no longer be truly representing said party in whatever guise it is operating under?
Really good points made there. I heard Corbyn and others talk about these seven being elected on the back of Labours manifesto. I didn't think of it in the context of Corbyn voting against his party so many times. Really well made point!

[ronaldo7]

Another one bites the dust. Joan Ryan leaves the Labour Party.

[Pete]

So would you then agree that when Corbyn was repeatedly rejecting the Labour manifesto, however valid his reasons, he should have resigned the whip and stood as an independent rather than piggybacking on the popularity of New Labour for many years?

After all if the people of Islington where voting for the party and not the man they weren't being fairly represented in parliament.

Bringing up Corbyn can indeed give you things to consider and there are parallels to be drawn.

Consider Islington North and it’s MP Michael O’Halloran. A fairly right wing character in a party of left wing agitators who feels he has no choice but leave the Labour Party and become an “independent”. What does he do? Stand against the left-wing Labour candidate who slaughters him as the people speak. Said left wing character enjoys hulking majority for the next 30 odd years regardless of what style of Labour Party he is a member of.
Perhaps I was wrong and in some instances there are certain politicians who are returned continually because of who they are and what they believe in...and maybe the people of Islington are actually being fairly represented by Jeremy Corbyn.🤔

[Pete]

Another one bites the dust. Joan Ryan leaves the Labour Party.
Not exactly a shock.

Is she off to the Lib Dem’s?

[cabbageandribs1875]

:eyes: how on earth would that have worked :greengrin although ruthy has already knocked back the idea of it


Rebel Labour MPs considered asking Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson to lead the new movement, reports @chrisdeerin (https://twitter.com/chrisdeerin). https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2019/02/there-no-clear-space-new-centrist-party-scotland … (https://t.co/nPI1Mfm4Rw)

[ballengeich]

Bringing up Corbyn can indeed give you things to consider and there are parallels to be drawn.

Consider Islington North and it’s MP Michael O’Halloran. A fairly right wing character in a party of left wing agitators who feels he has no choice but leave the Labour Party and become an “independent”. What does he do? Stand against the left-wing Labour candidate who slaughters him as the people speak. Said left wing character enjoys hulking majority for the next 30 odd years regardless of what style of Labour Party he is a member of.
Perhaps I was wrong and in some instances there are certain politicians who are returned continually because of who they are and what they believe in...and maybe the people of Islington are actually being fairly represented by Jeremy Corbyn.🤔

or there are constituencies which will return a donkey if it wears a red rosette and Islington North is one. Both interpretations are equally valid.

[Ozyhibby]

Another one bites the dust. Joan Ryan leaves the Labour Party.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190219/64323eb4153f56b4876ac65485cbd83d.jpg





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibbyradge]

Perhaps I was wrong and in some instances there are certain politicians who are returned continually because of who they are and what they believe in...and maybe the people of Islington are actually being fairly represented by Jeremy Corbyn.��

You think?

https://www.islington.gov.uk/about-the-council/voting-and-elections/elections-and-election-results/european-referendum

[Pete]

You think?

https://www.islington.gov.uk/about-the-council/voting-and-elections/elections-and-election-results/european-referendum

As leader of the opposition, one must respect the collective national decision:

Corbyn argues that as Prime Minister he would negotiate for a bespoke, negotiated relationship with the EU with Single Market rules, protections, clarification or exemption when necessary.

"That new relationship would need to ensure we can deliver or ambitious economic programme, take the essential steps to upgrade and transform our economy, and build an economy for the 21st century that works for the many, not the few".

...A solution that gives people the benefits of single market rules and a customs union while respecting democracy.

One thing we might also find out from his next massive majority is that...you’ll never guess...there are actually issues other than Brexit which determine people’s voting intentions. 😁

[One Day Soon]

This seven got increased majorities by piggybacking on Jeremy Corbyns manifesto.

By-elections now please and let the constituents decide.

There won’t be because we know what the outcome will be.


They'll wait for a general election and almost certainly stand in key marginals rather than their own seats - where they can exercise maximum leverage. Why shouldn't they? They've no obligations to Labour at this point - quite the opposite in fact - and presumably they will continue to represent their constituents. Now that they've stopped taking it it's safe to expect that they'll be keen to give plenty back.

When Corbyn supporting Jared O'Mara was booted out, then readmitted and then resigned from the party he didn't resign and cause a by-election. The by-election stuff is a red herring, it can't be forced and it's not going to happen. They'll be judged by voters in the next election in whichever marginals they stand.

[One Day Soon]

Yes, let's just endorse that funding claim, based on nothing other than the fact that it's 'possible'. It's pitiful stuff and underlines the serious problems Labour have here.

The notion that Labour doesn't have a serious problem with anti-semitism at this point is beyond parody. Just for a start, the immediate defaulting to conspiracy theories about who is running the defectors echoes, deliberately, every stock standard anti-semitic trope in modern and earlier history.

A Labour leader with a shred of decency would have been both nailing this garbage and being seen to be doing it. Apart from anything else the capacity to be anything like an effective advocate for Palestinian rights is kneecapped by the failure to be seen as a bullwark against anti-semitism.

When I think of how unambiguously Kinnock called out Militant in Liverpool at conference, on camera, live and with passion in the face of heavy Trade Union and CLP opposition it contrasts spectacularly with Corbyn's flaccid stance on anti-semitism.

[ballengeich]

As leader of the opposition, one must respect the collective national decision:

Corbyn argues that as Prime Minister he would negotiate for a bespoke, negotiated relationship with the EU with Single Market rules, protections, clarification or exemption when necessary.


Regarding the "collective national decision" are you confident that the populace haven't changed their minds since 2017?

There's no chance of Corbyn being in a position to negotiate a revised EU relationship before 29th March. What position should he and the Labour party adopt during the next six weeks?

[Colr]

Regarding the "collective national decision" are you confident that the populace haven't changed their minds since 2017?

There's no chance of Corbyn being in a position to negotiate a revised EU relationship before 29th March. What position should he and the Labour party adopt during the next six weeks?

Corbyn is anti EU. What he does and what the Labour party wants are two different things.

Its why he’s unfit to leade the party.

[G B Young]

Obviously, if you read it, the MP is not endorsing it. She's making the point, as discussed in the post above, that the tweet referred to them being in Labour Friends of Israel (a lobbying group of MPs, who will be unpopular with many people for reasons nothing to do with prejudice), and hence wasn't a reference to being Jewish and therefore isn't in itself anti Semitic.

Aw no I've just ignored my own advice about this subject. Best to leave it alone.

She gives credence to a claim founded on nothing more than an anti-Israeli agenda, thus fuelling such speculation. She has, though, now apologised for doing so:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47296591

[G B Young]

Another one bites the dust. Joan Ryan leaves the Labour Party.

Strong speculation growing that a couple of Tories may also jump ship today, but at council level Labour look like losing Brighton to the Tories:

https://twitter.com/BBCHelenCatt/status/1098172731001061376

[Hibbyradge]

Anna Soubry, Sarah Wollaston And Heidi Allen Quit Conservative Party To Join Independent Group Of MPs

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/anna-soubry-sarah-wollaston-and-heidi-allen-quit-conservative-party-to-join-independent-group-of-mps_uk_5c6d15b5e4b0e2f4d8a0d08d

[G B Young]

Corbyn is anti EU. What he does and what the Labour party wants are two different things.

Its why he’s unfit to lead the party.


Couple of articles here which sum Corbyn up to a T:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/19/at-times-like-these-corbyn-is-his-own-worst-enemy

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jeremy-corbyn-brexit-the-independent-group-chuka-umunna-luciana-berger-latest-eff-conference-a8787291.html

[Peevemor]

Anna Soubry, Sarah Wollaston And Heidi Allen Quit Conservative Party To Join Independent Group Of MPs

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/anna-soubry-sarah-wollaston-and-heidi-allen-quit-conservative-party-to-join-independent-group-of-mps_uk_5c6d15b5e4b0e2f4d8a0d08d

This is becoming more interesting.

[Scorrie]

This is becoming more interesting.

Aye it is. The Independent Group are now bigger than the DUP and only one MP shy of the Lib Dems. If any more join then they could hold a bit of power in key votes...

[G B Young]

Aye it is. The Independent Group are now bigger than the DUP and only one MP shy of the Lib Dems. If any more join then they could hold a bit of power in key votes...

Several more Labour MPs rumoured to be joining them.

[Peevemor]

Several more Labour MPs rumoured to be joining them.

A few more tories then the brown stuff will really hit the fan.

[Pretty Boy]

A potentially centre ground, pro European group starting to take shape. If Tony Blair can resist the urge to stick his oar in they might just be on to something.

[Hiber-nation]

A potentially centre ground, pro European group starting to take shape. If Tony Blair can resist the urge to stick his oar in they might just be on to something.

Hah, just what we were talking about this morning. Surely no-one will ask him to get involved, he's basically toxic now you'd have to think....

[Benny Brazil]

This is becoming more interesting.

Keen to see where they take this - would be good to see something different in UK politics

[hibsbollah]

Keen to see where they take this - would be good to see something different in UK politics

In the absence of any actual policies from this group yet, I'll wait to be convinced what it means.

Does 'centre ground' politics mean what Macron did in France with his new party, which is now basically turning into a Thatcher-style sell off of the French state to foreign investment?

Centre ground can mean different things to different people.

[One Day Soon]

Hah, just what we were talking about this morning. Surely no-one will ask him to get involved, he's basically toxic now you'd have to think....


He's not toxic but he absolutely is Marmite so whatever positives you'd get would also bring balancing negatives.

He's probably the smartest political operator in this country even now and he'd likely only make an intervention if and when there was a point at which it would help them.

[Don Giovanni]

A potentially centre ground, pro European group starting to take shape...

So Liberal Democrats? (Remember them? :greengrin: )

Will be interesting to see how those two groups interact.

[Ozyhibby]

He's not toxic but he absolutely is Marmite so whatever positives you'd get would also bring balancing negatives.

He's probably the smartest political operator in this country even now and he'd likely only make an intervention if and when there was a point at which it would help them.

The Iraq war makes him toxic. If it wasn’t for that I would still want him as PM but the lies told and the conduct of that war mean he should never hold office again. But that’s only me.
He was re-elected after the Iraq war which suggests most could move past it. And his domestic policies remain very popular.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

So Liberal Democrats? (Remember them? :greengrin: )

Will be interesting to see how those two groups interact.

Lib Dem brand is damaged beyond repair.
Only way forward is for Lib Dem’s to leave and join the Independent group and not the other way around.
Independent group could benefit from some of the Lib Dem infrastructure though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Lib Dem brand is damaged beyond repair.
Only way forward is for Lib Dem’s to leave and join the Independent group and not the other way around.
Independent group could benefit from some of the Lib Dem infrastructure though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Lib Dem’s have just said they won’t stand candidates against the Independents.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Derek Hatton suspended from Labour Party.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cabbageandribs1875]

Derek Hatton suspended from Labour Party.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


oh my, so soon

[Hiber-nation]

Derek Hatton suspended from Labour Party.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You actually couldn't make it up.

[weecounty hibby]

You actually couldn't make it up.

You would honestly believe that the Labour party go out of their way to find new ways to self destruct and look stupid. Suspended after complaints regarding a 2012 tweet. Who allowed him back in without vetting his recent social media activity.

[GlesgaeHibby]

You would honestly believe that the Labour party go out of their way to find new ways to self destruct and look stupid. Suspended after complaints regarding a 2012 tweet. Who allowed him back in without vetting his recent social media activity.

It's mental. And the vocal Corbyn supporters are just shouting louder than ever now, taking delight in MPs defecting.

[Colr]

Derek Hatton suspended from Labour Party.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’m not sure that I want to be in a club that would have him as a member!

I note he is best mates with Andy Wigmore!!

[Ozyhibby]

A potentially centre ground, pro European group starting to take shape. If Tony Blair can resist the urge to stick his oar in they might just be on to something.

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/tony-blair-tipped-to-be-next-to-join-independent-group/20/02/amp/?__twitter_impression=true


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[G B Young]

More than a dollop of irony in Corbyn accusing his defecting MPs of 'returning to the failed politics of the past' when his own political clock stopped somewhere in the 1970s.

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

More than a dollop of irony in Corbyn accusing his defecting MPs of 'returning to the failed politics of the past' when his own political clock stopped somewhere in the 1970s.


The future of the MPs who have defected from the Labour Party raises an important and interesting issue. I have heard both him and Len McCluskey say that they should do the honourable thing and resign and force a by election. That to me is entirely bluster because they know fine well that this won't happen. But if they did, and Corbyn supporters were elected in their place it would hard to defend the allegations that non - Corbyn MPs are being deliberately hounded out so that they can be de-selected.

[Ozyhibby]

More than a dollop of irony in Corbyn accusing his defecting MPs of 'returning to the failed politics of the past' when his own political clock stopped somewhere in the 1970s.

Ah but this time socialism will be different. Those past instances were not real socialism.[emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Beefster]

A bit of an aside but why's Blair considered toxic nowadays? Just the Iraq War or is there other reasons?

[Fife-Hibee]

Ah but this time socialism will be different. Those past instances were not real socialism.[emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You could argue that there were certain factors that were put in place to ensure socialism came crashing down. It's not that it can't technically work, it just requires that everybody wants it to work, which they don't.

[Ozyhibby]

You could argue that there were certain factors that were put in place to ensure socialism came crashing down. It's not that it can't technically work, it just requires that everybody wants it to work, which they don't.

It has never ever worked anywhere. Ever. Nor will it ever.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

A bit of an aside but why's Blair considered toxic nowadays? Just the Iraq War or is there other reasons?

He’s only toxic to the noisy minority. If it wasn’t for the Iraq war I would have him back as well. But the Iraq was is not a big deal for most. He was re-elected after it no problem. Plenty would welcome him back.
And if it was a choice between Blair and Corbyn then I go Blair every time.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[heretoday]

He’s only toxic to the noisy minority. If it wasn’t for the Iraq war I would have him back as well. But the Iraq was is not a big deal for most. He was re-elected after it no problem. Plenty would welcome him back.
And if it was a choice between Blair and Corbyn then I go Blair every time.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You're right. He can win elections. He'd be wiping the floor with May right now.

[Pete]

You could argue that there were certain factors that were put in place to ensure socialism came crashing down. It's not that it can't technically work, it just requires that everybody wants it to work, which they don't.

Some people simply don’t want to hear that argument though. Of course it can work.

People have different ideas of what socialism is though and perhaps for another thread (as is all the independent group chat)

[Hibrandenburg]

It has never ever worked anywhere. Ever. Nor will it ever.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Some of the happiest countries in the world have democratic socialism.

[Fife-Hibee]

It has never ever worked anywhere. Ever. Nor will it ever.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nope. Because it only takes a handful of people to want it to fail in order to make it fail. Socialism can't stop people from wanting to better everybody else. That's why it ultimately results in a dictatorship. Where as Capitalism encourages people to be competitive and to go as far as they can, which is supposed to stop anyone from getting too far ahead. But just like Socialism, it doesn't really work in practice. It does however make people work harder and give them something to strive for. Even if 99.9% will never truly obtain what they're striving for.

Capitalism can keep economies going, but it does so on lies and broken promises.

[Fife-Hibee]

Some of the happiest countries in the world have democratic socialism.

I think you mean social democracy, not quite the same thing. :wink:

[Ozyhibby]

Some of the happiest countries in the world have democratic socialism.

Which ones?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MyJo]

Which ones?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_model

[Ozyhibby]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_model

Those are all free market capitalist countries. They sometimes have higher public spending and there is much to be admired there but they are far from socialist.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fife-Hibee]

Those are all free market capitalist countries. They sometimes have higher public spending and there is much to be admired there but they are far from socialist.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not free markets, markets that are regulated just enough to prevent monopolies and the type of corporate communism we see here. A capitalist system, where the better off are taxed quite substantially but don't mind as long as it raises the overall living standards across the country as a whole.

[RyeSloan]

Not free markets, markets that are regulated just enough to prevent monopolies and the type of corporate communism we see here. A capitalist system, where the better off are taxed quite substantially but don't mind as long as it raises the overall living standards across the country as a whole.

It is though no doubt a capitalist system [emoji106]

As an aside Sweden has a rather interesting tax system (yes my life is an exciting one [emoji23]).

A lot of their income tax is actually a local tax. State income tax is only charged at the higher bands. An approach then that puts a lot of funds directly in municipal hands rather than state ones...something to bear in mind with regards to the soon to be had (maybe!) debate in Scotland around local government financing.

It’s also of note that they do not have wealth taxes, property taxes or inheritance tax...all three of which appear to be a favourite of Corbyn’s Labour.

That said every system has its flaws and Sweden’s is no doubt the fact that its highest rate starts relatively low so the real rich do not appear to be as impacted as much and therefore not as progressive as it might appear. It also has a strong disincentive built in regarding encouraging extra labour / wages as the tax is so high.

But I’ll desist from any more musings as I’m sure most people are much less interested in such things [emoji2957]

[Hibbyradge]

Check Norway's system out 😯

[RyeSloan]

Check Norway's system out [emoji54]

Ahh yeah well Norway is indeed a special case. It’s oil wealth does indeed give it the ability to be a centralist state but underneath all that it’s sovereign wealth funds are invested in capitalist enterprises around the world and last time I looked owned something like 1.5% of the worlds listed companies!

It’s also one of the most expensive countries in the world I believe so a nation with plenty free time but little free cash to enjoy it....that said their 30 hour weeks do sound rather attractive even if their tax rates and 25% vat make me come out in a cold sweat [emoji23]

[Fife-Hibee]

Ahh yeah well Norway is indeed a special case. It’s oil wealth does indeed give it the ability to be a centralist state but underneath all that it’s sovereign wealth funds are invested in capitalist enterprises around the world and last time I looked owned something like 1.5% of the worlds listed companies!

It’s also one of the most expensive countries in the world I believe so a nation with plenty free time but little free cash to enjoy it....that said their 30 hour weeks do sound rather attractive even if their tax rates and 25% vat make me come out in a cold sweat [emoji23]

It may be expensive, but it pays well enough. It's not as if the people living there are suffering poverty. They have all the provisions they need to live a comfortable life. You don't hear about deep inequality, homelessness, house shortages... etc. The Norwegian people are well taken care of under their progressive system.

Makes me sick to my stomach to know that Scotland could have found itself in a similar position had it only grown a pair in the 70s. After decades of brutal economics, we still haven't grown a pair.

[Curried]

Ian Austin has just quit the Labour Party this morning, and doesn't plan to call a by-election.......He has a majority of 22 votes.

How very noble of him.

The latest YouGov poll suggest that the majority of UK voters (both Labour and Tory) want these shysters to go to the people!

Without excluding don't knows, its Labour 52% for vs. 26% against; Tory 58% for v.s. 29% against; and wait for it....Lib Dems 33% for vs. 50% against.

https://yougov.co.uk/opi/surveys/results#/survey/f6385dae-34fd-11e9-af57-67fad969c339/question/b85d98d1-34fe-11e9-ac73-cd3ef41981c9/politics

The only ones against a by-election (peoples vote) are the minority fence-sitters and red tory squealers on this forum. :greengrin

[marinello59]

Ian Austin has just quit the Labour Party this morning, and doesn't plan to call a by-election.......He has a majority of 22 votes.

How very noble of him.

The latest YouGov poll suggest that the majority of UK voters (both Labour and Tory) want these shysters to go to the people!

Without excluding don't knows, its Labour 52% for vs. 26% against; Tory 58% for v.s. 29% against; and wait for it....Lib Dems 33% for vs. 50% against.

https://yougov.co.uk/opi/surveys/results#/survey/f6385dae-34fd-11e9-af57-67fad969c339/question/b85d98d1-34fe-11e9-ac73-cd3ef41981c9/politics

The only ones against a by-election (peoples vote) are the minority fence-sitters and red tory squealers on this forum. :greengrin





That's politicians for you. Mark Macdonald is still an MSP despite getting in on the SNP ticket.

[Curried]

Fair call.

I'd also want to see him go back to the people, however as we don't have a head-to-head (first past the post) voting/election system in Scotland he could only get in again on the list ticket like most current Labour and Conservative MSP, and that won't happen.

[Ozyhibby]

It may be expensive, but it pays well enough. It's not as if the people living there are suffering poverty. They have all the provisions they need to live a comfortable life. You don't hear about deep inequality, homelessness, house shortages... etc. The Norwegian people are well taken care of under their progressive system.

Makes me sick to my stomach to know that Scotland could have found itself in a similar position had it only grown a pair in the 70s. After decades of brutal economics, we still haven't grown a pair.

Homelessness and house shortages are artificially created here by the government restricting supply through the planning system.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hibsbollah]

Homelessness and house shortages are artificially created here by the government restricting supply through the planning system.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's a very small part of the problem. Homelessness is caused by a lack of an adequate welfare safety net and the restriction of supply through the 'not building council houses anymore' system. (As well as all the other causes such as mental health epidemic, drug and alcohol dependency of course). But essentially its a Tory policy choice.

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

You're right. He can win elections. He'd be wiping the floor with May right now.

He is the consummate transient professional politician and he would thrive just now at a time when the trick is to anchor your beliefs in shifting sand yet at the same time, have a 24 hour PR machine pumping out the line that you are principled.

[Ozyhibby]

That's a very small part of the problem. Homelessness is caused by a lack of an adequate welfare safety net and the restriction of supply through the 'not building council houses anymore' system. (As well as all the other causes such as mental health epidemic, drug and alcohol dependency of course). But essentially its a Tory policy choice.

It’s lazy to suggest it’s a Tory choice. Most governments of both colours would like to build more houses, they just struggle to do so in the current planning system and going up against local councils carries big political risks so they usually back down. The planning system adds about £130k to the price of a standard 3 bed house.
Cameron tried to reform the system but failed because grass roots campaigns against building on green belts etc were costing him politically.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James310]

That's a very small part of the problem. Homelessness is caused by a lack of an adequate welfare safety net and the restriction of supply through the 'not building council houses anymore' system. (As well as all the other causes such as mental health epidemic, drug and alcohol dependency of course). But essentially its a Tory policy choice.

The Tories have had a majority government in the UK for about 2 years out of the last 22 years. So must also be a Labour policy choice as well?

[hibsbollah]

It’s lazy to suggest it’s a Tory choice. Most governments of both colours would like to build more houses, they just struggle to do so in the current planning system and going up against local councils carries big political risks so they usually back down. The planning system adds about £130k to the price of a standard 3 bed house.
Cameron tried to reform the system but failed because grass roots campaigns against building on green belts etc were costing him politically.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Homelessness is not simply about building more houses. It's about the creation of an underclass who can never dream of owning their own home. I'm not sure what evidence you have that this is a 'lazy' assumption.

[hibsbollah]

The Tories have had a majority government in the UK for about 2 years out of the last 22 years. So must also be a Labour policy choice as well?

Uhhh, clearly not, since Labour haven't been in power since 2010. And since 2010 rough sleeping has gone up 169%.

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2018/11/new-labour-all-eliminated-rough-sleeping-how-did-it-do-it

[James310]

Uhhh, clearly not, since Labour haven't been in power since 2010. And since 2010 rough sleeping has gone up 169%.

Fair enough, so assume it went down from 1997 to 2010? If it did then I take back what I said.

[hibsbollah]

Fair enough, so assume it went down from 1997 to 2010? If it did then I take back what I said.

It did indeed, see link above. I have plenty of gripes about the Blair and Brown governments but they almost totally eradicated rough sleeping.

[Moulin Yarns]

It’s lazy to suggest it’s a Tory choice. Most governments of both colours would like to build more houses, they just struggle to do so in the current planning system and going up against local councils carries big political risks so they usually back down. The planning system adds about £130k to the price of a standard 3 bed house.
Cameron tried to reform the system but failed because grass roots campaigns against building on green belts etc were costing him politically.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sorry Oz, but where do you get £130k for planning approval? A single house would cost £7500 in professional fees for architectural services. The more houses the lower the fee per unit.

[James310]

It did indeed, see link above. I have plenty of gripes about the Blair and Brown governments but they almost totally eradicated rough sleeping.

OK fair enough I take it back about Labour.

[hibsbollah]

OK fair enough I take it back about Labour.

:aok:

[Ozyhibby]

Sorry Oz, but where do you get £130k for planning approval? A single house would cost £7500 in professional fees for architectural services. The more houses the lower the fee per unit.

£130k is the difference in price in a bit of land big enough for a house with and without planning permission. That is the true cost of the system.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cabbageandribs1875]

meanwhile, a labour councillor who was just reinstated to the anti-semite party last month appears to think it was clever/apt to use the word 'Rape' in his condemnation of the SNP budget


https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/local-news/labour-councillor-jim-sheridan-blasted-14038094

[GlesgaeHibby]

meanwhile, a labour councillor who was just reinstated to the anti-semite party last month appears to think it was clever/apt to use the word 'Rape' in his condemnation of the SNP budget


https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/local-news/labour-councillor-jim-sheridan-blasted-14038094

What an idiot, but hardly surprising. Leonard spent ages banging on about more money being needed for councils without once putting forward a credible alternative for which element of public spending they'd cut to fund that increase. Scottish Labour are a total embarrassment.

[Tornadoes70]

What an idiot, but hardly surprising. Leonard spent ages banging on about more money being needed for councils without once putting forward a credible alternative for which element of public spending they'd cut to fund that increase. Scottish Labour are a total embarrassment.

Its very easy to slander outward looking world wide international parties that actually care about genocide, poverty, corruption, voting violation etc while being part of an inward looking fascist nationalist party such as the snp.

Mon Labour!!!

[Curried]

Its very easy to slander outward looking world wide international parties that actually care about genocide, poverty, corruption, voting violation etc while being part of an inward looking fascist nationalist party such as the snp.

Mon Labour!!!

Tony Blair (former Labour PM 1997-2007) cared so much he sent his beloved UK citizen to counter genocide, poverty, corruption and voting violations in Iraq!

To conflate the SNP’s track record with the actions of this war criminal might be laughable, if it wasn’t for the thousands of innocent people he indirectly killed while trying to facilitate western corporate access to Iraq’s oil reserves.

Pull you ****** head out of your ar*e, and look at what your party are doing to the future of Scotland…I’ll give you a tip, it’s not good:-<

[GlesgaeHibby]

Its very easy to slander outward looking world wide international parties that actually care about genocide, poverty, corruption, voting violation etc while being part of an inward looking fascist nationalist party such as the snp.

Mon Labour!!!

It's very easy to slander a party that are weak and offer nothing, even after being given countless opportunities to do so in parliament. Still waiting to hear what area of spending Labour want to cut to fund increases in local govt spending.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

Its very easy to slander outward looking world wide international parties that actually care about genocide, poverty, corruption, voting violation etc while being part of an inward looking fascist nationalist party such as the snp.

Mon Labour!!!

Unbelievable Jeff! 😲

[Hibbyradge]

He is the consummate transient professional politician and he would thrive just now at a time when the trick is to anchor your beliefs in shifting sand yet at the same time, have a 24 hour PR machine pumping out the line that you are principled.

Do we really need to list, again, all the things Labour achieved with Blair as leader?

[Hibbyradge]

OK fair enough I take it back about Labour.

Big up to you, sir.

That's the first time I've seen anyone accept another poster's contradictory point on the Holy Ground.

Very gracious. :thumbsup:

[Moulin Yarns]

Its very easy to slander outward looking world wide international parties that actually care about genocide, poverty, corruption, voting violation etc while being part of an inward looking fascist nationalist party such as the snp.

Mon Labour!!!


I trust you know the definition of insanity, repeating the same thing over and over expecting a different outcome.

You sir, are clearly insane.

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

Do we really need to list, again, all the things Labour achieved with Blair as leader?

Well it depends if the list is subjective or objective?

[One Day Soon]

I trust you know the definition of insanity, repeating the same thing over and over expecting a different outcome.

You sir, are clearly insane.

What, like an independence referendum you mean?

[hibsbollah]

Big up to you, sir.

That's the first time I've seen anyone accept another poster's contradictory point on the Holy Ground.

Very gracious. :thumbsup:

I agree, a lesson in class for us all I think.:agree:

[Fife-Hibee]

Its very easy to slander outward looking world wide international parties that actually care about genocide, poverty, corruption, voting violation etc while being part of an inward looking fascist nationalist party such as the snp.

Mon Labour!!!

You seem to think you know a lot about a party that sit on their hands at every key opportunity.

What is the "outward" looking Labour stance on the European Union and freedom of movement? What is the "inward" looking SNP stance on the European Union and freedom of movement?

I don't expect a coherent response from you. So perhaps one of the wiser on here can remind us all?

[DaveF]

What, like an independence referendum you mean?

Even as an Indy supporting voter, that made me laugh :-)

[Hibbyradge]

Well it depends if the list is subjective or objective?

Pick the ones you like out of these 50 which were up til 2007;

1. Longest period of sustained low inflation since the 60s.

2. Low mortgage rates.

3. Introduced the National Minimum Wage and raised it to £5.52.

4. Over 14,000 more police in England and Wales.

5. Cut overall crime by 32 per cent.

6. Record levels of literacy and numeracy in schools.

7. Young people achieving some of the best ever results at 14, 16, and 18.

8. Funding for every pupil in England has doubled.

9. Employment is at its highest level ever.

10. Written off up to 100 per cent of debt owed by poorest countries.

11. 85,000 more nurses.

12. 32,000 more doctors.

13. Brought back matrons to hospital wards.

14. Devolved power to the Scottish Parliament.

15. Devolved power to the Welsh Assembly.

16. Dads now get paternity leave of 2 weeks for the first time.

17. NHS Direct offering free convenient patient advice.

18. Gift aid was worth £828 million to charities last year.

19. Restored city-wide government to London.

20. Record number of students in higher education.

21. Child benefit up 26 per cent since 1997.

22. Delivered 2,200 Sure Start Children’s Centres.

23. Introduced the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

24. £200 winter fuel payment to pensioners & up to £300 for over-80s.

25. On course to exceed our Kyoto target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

26. Restored devolved government to Northern Ireland.

27. Over 36,000 more teachers in England and 274,000 more support staff and teaching assistants.

28. All full time workers now have a right to 24 days paid holiday.

29. A million pensioners lifted out of poverty.

30. 600,000 children lifted out of relative poverty.

31. Introduced child tax credit giving more money to parents.

32. Scrapped Section 28 and introduced Civil Partnerships.

33. Brought over 1 million social homes up to standard.

34. Inpatient waiting lists down by over half a million since 1997.

35. Banned fox hunting.

36. Cleanest rivers, beaches, drinking water and air since before the industrial revolution.

37. Free TV licences for over-75s.

38. Banned fur farming and the testing of cosmetics on animals.

39. Free breast cancer screening for all women aged between 50-70.

40. Free off peak local bus travel for over-60s.

41. New Deal – helped over 1.8 million people into work.

42. Over 3 million child trust funds have been started.

43. Free eye test for over 60s.

44. More than doubled the number of apprenticeships.

45. Free entry to national museums and galleries.

46. Overseas aid budget more than doubled.

47. Heart disease deaths down by 150,000 and cancer deaths down by 50,000.

48. Cut long-term youth unemployment by 75 per cent.

49. Free nursery places for every three and four-year-olds.

50. Free fruit for most four to six-year-olds at school.

[Fife-Hibee]

What, like an independence referendum you mean?

Indeed.

Take the likes of Ruth Davidson, Richard Leonard and Willie Rennie for example. They can't keep going on about it while our government gets on with the day to day job of running our country.

It's almost as if.... they have nothing better to be doing, or to offer for that matter.

[Fife-Hibee]

Pick the ones you like out of these 50 which were up til 2007;

1. Longest period of sustained low inflation since the 60s.

2. Low mortgage rates.

3. Introduced the National Minimum Wage and raised it to £5.52.

4. Over 14,000 more police in England and Wales.

5. Cut overall crime by 32 per cent.

6. Record levels of literacy and numeracy in schools.

7. Young people achieving some of the best ever results at 14, 16, and 18.

8. Funding for every pupil in England has doubled.

9. Employment is at its highest level ever.

10. Written off up to 100 per cent of debt owed by poorest countries.

11. 85,000 more nurses.

12. 32,000 more doctors.

13. Brought back matrons to hospital wards.

14. Devolved power to the Scottish Parliament.

15. Devolved power to the Welsh Assembly.

16. Dads now get paternity leave of 2 weeks for the first time.

17. NHS Direct offering free convenient patient advice.

18. Gift aid was worth £828 million to charities last year.

19. Restored city-wide government to London.

20. Record number of students in higher education.

21. Child benefit up 26 per cent since 1997.

22. Delivered 2,200 Sure Start Children’s Centres.

23. Introduced the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

24. £200 winter fuel payment to pensioners & up to £300 for over-80s.

25. On course to exceed our Kyoto target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

26. Restored devolved government to Northern Ireland.

27. Over 36,000 more teachers in England and 274,000 more support staff and teaching assistants.

28. All full time workers now have a right to 24 days paid holiday.

29. A million pensioners lifted out of poverty.

30. 600,000 children lifted out of relative poverty.

31. Introduced child tax credit giving more money to parents.

32. Scrapped Section 28 and introduced Civil Partnerships.

33. Brought over 1 million social homes up to standard.

34. Inpatient waiting lists down by over half a million since 1997.

35. Banned fox hunting.

36. Cleanest rivers, beaches, drinking water and air since before the industrial revolution.

37. Free TV licences for over-75s.

38. Banned fur farming and the testing of cosmetics on animals.

39. Free breast cancer screening for all women aged between 50-70.

40. Free off peak local bus travel for over-60s.

41. New Deal – helped over 1.8 million people into work.

42. Over 3 million child trust funds have been started.

43. Free eye test for over 60s.

44. More than doubled the number of apprenticeships.

45. Free entry to national museums and galleries.

46. Overseas aid budget more than doubled.

47. Heart disease deaths down by 150,000 and cancer deaths down by 50,000.

48. Cut long-term youth unemployment by 75 per cent.

49. Free nursery places for every three and four-year-olds.

50. Free fruit for most four to six-year-olds at school.

But like all one sentence examples given for individual policies and statistics. It's not always what it's dressed up to look like.

[marinello59]

But like all one sentence examples given for individual policies and statistics. It's not always what it's dressed up to look like.

What have the Romans ever done for us?

[Mibbes Aye]

But like all one sentence examples given for individual policies and statistics. It's not always what it's dressed up to look like.

:faf:

You've got him tellt there

:fibber:

[Fife-Hibee]

I'm just saying, sometimes goal posts are moved to make statistics look more flattering than they actually are/were. Not sure i'd have something like "free tv licences for the over 75s" as a bonus though. Getting fed BBC propaganda for free is hardly something to celebrate.

[Mibbes Aye]

I'm just saying, sometimes goal posts are moved to make statistics look more flattering than they actually are/were. Not sure i'd have something like "free tv licences for the over 75s" as a bonus though. Getting fed BBC propaganda for free is hardly something to celebrate.

You're funny because you're like Home Team but at a different end of the spectrum :greengrin

[Just Alf]

I'm just saying, sometimes goal posts are moved to make statistics look more flattering than they actually are/were. Not sure i'd have something like "free tv licences for the over 75s" as a bonus though. Getting fed BBC propaganda for free is hardly something to celebrate.Maybe they like ITV, Channel 4 heck, even sky news etc and never watch the BBC.... Basically that's not a decent argument you've raised.

As an aside, I'd like to see the Tories equivalent of that list for their time in power, would be a good comparison.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[Hibbyradge]

I'm just saying, sometimes goal posts are moved to make statistics look more flattering than they actually are/were. Not sure i'd have something like "free tv licences for the over 75s" as a bonus though. Getting fed BBC propaganda for free is hardly something to celebrate.

I've noticed your inability to give credit where it's due before, but that's a belter.

[Fife-Hibee]

You're funny because you're like Home Team but at a different end of the spectrum :greengrin

Away team? :dunno:


Maybe they like ITV, Channel 4 heck, even sky news etc and never watch the BBC.... Basically that's not a decent argument you've raised.

As an aside, I'd like to see the Tories equivalent of that list for their time in power, would be a good comparison.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Considering 97% of the licence fee goes directly to the BBC. It's basically a BBC freebie for those who probably don't access many other sources of information anymore. It was a great way to get a sizeable chunk of public support on their side for their war games.

As for a tory equivalent list. I'm pretty sure they could spin a list that looks positive on the surface as well.

[Fife-Hibee]

I've noticed your inability to give credit where it's due before, but that's a belter.

Does Hitler get credited for his art?

Why would I credit a government that played their part in the slaughtering and murder of hundreds of thousands of innocent people on a war lie that they fed to the public?

[Hibbyradge]

Does Hitler get credited for his art?

Why would I credit a government that played their part in the slaughtering and murder of hundreds of thousands of innocent people on a war lie that they fed to the public?

Good lord.

[Fife-Hibee]

Good lord.

Well?

[Hibbyradge]

Well?

You don't deserve a response if you're comparing Tony Blair's 10 years as Prime Minister to Adolf Hitler's reign.

You've written off all of the good, and some great, things his 3 governments did because you disagree with a decision he made about a hugely complicated issue.

That's student politics at its worst and it's utterly contemptible.

[Ozyhibby]

Don’t want to get into the nitty gritty of this argument especially now that Hitler is involved [emoji3] but his achievements domestically have to be weighed up against the decision to go to war in Iraq. It was a horrendous decision that has had horrendous consequences which were entirely predicted and it was done for all the wrong reasons. Not only that but it was not just a bad decision, it was the lies that were told to get the decision made that make it all the worse.
Blair could and should have been a great prime minister. Without Iraq he would have been.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

Maybe they like ITV, Channel 4 heck, even sky news etc and never watch the BBC.... Basically that's not a decent argument you've raised.

As an aside, I'd like to see the Tories equivalent of that list for their time in power, would be a good comparison.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

I think it would be interesting too.

Thinking about it from an objective point of view however, there would be 'achievements' on both sides that wouldn't be seen as achievements by all.

From the Labour list, I was fully in favour of debt write-off for the poorest countries but can all too easily imagine a sizeable amount of the population wasn't. Likewise the scrapping of Section 28 was an absolute no-brainer matter of principle but we know from polls that significant numbers of people were dead-set against it being rescinded. While I believe they were fundamentally wrong, they likewise would believe the same of me.

From any Tory list, they would probably cite the big cut in corporation tax - was it stimulating business or was it a bonus for their business and City donors? Likewise the pension triple-lock - is it protecting the income of pensioners or is it an electoral bribe that is financially unsustainable given demographic pressures?

[Fife-Hibee]

You don't deserve a response if you're comparing Tony Blair's 10 years as Prime Minister to Adolf Hitler's reign.

You've written off all of the good, and some great, things his 3 governments did because you disagree with a decision he made about a hugely complicated issue.

That's student politics at its worst and it's utterly contemptible.

You've written off the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. What's worse?

All governments throughout history have done "good things", even the most controversial of them. But they're not remembered for those things, they're remembered for the evil they committed. Tony Blair and New Labour is no different. People aren't going to remember them for low inflation, they'll remember them for their war crimes against humanity and quite rightfully so.

[Fife-Hibee]

Don’t want to get into the nitty gritty of this argument especially now that Hitler is involved [emoji3] but his achievements domestically have to be weighed up against the decision to go to war in Iraq. It was a horrendous decision that has had horrendous consequences which were entirely predicted and it was done for all the wrong reasons. Not only that but it was not just a bad decision, it was the lies that were told to get the decision made that make it all the worse.
Blair could and should have been a great prime minister. Without Iraq he would have been.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Indeed. But the same could be said for many political leaders throughout history. "If they hadn't done this, they may have been great." But they did do this and that's what they're remembered for.

[Hibbyradge]

You've written off the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. What's worse?

All governments throughout history have done "good things", even the most controversial of them. But they're not remembered for those things, they're remembered for the evil they committed. Tony Blair and New Labour is no different. People aren't going to remember them for low inflation, they'll remember them for their war crimes against humanity and quite rightfully so.

Where did anyone write off deaths? No don't bother answering that.

A long time ago, I used to be close to the SWP. I realise that expecting objectivity from zealots is a waste of effort.

Mibbes is right. You're like the mirror image of Home Team although I expect you're more serious in your views

[Fife-Hibee]

Where did anyone write off deaths? No don't bother answering that.

A long time ago, I used to be close to the SWP. I realise that expecting objectivity from zealots is a waste of effort.

Mibbes is right. You're like the mirror image of Home Team although I expect you're more serious in your views

You don't address anything I say. Your arguement seems to be "I believe what you're saying is so ridiculous, that I need not engage in a debate with you about it."

It's a complete cop out.

Just like calling the war situation "very complicated". It's only very complicated to those who didn't really ever want to understand it, because it would have meant facing up to some very hard truths.

Tony Blair is a bad man. He allowed himself to be used as a puppet for a US political and economic agenda and in turn used other people as puppets which ultimately cost them their lives and the lives of their victims.

If having a successful economy comes at that kind of cost, then count me out.

[ronaldo7]

Pick the ones you like out of these 50 which were up til 2007;

1. Longest period of sustained low inflation since the 60s.

2. Low mortgage rates.

3. Introduced the National Minimum Wage and raised it to £5.52.

4. Over 14,000 more police in England and Wales.

5. Cut overall crime by 32 per cent.

6. Record levels of literacy and numeracy in schools.

7. Young people achieving some of the best ever results at 14, 16, and 18.

8. Funding for every pupil in England has doubled.

9. Employment is at its highest level ever.

10. Written off up to 100 per cent of debt owed by poorest countries.

11. 85,000 more nurses.

12. 32,000 more doctors.

13. Brought back matrons to hospital wards.

14. Devolved power to the Scottish Parliament.

15. Devolved power to the Welsh Assembly.

16. Dads now get paternity leave of 2 weeks for the first time.

17. NHS Direct offering free convenient patient advice.

18. Gift aid was worth £828 million to charities last year.

19. Restored city-wide government to London.

20. Record number of students in higher education.

21. Child benefit up 26 per cent since 1997.

22. Delivered 2,200 Sure Start Children’s Centres.

23. Introduced the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

24. £200 winter fuel payment to pensioners & up to £300 for over-80s.

25. On course to exceed our Kyoto target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

26. Restored devolved government to Northern Ireland.

27. Over 36,000 more teachers in England and 274,000 more support staff and teaching assistants.

28. All full time workers now have a right to 24 days paid holiday.

29. A million pensioners lifted out of poverty.

30. 600,000 children lifted out of relative poverty.

31. Introduced child tax credit giving more money to parents.

32. Scrapped Section 28 and introduced Civil Partnerships.

33. Brought over 1 million social homes up to standard.

34. Inpatient waiting lists down by over half a million since 1997.

35. Banned fox hunting.

36. Cleanest rivers, beaches, drinking water and air since before the industrial revolution.

37. Free TV licences for over-75s.

38. Banned fur farming and the testing of cosmetics on animals.

39. Free breast cancer screening for all women aged between 50-70.

40. Free off peak local bus travel for over-60s.

41. New Deal – helped over 1.8 million people into work.

42. Over 3 million child trust funds have been started.

43. Free eye test for over 60s.

44. More than doubled the number of apprenticeships.

45. Free entry to national museums and galleries.

46. Overseas aid budget more than doubled.

47. Heart disease deaths down by 150,000 and cancer deaths down by 50,000.

48. Cut long-term youth unemployment by 75 per cent.

49. Free nursery places for every three and four-year-olds.

50. Free fruit for most four to six-year-olds at school.

I'll just ask about one. Number 36. Was Tony and co just following European policy in this area, or did they do something different?

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

Pick the ones you like out of these 50 which were up til 2007;

1. Longest period of sustained low inflation since the 60s.

2. Low mortgage rates.

3. Introduced the National Minimum Wage and raised it to £5.52.

4. Over 14,000 more police in England and Wales.

5. Cut overall crime by 32 per cent.

6. Record levels of literacy and numeracy in schools.

7. Young people achieving some of the best ever results at 14, 16, and 18.

8. Funding for every pupil in England has doubled.

9. Employment is at its highest level ever.

10. Written off up to 100 per cent of debt owed by poorest countries.

11. 85,000 more nurses.

12. 32,000 more doctors.

13. Brought back matrons to hospital wards.

14. Devolved power to the Scottish Parliament.

15. Devolved power to the Welsh Assembly.

16. Dads now get paternity leave of 2 weeks for the first time.

17. NHS Direct offering free convenient patient advice.

18. Gift aid was worth £828 million to charities last year.

19. Restored city-wide government to London.

20. Record number of students in higher education.

21. Child benefit up 26 per cent since 1997.

22. Delivered 2,200 Sure Start Children’s Centres.

23. Introduced the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

24. £200 winter fuel payment to pensioners & up to £300 for over-80s.

25. On course to exceed our Kyoto target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

26. Restored devolved government to Northern Ireland.

27. Over 36,000 more teachers in England and 274,000 more support staff and teaching assistants.

28. All full time workers now have a right to 24 days paid holiday.

29. A million pensioners lifted out of poverty.

30. 600,000 children lifted out of relative poverty.

31. Introduced child tax credit giving more money to parents.

32. Scrapped Section 28 and introduced Civil Partnerships.

33. Brought over 1 million social homes up to standard.

34. Inpatient waiting lists down by over half a million since 1997.

35. Banned fox hunting.

36. Cleanest rivers, beaches, drinking water and air since before the industrial revolution.

37. Free TV licences for over-75s.

38. Banned fur farming and the testing of cosmetics on animals.

39. Free breast cancer screening for all women aged between 50-70.

40. Free off peak local bus travel for over-60s.

41. New Deal – helped over 1.8 million people into work.

42. Over 3 million child trust funds have been started.

43. Free eye test for over 60s.

44. More than doubled the number of apprenticeships.

45. Free entry to national museums and galleries.

46. Overseas aid budget more than doubled.

47. Heart disease deaths down by 150,000 and cancer deaths down by 50,000.

48. Cut long-term youth unemployment by 75 per cent.

49. Free nursery places for every three and four-year-olds.

50. Free fruit for most four to six-year-olds at school.Where is the Iraq war. The abandonment of diplomacy for sabre rattling. The deliberate suppression of Chilcot. Repeated lying to parliament. Embracing PFI with no checks or balances.

No doubt that Tony Blair could lead a party to power, but it could easily have been the Conservatives. He was the natural successor to Mrs Thatcher and indeed had her blessing.

[Hibbyradge]

I'll just ask about one. Number 36. Was Tony and co just following European policy in this area, or did they do something different?

I'm not sure.

Is that relevant, however? There will be plenty countries which fail to meet EU policy in various areas.

[Hibbyradge]

Where is the Iraq war. The abandonment of diplomacy for sabre rattling. The deliberate suppression of Chilcot. Repeated lying to parliament. Embracing PFI with no checks or balances.

No doubt that Tony Blair could lead a party to power, but it could easily have been the Conservatives. He was the natural successor to Mrs Thatcher and indeed had her blessing.

When you asked me whether the list was objective or subjective, I thought you were interested in the objective achievements.

Schoolboy error on my part.

[ronaldo7]

I'm not sure.

Is that relevant, however? There will be plenty countries which fail to meet EU policy in various areas.

Just checking that one of your list is piggy backing Eu directives.:greengrin

Well done Tony.

[Hibbyradge]

You don't address anything I say. Your arguement seems to be "I believe what you're saying is so ridiculous, that I need not engage in a debate with you about it."

It's a complete cop out.

Just like calling the war situation "very complicated". It's only very complicated to those who didn't really ever want to understand it, because it would have meant facing up to some very hard truths.

Tony Blair is a bad man. He allowed himself to be used as a puppet for a US political and economic agenda and in turn used other people as puppets which ultimately cost them their lives and the lives of their victims.

If having a successful economy comes at that kind of cost, then count me out.

I've addressed everything you've said.

I'm fascinated that you think the Iraq situation was only complicated to those who didn't want to understand it.

Everything was simple and black and white in my SWP days too. Student politics are always nuance free, right enough.

I bet the Palestinian situation has a simple solution that the whole world has somehow missed too.

[Hibbyradge]

Just checking that one of your list is piggy backing Eu directives.:greengrin

Well done Tony.

How churlish.

No doubt the SNP will "follow" EU directives if Scotland ever joins the EU rather than "piggyback" them. :dunno:

As I said I don't know if it was an EU initiative or not, but if it was, then I agree, well done for successfully implementing it.

I hope our government continues to do so for many years to come.

[Mibbes Aye]

Just checking that one of your list is piggy backing Eu directives.:greengrin

Well done Tony.

The UK and other EU nations have opted out of a number of EU directives at various stages - it's not like they have no choice.

And ultimately, for a directive to succeed the home nation has to implement it. A directive is just a piece of paper. The work is delivered through national government and its domestic agencies and policies.

Anyhow, the point probably is overshadowed by what wasn't mentioned in the list - not just on course to exceed Kyoto targets, but the role Labour UK ministers played in getting agreement on Kyoto in the first place; and the role Miliband played in salvaging the Copenhagen Accord on the environment.

[ronaldo7]

How churlish.

No doubt the SNP will "follow" EU directives if Scotland ever joins the EU rather than "piggyback" them. :dunno:

As I said I don't know if it was an EU initiative or not, but if it was, then I agree, well done for successfully implementing it.

I hope our government continues to do so for many years to come.

I was being flippant, David. :greengrin

I'm sure Tony had everything to do with Scottish Devolution and it was nothing to do with the Scottish constitutional convention.:wink:

Take a chill pill man.:greengrin

[Hibbyradge]

I was being flippant, David. :greengrin

I'm sure Tony had everything to do with Scottish Devolution and it was nothing to do with the Scottish constitutional convention.:wink:

Take a chill pill man.:greengrin

You need a couple of yer ain chill pills, Ronald. :wink:

Ah yes, the Scottish Constitutional Convention. Are the SNP trying to take credit for it's good work these days?

There was me thinking they withdrew from it. Maybe it's my memory playing tricks again. :greengrin

Still, at least our Tony did us proud. :thumbsup:

[Just Alf]

Away team? :dunno:



Considering 97% of the licence fee goes directly to the BBC. It's basically a BBC freebie for those who probably don't access many other sources of information anymore. It was a great way to get a sizeable chunk of public support on their side for their war games.

As for a tory equivalent list. I'm pretty sure they could spin a list that looks positive on the surface as well.Don't know if it was deliberate, hope not, but you've entirely missed my point, those that watch everything BUT the BBC still have to pay the fee.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[Just Alf]

I think it would be interesting too.

Thinking about it from an objective point of view however, there would be 'achievements' on both sides that wouldn't be seen as achievements by all.

From the Labour list, I was fully in favour of debt write-off for the poorest countries but can all too easily imagine a sizeable amount of the population wasn't. Likewise the scrapping of Section 28 was an absolute no-brainer matter of principle but we know from polls that significant numbers of people were dead-set against it being rescinded. While I believe they were fundamentally wrong, they likewise would believe the same of me.

From any Tory list, they would probably cite the big cut in corporation tax - was it stimulating business or was it a bonus for their business and City donors? Likewise the pension triple-lock - is it protecting the income of pensioners or is it an electoral bribe that is financially unsustainable given demographic pressures?Agreed, good post.



Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

You need a couple of yer ain chill pills, Ronald. :wink:

Ah yes, the Scottish Constitutional Convention. Are the SNP trying to take credit for it's good work these days?

There was me thinking they withdrew from it. Maybe it's my memory playing tricks again. :greengrin

Still, at least our Tony did us proud. :thumbsup:

Completely horizontal pal. 😂

We wouldn't want to take credit for something someone else achieved. 😊

At least Tony got something right starting with W. 💦

Best not speak of the other W 💣

Have a nice night. 🌛💤🍻

[One Day Soon]

Well, there's certainly be some spectacular onanism on this page.

[Moulin Yarns]

What, like an independence referendum you mean?

My memory must be playing tricks but I'm sure there has only been one of those.

[Fife-Hibee]

Don't know if it was deliberate, hope not, but you've entirely missed my point, those that watch everything BUT the BBC still have to pay the fee.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

They don't. They just think they do. The licence agencies claim that you must pay the BBC tax if you watch any live broadcasting at all is a false one. They have no legal grounds to charge you a tax for watching channels where zero of that money is spent.

You wouldn't pay council tax if none of that tax money went towards council funding. So why would you need to pay a BBC tax so you can watch Sky Sports? You don't.

[Just Alf]

They don't. They just think they do. The licence agencies claim that you must pay the BBC tax if you watch any live broadcasting at all is a false one. They have no legal grounds to charge you a tax for watching channels where zero of that money is spent.

You wouldn't pay council tax if none of that tax money went towards council funding. So why would you need to pay a BBC tax so you can watch Sky Sports? You don't.Your wrong.

Legally you need a licence if you watch any live broadcasting or watch BBC iplayer.

It's dead easily verified. Check money saving expert for an independent view or the BBC website for the "horses mouth" version.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[Future17]

They don't. They just think they do. The licence agencies claim that you must pay the BBC tax if you watch any live broadcasting at all is a false one. They have no legal grounds to charge you a tax for watching channels where zero of that money is spent.

You wouldn't pay council tax if none of that tax money went towards council funding. So why would you need to pay a BBC tax so you can watch Sky Sports? You don't.

This is not true and it's reckless, if not intentionally deceitful, to post something like this which could lead others to break the law.

It may be helpful if you deleted your post.

[lapsedhibee]

they don't. They just think they do. The licence agencies claim that you must pay the bbc tax if you watch any live broadcasting at all is a false one. They have no legal grounds to charge you a tax for watching channels where zero of that money is spent.

You wouldn't pay council tax if none of that tax money went towards council funding. So why would you need to pay a bbc tax so you can watch sky sports? You don't.

ffs.

[Hibbyradge]

They don't. They just think they do. The licence agencies claim that you must pay the BBC tax if you watch any live broadcasting at all is a false one. They have no legal grounds to charge you a tax for watching channels where zero of that money is spent.

You wouldn't pay council tax if none of that tax money went towards council funding. So why would you need to pay a BBC tax so you can watch Sky Sports? You don't.

Exactly what do you read, if it's not the Socialist Worker?

That's nonsense.

[Fife-Hibee]

You have all been mislead. The claims of the licence agengy are bogus. They even claim you need to pay the licence fee if you own a DVD player or a computer ffs.

They've been sending me threatening letters for years and haven't once dared come to my door or pursue any legal action. I wonder why. :rolleyes:

[lapsedhibee]

You have all been mislead. The claims of the licence agengy are bogus. They even claim you need to pay the licence fee if you own a DVD player or a computer ffs.

They've been sending me threatening letters for years and haven't once dared come to my door or pursue any legal action. I wonder why. :rolleyes:

Is it because they're very, very incompetent or because they know they've met their match? :dunno:

[Hibbyradge]

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/utilities/tv-licence/#needtoknow-1

[jonty]

You have all been mislead. The claims of the licence agengy are bogus. They even claim you need to pay the licence fee if you own a DVD player or a computer ffs.

They've been sending me threatening letters for years and haven't once dared come to my door or pursue any legal action. I wonder why. :rolleyes:

You really need to check your sources. Your claims are the only thing bogus.

https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/faqs/FAQ15

"Do I need a TV Licence if I only use my TV for gaming or DVDs?
No. You don’t need a TV Licence if you only use your TV for gaming or DVDs. That’s as long as you never watch or record live TV on any channel, or download or watch BBC programmes on iPlayer. This applies to any device or provider you use."

"When don’t I need a licence to watch TV?
You don’t need a TV Licence if you never watch or record programmes as they’re being shown on TV or live on an online TV service, and you never download or watch BBC programmes on iPlayer – live, catch up or on demand.
This applies to any provider or device you use, including a TV, desktop computer, laptop, mobile phone, tablet, games console, digital box or Blu-ray/DVD/VHS recorder."

[Future17]

You have all been mislead. The claims of the licence agengy are bogus. They even claim you need to pay the licence fee if you own a DVD player or a computer ffs.

They've been sending me threatening letters for years and haven't once dared come to my door or pursue any legal action. I wonder why. :rolleyes:

What are you talking about? You're just making up nonsense.

Thousands of people are taken to court for non-payment of the TV Licence fee every year. People have gone to jail.

[cabbageandribs1875]

awfy glad i didn't cancel my payments :greengrin




google is always a good place for the facts

[ronaldo7]

I see, Jenny Marra went after a doctor wearing a CND badge whilst at work.

You've got to wonder about labour in Scotland these days.

[Hiber-nation]

I see, Jenny Marra went after a doctor wearing a CND badge whilst at work.

You've got to wonder about labour in Scotland these days.

I hear he wasn't actually wearing one, it was a white ribbon badge. Eye test for Ms Marra??

[JeMeSouviens]

I hear he wasn't actually wearing one, it was a white ribbon badge. Eye test for Ms Marra??

He was wearing a CND badge but she was also whining about him having an SNP badge, which turned out to be the white ribbon.

[cabbageandribs1875]

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/labour-mp-chris-williamson-condemned-for-saying-party-too-apologetic-on-antisemitism-a4077491.html



no surprise he was addressing the the most rabid anti-semite group in the labour party

"too apologetic" my goodness

[lapsedhibee]

Heather Stewart‏Verified account @GuardianHeather · 19m19 minutes ago

New - and this will *not* go down well - Corbyn’s spokesman says Chris Williamson has been issued with a notice of investigation into a “pattern of behaviour”; but he won’t be suspended while it is carried out.

[cabbageandribs1875]

Labour have just voted with their Tory chums on south lanarkshire council to deny primary 4 and 5 pupils free school meals.

[Hibbyradge]

Labour have just voted with their Tory chums on south lanarkshire council to deny primary 4 and 5 pupils free school meals.

Good headline, but what are their reasons?

[G B Young]

Heather Stewart‏Verified account @GuardianHeather · 19m19 minutes ago

New - and this will *not* go down well - Corbyn’s spokesman says Chris Williamson has been issued with a notice of investigation into a “pattern of behaviour”; but he won’t be suspended while it is carried out.

Williamson was finally suspended last night after Corbyn was apparently told he faced a walkout of Labour MPs that would have dwarfed last week's exodus.

Corbyn is a disgrace and should be suspended along with Williamson.

[hibsbollah]

Corbyn is a disgrace and should be suspended along with Williamson.

:faf: For what, following due process?
I get you dont like Corbyn, but there is absolutely no rationale for that.

[lapsedhibee]

Corbyn is a disgrace and should be suspended


:faf: For what?


For keeping the Tories in power for as long as he's leader.

He should step down and give someone else a go.

[Just Alf]

Good headline, but what are their reasons?Good point, I'm thinking it's financial, but as Labour have been ripping into the Scottish government for not spending on stuff, which the government isn't doing for financial reasons, it has to be something else?

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[hibsbollah]

For keeping the Tories in power for as long as he's leader.

He should step down and give someone else a go.

I would point out the polls have the two parties neck and neck, but I will literally fall asleep if we have that argument again. Circular bollocks.

Mr Young was referring to suspending Corbyn for something linked to the Williamson carry on, not a call for him to resign. He's done nothing to justify that.

[One Day Soon]

I would point out the polls have the two parties neck and neck, but I will literally fall asleep if we have that argument again. Circular bollocks.

Mr Young was referring to suspending Corbyn for something linked to the Williamson carry on, not a call for him to resign. He's done nothing to justify that.


I will point out that this is nowhere near good enough given the context, nowhere near enough to win and that Labour have been mostly behind for some time - vastly so if TIG are included, but I also 'Just can't even' as the kids (used to) say.

I'm delighted Williamson has been suspended but I won't hold my breath on the outcome of any disciplinary investigation. As for Corbyn and suspension, he seems to be inflicting the death of a thousand cuts upon himself anyway.

[lapsedhibee]

I would point out the polls have the two parties neck and neck, but I will literally fall asleep if we have that argument again. Circular bollocks.

Mr Young was referring to suspending Corbyn for something linked to the Williamson carry on, not a call for him to resign. He's done nothing to justify that.

Didn't mean suspend him from the party. Was thinking more 'hang him upside down and give him a good shake and hope his brains rearrange themselves into something that works'.

[AgentDaleCooper]

So...anyone else feel a bit sick that being anti-capitalist now means you're automatically an anti-semite?

[Moulin Yarns]

Oh dear.


https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1103600423301271552?s=19

[Ozyhibby]

And it’s support in Scotland is falling still.
https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/poll-scottish-labour-support-at-holyrood-on-the-slide-1-4885171/amp?__twitter_impression=true



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hibsbollah]

And it’s support in Scotland is falling still.
https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/poll-scottish-labour-support-at-holyrood-on-the-slide-1-4885171/amp?__twitter_impression=true

...which is a pattern repeated in five polls across the UK across the last two weeks. The Tories have increased slightly from previously level pegging, the timing is spot on with the anti-Semitism allegations, the MPs leaving the party, but also with the leaderships move to sound more Ref2 sympathetic. The movement is not Labour to Tory, it's Labour to UKIP or No Vote. Not really that surprising, it's been a bad fortnight; people don't want to vote for a 'nasty party' as Theresa May said herself a few years back. We'll see if the pattern continues.


[/QUOTE]

[Hibrandenburg]

The timing is spot on with the anti-Semitism allegations, the MPs leaving the party, but also with the leaderships move to sound more Ref2 sympathetic. The movement is not Labour to Tory, it's Labour to UKIP or No Vote[/QUOTE]

More evidence that some of Labour's so called "International Socialist" following were in reality "National Socialists" waving red flags.

[hibsbollah]

More evidence that some of Labour's so called "International Socialist" following were in reality "National Socialists" waving red flags.[/QUOTE]

That's exactly the kind of nonsense that gets the far right talking about 'liberal elites':bitchy:.

I know Hibs net holy ground isn't going to be a natural place where the concerns of working class white England are going to be well represented but you've gone way too far there.

There's no 'evidence' that Labour Leave voters are Nazis because they have a different idea of European government to you.

[Hibrandenburg]

More evidence that some of Labour's so called "International Socialist" following were in reality "National Socialists" waving red flags.

That's exactly the kind of nonsense that gets the far right talking about 'liberal elites':bitchy:.

I know Hibs net holy ground isn't going to be a natural place where the concerns of working class white England are going to be well represented but you've gone way too far there.

There's no 'evidence' that Labour Leave voters are Nazis because they have a different idea of European government to you.[/QUOTE]

I never used the word Nazi HB, but I am fully aware it's the abbreviated form of Nationaler Sozialismus. To deny that there is any xenophobic Labour voters is naive at best. Not everyone who votes Labour does so because they believe in the ideology of international socialism, many will simply have done so because they believe (and rightly so) that Labour is traditionally the home of the working man. It's the normal working man that has come out in their millions to vote for Brexit, sure the pro Brexit leadership has been anything but working class but it's been the factory workers in North, South and Midlands of England that actually went out and put their cross in the leave box despite utterly overwhelming evidence that to do so was an unequalled act of self harm. They have done so in their millions and on the promise of regaining sovereignty at a NATIONAL level, controlling NATIONAL immigration, promises to improvement to their NATIONAL health service and preservation of some fantasy NATIONAL identity that's been sold to them by the likes of Yaxley-Lennon and Farage. The UK has politically made a huge surge to the right in the last 2 decades whilst the Labour party has arguably moved further left and no longer caters for many of it's traditional voters. Like it or not, but many of the working masses have been seduced by the idea of National Socialism where "real" British citizens are prioritised. I've no idea how Labour can turn the tables but denying it's happening will only make it worse.

Edit: Apologies, I've no idea what happened with the quotes there.

[JeMeSouviens]

That's exactly the kind of nonsense that gets the far right talking about 'liberal elites':bitchy:.

I know Hibs net holy ground isn't going to be a natural place where the concerns of working class white England are going to be well represented but you've gone way too far there.

There's no 'evidence' that Labour Leave voters are Nazis because they have a different idea of European government to you.

I never used the word Nazi HB, but I am fully aware it's the abbreviated form of Nationaler Sozialismus. To deny that there is any xenophobic Labour voters is naive at best. Not everyone who votes Labour does so because they believe in the ideology of international socialism, many will simply have done so because they believe (and rightly so) that Labour is traditionally the home of the working man. It's the normal working man that has come out in their millions to vote for Brexit, sure the pro Brexit leadership has been anything but working class but it's been the factory workers in North, South and Midlands of England that actually went out and put their cross in the leave box despite utterly overwhelming evidence that to do so was an unequalled act of self harm. They have done so in their millions and on the promise of regaining sovereignty at a NATIONAL level, controlling NATIONAL immigration, promises to improvement to their NATIONAL health service and preservation of some fantasy NATIONAL identity that's been sold to them by the likes of Yaxley-Lennon and Farage. The UK has politically made a huge surge to the right in the last 2 decades whilst the Labour party has arguably moved further left and no longer caters for many of it's traditional voters. Like it or not, but many of the working masses have been seduced by the idea of National Socialism where "real" British citizens are prioritised. I've no idea how Labour can turn the tables but denying it's happening will only make it worse.

Edit: Apologies, I've no idea what happened with the quotes there.

Semi-digression but Corbyn's people are mainly ex-Communists of the GB party variety aren't they? So Tankies (Socialism in one country) rather than internationalists?

[hibsbollah]

Semi-digression but Corbyn's people are mainly ex-Communists of the GB party variety aren't they? So Tankies (Socialism in one country) rather than internationalists?

There are both Europhobes and Europhiles within the Left, Jacques Delors' vision of Europe

http://www.historyandpolicy.org/trade-union-forum/meeting/how-the-tuc-learned-to-love-the-european-union-and-how-the-affair-turned-out

was essentially delivering a lot of the social democracy, pluralism and workers rights that socialism is supposed to deliver, and this pro European leftism is still a strong force in the party. Obviously there is also the reality that modern Europe is essentially a capitalist neo liberal project these days, as demonstrated by the treatment of Greece in 2014(?). This will influence thinking the other way too.

If you don't like Labour, you're going to find it comfortable to believe that there is this rabid anti European nationalism running through it. I don't see any evidence of it. I'd say most MPs would echo Corbyns 'warmish' vote of 7/10 enthusiasm score for the project.

[JeMeSouviens]

There are both Europhobes and Europhiles within the Left, Jacques Delors' vision of Europe

http://www.historyandpolicy.org/trade-union-forum/meeting/how-the-tuc-learned-to-love-the-european-union-and-how-the-affair-turned-out

was essentially delivering a lot of the social democracy, pluralism and workers rights that socialism is supposed to deliver, and this pro European leftism is still a strong force in the party.

Yeah, I know. But specifically Corbyn's circle: Seamus Milne, Andrew Murray, Andrew Fisher, they're all ex-Communist party of GB (Stalinists as opposed to Trots) I think.

[hibsbollah]

Yeah, I know. But specifically Corbyn's circle: Seamus Milne, Andrew Murray, Andrew Fisher, they're all ex-Communist party of GB (Stalinists as opposed to Trots) I think.

John Reid was in the Communist Party in his early days, Chris 'Failing' Grayling was in the SDP. I used to think Kujabi was going to be a player.

We're all allowed to change our minds through life.

[Fife-Hibee]

Only 37% of Scottish Labour voters know who the Scottish Labour leader is.

https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-mystery-man/#more-108857

[Ozyhibby]

John Reid was in the Communist Party in his early days, Chris 'Failing' Grayling was in the SDP. I used to think Kujabi was going to be a player.

We're all allowed to change our minds through life.

I think the point with Corbyn and co is that they have not changed their mind. They still think Venezuela is a model for the UK to follow.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hibsbollah]

I think the point with Corbyn and co is that they have not changed their mind. They still think Venezuela is a model for the UK to follow.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Uh, no, Corbyn doesn't think that. Nobody thinks that. He thinks Venezuela is a better model for Latin America to follow than some of their neighbours, which is another argument.

[Mibbes Aye]

I would point out the polls have the two parties neck and neck, but I will literally fall asleep if we have that argument again. Circular bollocks.

Mr Young was referring tosuspending Corbyn for something linked to the Williamson carry on, not a call for him to resign. He's done nothing to justify that.

I've seen you make this claim a few times in recent posts.

The link below is to YouGov's tracker, going back to the 2017 General Election. It shows a Labour spike after the election and then, for the last year (bar a blip in July 2018) is pretty much a tale of the Tories being in front, usually by more than a decent margin. The figures since the start of this year are even more pronounced.

But even were Labour doing better, there is still the unanswered point - Corbynites talk about the vote swing and share of the popular vote in 2017 in hallowed terms, as if it shows proof there is a populist support for him. In reality the vote swing and vote share were pretty similar to Blair in 1997 and 2001.

And of course, the difference was that Blair turned those factors into super-majorities whereas Corbyn turned them into finishing dozens of seats behind one of the least competent governments in our history.

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/awrl7066up/YG%20trackers%20-%20Voting%20Intention%20since%20GE%202017_W.pdf

[JeMeSouviens]

https://britainelects.com/polling/westminster/

Lab definitely fallen a bit behind recently.

[Ozyhibby]

I've seen you make this claim a few times in recent posts.

The link below is to YouGov's tracker, going back to the 2017 General Election. It shows a Labour spike after the election and then, for the last year (bar a blip in July 2018) is pretty much a tale of the Tories being in front, usually by more than a decent margin. The figures since the start of this year are even more pronounced.

But even were Labour doing better, there is still the unanswered point - Corbynites talk about the vote swing and share of the popular vote in 2017 in hallowed terms, as if it shows proof there is a populist support for him. In reality the vote swing and vote share were pretty similar to Blair in 1997 and 2001.

And of course, the difference was that Blair turned those factors into super-majorities whereas Corbyn turned them into finishing dozens of seats behind one of the least competent governments in our history.

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/awrl7066up/YG%20trackers%20-%20Voting%20Intention%20since%20GE%202017_W.pdf

And Blair won at a time when the Lib Dem’s could still pick up about 20% of the vote as opposed to the 7% they get these days.
The pick up in the Labour vote in 2017 was mostly because remainders wanted to punish the tories.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hibsbollah]

https://britainelects.com/polling/westminster/

Lab definitely fallen a bit behind recently.

I posted that link yesterday, and made that very point for balance.

Unlike some on here, I don't just post the stuff that reflects my own prejudices:greengrin

[hibsbollah]

I've seen you make this claim a few times in recent posts.

The link below is to YouGov's tracker, going back to the 2017 General Election. It shows a Labour spike after the election and then, for the last year (bar a blip in July 2018) is pretty much a tale of the Tories being in front, usually by more than a decent margin. The figures since the start of this year are even more pronounced.

But even were Labour doing better, there is still the unanswered point - Corbynites talk about the vote swing and share of the popular vote in 2017 in hallowed terms, as if it shows proof there is a populist support for him. In reality the vote swing and vote share were pretty similar to Blair in 1997 and 2001.

And of course, the difference was that Blair turned those factors into super-majorities whereas Corbyn turned them into finishing dozens of seats behind one of the least competent governments in our history.

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/awrl7066up/YG%20trackers%20-%20Voting%20Intention%20since%20GE%202017_W.pdf

Ah, facts. Yougov is only ONE pollster, as you know very well. And the pollster that tends to favour the Tories better than the others.

Britain elects gives you a cluster of polls, including all the big pollsters. It's not difficult, you'll see leads for both parties ever since last summer, with spikes either way. It's an established fact since last summer.

https://britainelects.com/polling/westminster/

This is not the first time you are selective with the facts, either. Making comparisons with what Corbyn has 'done' to Blair's 'super majorities' is vacuous, for two reasons.

First, there have been quite a few Labour leaders between Blair and Corbyn, why don't you choose to look at Corbyns 2017 result with any of the intervening elections between now and then? That would be more logical. Labours support measured by GE result, local election result and polling average has all improved since he took over, and in comparison with Miliband and Brown.

You also say, Corbyns Vote swing is broadly similar to Blair's in 1997 and 2001? :dunno: Agreed, but that's no reason to suggest it's not relevant, is it? Corbyn oversaw the biggest vote swing to Labour since 1945. It's just a statistic, but you can't ignore it.

Second, there is no dispute that Labour is now a more radical proposition than it was twelve years ago. There is no dispute that the manifesto is more Left. And there is no serious dispute that it is harder to persuade middle England to vote Labour with that manifesto.

Essentially, Blair is always going to be an easier sell to the Cotswolds or rural Hampshire. That's obvious. I was working in an enclave of Surrey recently; the wealth takes your breath away, it's like a different country. Realistically areas like that will never, ever, vote for a high tax socialist party. And realistically, achieving twenty point poll leads in the UK is going to be beyond a party like that. So going back to how Blair did all the time, when almost all of the campaigning effort at that time was concentrated on being electable to that social demographic, isn't really relevant.

There is a case to be made that Brexit is such a ****storm that Labour should be polling better than they are now. If you are Labour you always want to be winning in the polls in uncertain times, because when the economy is looking more promising the Govt will polling higher, obviously. That's the only part of your post that stands close scrutiny, to be honest.

[Ozyhibby]

Ah, facts. Yougov is only ONE pollster, as you know very well. And the pollster that tends to favour the Tories better than the others.

Britain elects gives you a cluster of polls, including all the big pollsters. It's not difficult, you'll see leads for both parties ever since last summer, with spikes either way. It's an established fact since last summer.

https://britainelects.com/polling/westminster/

This is not the first time you are selective with the facts, either. Making comparisons with what Corbyn has 'done' to Blair's 'super majorities' is vacuous, for two reasons.

First, there have been quite a few Labour leaders between Blair and Corbyn, why don't you choose to look at Corbyns 2017 result with any of the intervening elections between now and then? That would be more logical. Labours support measured by GE result, local election result and polling average has all improved since he took over, and in comparison with Miliband and Brown.

You also say, Corbyns Vote swing is broadly similar to Blair's in 1997 and 2001? :dunno: Agreed, but that's no reason to suggest it's not relevant, is it? Corbyn oversaw the biggest vote swing to Labour since 1945. It's just a statistic, but you can't ignore it.

Second, there is no dispute that Labour is now a more radical proposition than it was twelve years ago. There is no dispute that the manifesto is more Left. And there is no serious dispute that it is harder to persuade middle England to vote Labour with that manifesto.

Essentially, Blair is always going to be an easier sell to the Cotswolds or rural Hampshire. That's obvious. I was working in an enclave of Surrey recently; the wealth takes your breath away, it's like a different country. Realistically areas like that will never, ever, vote for a high tax socialist party. And realistically, achieving twenty point poll leads in the UK is going to be beyond a party like that. So going back to how Blair did all the time, when almost all of the campaigning effort at that time was concentrated on being electable to that social demographic, isn't really relevant.

There is a case to be made that Brexit is such a ****storm that Labour should be polling better than they are now. If you are Labour you always want to be winning in the polls in uncertain times, because when the economy is looking more promising the Govt will polling higher, obviously. That's the only part of your post that stands close scrutiny, to be honest.

You are basically saying Corbyn can’t win?
What is a fact is that Corbyn has already lost to Theresa May! Theresa May FFS!
And the tories are smart enough to know not to go into an election with her again. Labour sadly is not that smart.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hibsbollah]

You are basically saying Corbyn can’t win?
What is a fact is that Corbyn has already lost to Theresa May! Theresa May FFS!
And the tories are smart enough to know not to go into an election with her again. Labour sadly is not that smart.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not saying he 'can't win' at all. It would be stupid and illogical to say he can't win, based on the pre election swing in 2017. Nobody is unelectable.
If I had to predict anything, I'd predict another hung parliament with both main parties broadly where they are now with small increases for the smaller parties and the 'centre':confused: vote divided between this new SDP and the Liberals. But who knows.

[JeMeSouviens]

Ah, facts. Yougov is only ONE pollster, as you know very well. And the pollster that tends to favour the Tories better than the others.

Britain elects gives you a cluster of polls, including all the big pollsters. It's not difficult, you'll see leads for both parties ever since last summer, with spikes either way. It's an established fact since last summer.

https://britainelects.com/polling/westminster/

This is not the first time you are selective with the facts, either. Making comparisons with what Corbyn has 'done' to Blair's 'super majorities' is vacuous, for two reasons.

First, there have been quite a few Labour leaders between Blair and Corbyn, why don't you choose to look at Corbyns 2017 result with any of the intervening elections between now and then? That would be more logical. Labours support measured by GE result, local election result and polling average has all improved since he took over, and in comparison with Miliband and Brown.

You also say, Corbyns Vote swing is broadly similar to Blair's in 1997 and 2001? :dunno: Agreed, but that's no reason to suggest it's not relevant, is it? Corbyn oversaw the biggest vote swing to Labour since 1945. It's just a statistic, but you can't ignore it.

Second, there is no dispute that Labour is now a more radical proposition than it was twelve years ago. There is no dispute that the manifesto is more Left. And there is no serious dispute that it is harder to persuade middle England to vote Labour with that manifesto.

Essentially, Blair is always going to be an easier sell to the Cotswolds or rural Hampshire. That's obvious. I was working in an enclave of Surrey recently; the wealth takes your breath away, it's like a different country. Realistically areas like that will never, ever, vote for a high tax socialist party. And realistically, achieving twenty point poll leads in the UK is going to be beyond a party like that. So going back to how Blair did all the time, when almost all of the campaigning effort at that time was concentrated on being electable to that social demographic, isn't really relevant.

There is a case to be made that Brexit is such a ****storm that Labour should be polling better than they are now. If you are Labour you always want to be winning in the polls in uncertain times, because when the economy is looking more promising the Govt will polling higher, obviously. That's the only part of your post that stands close scrutiny, to be honest.


The problem for Labour is that now the Tories are the party of Brexit, the UKIP splitter vote has collapsed and returned to the Tory fold. Early polling seems to show the Independent Group are going to take more votes from Lab than Tory which could compound the problem.

[hibsbollah]

The problem for Labour is that now the Tories are the party of Brexit, the UKIP splitter vote has collapsed and returned to the Tory fold. Early polling seems to show the Independent Group are going to take more votes from Lab than Tory which could compound the problem.

I agree,although UKIP has been polling better in the last few weeks at the expense of Labour, that story isn't over yet. They could see a revival.

[JeMeSouviens]

I agree,although UKIP has been polling better in the last few weeks at the expense of Labour, that story isn't over yet. They could see a revival.

True, the main reason the Tories are crapping it about not getting Brexit through without a big delay.

[Fife-Hibee]

I agree,although UKIP has been polling better in the last few weeks at the expense of Labour, that story isn't over yet. They could see a revival.

Said it over a month ago. UKIP are just one of the reasons the tories are pressing for a hard brexit. They know UKIP will spread like bad bacteria if they don't deliver it.

[Mibbes Aye]

Ah, facts. Yougov is only ONE pollster, as you know very well. And the pollster that tends to favour the Tories better than the others.

Britain elects gives you a cluster of polls, including all the big pollsters. It's not difficult, you'll see leads for both parties ever since last summer, with spikes either way. It's an established fact since last summer.

https://britainelects.com/polling/westminster/

This is not the first time you are selective with the facts, either. Making comparisons with what Corbyn has 'done' to Blair's 'super majorities' is vacuous, for two reasons.

First, there have been quite a few Labour leaders between Blair and Corbyn, why don't you choose to look at Corbyns 2017 result with any of the intervening elections between now and then? That would be more logical. Labours support measured by GE result, local election result and polling average has all improved since he took over, and in comparison with Miliband and Brown.

You also say, Corbyns Vote swing is broadly similar to Blair's in 1997 and 2001? :dunno: Agreed, but that's no reason to suggest it's not relevant, is it? Corbyn oversaw the biggest vote swing to Labour since 1945. It's just a statistic, but you can't ignore it.

Second, there is no dispute that Labour is now a more radical proposition than it was twelve years ago. There is no dispute that the manifesto is more Left. And there is no serious dispute that it is harder to persuade middle England to vote Labour with that manifesto.

Essentially, Blair is always going to be an easier sell to the Cotswolds or rural Hampshire. That's obvious. I was working in an enclave of Surrey recently; the wealth takes your breath away, it's like a different country. Realistically areas like that will never, ever, vote for a high tax socialist party. And realistically, achieving twenty point poll leads in the UK is going to be beyond a party like that. So going back to how Blair did all the time, when almost all of the campaigning effort at that time was concentrated on being electable to that social demographic, isn't really relevant.

There is a case to be made that Brexit is such a ****storm that Labour should be polling better than they are now. If you are Labour you always want to be winning in the polls in uncertain times, because when the economy is looking more promising the Govt will polling higher, obviously. That's the only part of your post that stands close scrutiny, to be honest.

No. The reason for comparing Corbyn to Blair is that Corbynites keep going on about this massive vote swing and share of the popular vote as evidence that yes, he can actually win

The only Labour leader who did anything similar was Blair. The difference between the two was that Blair translated it into majorities well in excess of 150 twice whereas Corbyn translated it into finishing 55 seats behind Theresa May. Just read those last ten words again.

Blair didn’t win the Tory bastions, he won the marginals and the erring towards marginal seats. The Tories still retained their rump seats in the shires. Corbyn is incapable of doing that. His vote count won’t let him secure a majority as it is based on a swelling of numbers from entryists and the return of the disaffected who moved away from the party because of Iraq. They aren’t the demographic to swing the marginals to a great enough degree, meanwhile he alienates the soft left element and you get people leaving the party or not voting Labour.

And it is not even like he is the brains of the operation. McDonnell is intellectually far superior to Corbyn, who one suspects would be happier sitting in his Islington flat, strumming a guitar underneath his Salvador Allende poster.

As for the polls, I don’t think YouGov favour the Tories more than any other, I can remember when Peter Kellner was accused of bias towards Labour.

And the Britain Elects data you posted pretty much reiterates what I said and certainly doesn’t support your notion of level pegging. Clear Tory leads in the last year, with the occasional Labour blip, and the Tory lead more pronounced in recent times.

[hibsbollah]

No. The reason for comparing Corbyn to Blair is that Corbynites keep going on about this massive vote swing and share of the popular vote as evidence that yes, he can actually win

The only Labour leader who did anything similar was Blair. The difference between the two was that Blair translated it into majorities well in excess of 150 twice whereas Corbyn translated it into finishing 55 seats behind Theresa May. Just read those last ten words again.

Blair didn’t win the Tory bastions, he won the marginals and the erring towards marginal seats. The Tories still retained their rump seats in the shires. Corbyn is incapable of doing that. His vote count won’t let him secure a majority as it is based on a swelling of numbers from entryists and the return of the disaffected who moved away from the party because of Iraq. They aren’t the demographic to swing the marginals to a great enough degree, meanwhile he alienates the soft left element and you get people leaving the party or not voting Labour.

And it is not even like he is the brains of the operation. McDonnell is intellectually far superior to Corbyn, who one suspects would be happier sitting in his Islington flat, strumming a guitar underneath his Salvador Allende poster.

As for the polls, I don’t think YouGov favour the Tories more than any other, I can remember when Peter Kellner was accused of bias towards Labour.

And the Britain Elects data you posted pretty much reiterates what I said and certainly doesn’t support your notion of level pegging. Clear Tory leads in the last year, with the occasional Labour blip, and the Tory lead more pronounced in recent times.

:confused:Its not a 'notion', the data clearly shows over the last year the Tories are up five points one month, Labour are up three points the next. Each lead is also within the margin of error.

That is the definition of level pegging.

I doubt you read it very carefully though, as your other comment about YouGov is obviously wrong, you can see by even a cursory glance that theres a pattern of YouGov giving the Tories a higher rating than the other pollsters, probably down to different ways of collecting data. Thats a fact.

Trying to put the growth of the Labour vote solely down to 'entryists' (your word of the year, clearly, cribbed from the tory press,and absolutely meaningless...at what point does one become an 'entryist'? 1997, 2007, 2014? Are only Corbyn supporters 'entryists'? Is getting new members a bad thing? I thought that was part of the point of politics:greengrin) and is just clearly deeply complacent.

And you are still lost in obsessing about the personalities. Any thoughts at all about policy? the manifesto? the campaigning? the hung parliament ensuring lots of damaging Tory legislation doesnt get through?

The rest of the post is the same repetition of your 'Blair did this in an election twenty years ago hence im going to draw a lot of empty comparisons...' point, as if Corbyn had just walked into Blairs shoes instead of twenty years of time elapsing. Its nonsense. Im sure you know that really.