If Corbyn does win there must be an outside chance of UKIP taking second place in the polls in the run-up to and following EU ref
There's this assumption that every country needs a right-wing party and a left-wing party as the big two, but countries like Ireland shows that is not necessarily the case.
Looks like Dan Jarvis will be leading Labour into the 2020 election if this poll is right.
I think would be a good bet, at least a bet on not Corbyn leading Labour in 2020 (in Corbyn does win).
There is no chance at all he will last until 2020. It will be a blast while he is in charge though. I'd give him a year tops. Maybe Tyson is right - Labour needs to make Corbyn leader before it comes to its senses.
I can't believe Labour actually needs to experiment with a Corbyn leadership to come to its senses. Is everyone voting completely stupid, or something? Ralph Miliband was right, Labour will always let down the working classes in the end.
Labour is all there is. Either it comes to its senses or something emerges to replace it. The more I think about it the more a Corbyn leadership is the catalyst for a major and necessary shake-up.
It would be a good result if a Corbyn led Labour Party was the catalyst for the new moderate left of centre party we have spoken about in the past. Can't see it happening though (who is going to start it?) and Labour can't reform all the while it is beholden to the unions. So that major and necessary shake up might be a few years off yet.
As much as this seems to defy national electoral politics (rather than Labour internal politics) we should bear in mind Labour's last two leaders.
One was anointed despite showing clear signs of being a net vote loser, one was elected despite showing signs of being a net vote loser. These things can happen.
There will be a mass assault on Corbyn's candidacy soon. If you think the Labour party will think electoral politics (or perhaps just plain decent sense) first when it comes to casting the vote then you have a straightforward betting market by taking Corbyn out.
What is curious is the apparent decline of the broadly Blairite wing of the party represented by Kendall. Bearing in mind David Miliband was just pipped last time around is there an actual decline in that wing of Labour or is Kendall simply not the name to carry it?
@abelardinelli: Polls are polls, but damage to Labour already being done. MPs who should have known better much to blame. As I said: https://t.co/ZQa6u7dduF
I stick by my position from the previous night: Corbyn as LOTO might prove more of a handful for the Conservatives than anyone expects.
I agree with that. That's why he might stay a while.
Btw, what's with the paramilitary profile pic?!
That's me outside my house on a cold winter's day. Balaclava's are great when out walking in the cold. They keep your mouth warm, and if you eat a bacon butty you can taste it for the rest of the day.
I once walked the Peddar's Way through Norfolk in November, wild camping. Early one morning I reached a small shop in a village near Hunstanton, where an old lady warily served me in my balaclava. As I went to pay, my tub of vaseline flew out my pocket and onto the counter.
Fortunately they took it well. Or perhaps they were humouring me.
Blair is toxic, I wish he'd stay out of. May as well tune out of politics for the foreseeable future, if Labour are going to make themselves a laughing stock. We'll literally have no effective opposition.
Indeed, Without him Labour could have remained pure and untainted by governing.
*rolleyes*
I mean toxic in relation to leadership election. Then again, Blair post 2003 isn't a liked leader in the country as whole in general. Not that you'd know, the way *some* Tories talking about him....
He could have beaten Cameron.
I don't actually think he could have. After Iraq, I think public opinion of him fell markedly, and it was only really the Tories putting up a candidate that wasn't a viable PM (Howard) that meant he got a third term. Given that the public clearly sees Cameron as a viable PM, and they don't have the trust issues associated with Blair, I think Cameron would win against him.
what on earth does "in touch with the concerns of ordinary people" mean?
It's exactly what they are meant to do? To be fair - bad that I keep repeating this phrase about the self-harming UK Labour Party, eh? - it is what people told them to do right after the election.
what on earth does "in touch with the concerns of ordinary people" mean?
Looking and sounding like a typical next door neighbour in a middle class neighbourhood. Corbyn is much closer to that than the other 3 who look and sound robotic, if they speak at all.
Your typical next door neighbour in a middle class neighbourhood wants to improve his lot in life, earn more money, provide for his family and build a financial safety net.
@Casino_Royale I doubt those voting for Corbyn are thinking along those lines. People who want to 'get their party back' so to speak.
@SouthamObserver What kind of shake-up do think a Corbyn leadership will result in?
My hope - probably folorn - is that losing to Corbyn will consign the last of the 97-10 deadwood to the further reaches of obscurity; while at the same time it will quickly dawn on the membership that tacking left is not going to cut it. That may allow a new generation, under someone like Jarvis, to emerge a fair while before 2020. If not, I guess I'll join millions of others in leaving Labour behind forever. Lucky LibDems!!
Given the likely non-transferable votes by people who don't understand AV, Corbyn might only need 45% of first prefs to secure victory, perhaps less...
@Andy_Cooke I am taking issue with your claim that the change is retrospective. It is not. A true retrospective change would be in year X to increase the fees that had been charged in years X-1, X-2, and X-3. As far as I can understand, this is simply a change to the terms on which the student must repay the agreed sum. It may be a good thing or a bad thing, but it is not retrospective. The comparison with tax law is inexact, but the comparison with a bilateral contract for debt doesn't work either, since a student does not owe a debt in the ordinary sense of the term; his obligations are regulated principally by public, not private law.
Let us, however, assume that the comparison with an ordinary contract for debt is apt. Consider the following two examples. (1) Parliament in 2000 chooses to declare void all future and subsisting terms of contracts of a particular character. (2) Parliament in 2000 declares that such terms were void as of 1 January 1990. The second change is genuinely retrospective. The first simply alters existing rights with prospective effect. An individual may plan his affairs on the basis that the general law governing the validity of contracts will stay the same, but he must always be prepared to accept that that that law may change.
@Casino_Royale I doubt those voting for Corbyn are thinking along those lines. People who want to 'get their party back' so to speak.
@SouthamObserver What kind of shake-up do think a Corbyn leadership will result in?
My hope - probably folorn - is that losing to Corbyn will consign the last of the 97-10 deadwood to the further reaches of obscurity; while at the same time it will quickly dawn on the membership that tacking left is not going to cut it. That may allow a new generation, under someone like Jarvis, to emerge a fair while before 2020. If not, I guess I'll join millions of others in leaving Labour behind forever. Lucky LibDems!!
The Lib Dems? Farron is far to into God for me. I may as well spoil my ballots in future elections....
As much as this seems to defy national electoral politics (rather than Labour internal politics) we should bear in mind Labour's last two leaders.
One was anointed despite showing clear signs of being a net vote loser, one was elected despite showing signs of being a net vote loser. These things can happen.
There will be a mass assault on Corbyn's candidacy soon. If you think the Labour party will think electoral politics (or perhaps just plain decent sense) first when it comes to casting the vote then you have a straightforward betting market by taking Corbyn out.
What is curious is the apparent decline of the broadly Blairite wing of the party represented by Kendall. Bearing in mind David Miliband was just pipped last time around is there an actual decline in that wing of Labour or is Kendall simply not the name to carry it?
Blairism died in 2003. Since then it's been losing voters and MP's.
Since 2001 the number of rightwing MP's elected on the Labour party platform has dropped significantly as Labour has lost more and more marginals. And since MP's in safe Labour seats are left wing, the fewer seats Labour wins the more left wing the remaining party becomes.
That's how the Tory party ejected it's Heseltine wing during the 1997-2001 period, since the only thing that remained after 1997 was the core Thatcherite party, and how as the Tories gain more and more seats they become more liberal and less right wing.
How long do we expect Corbyn to last if he does win?
5 years unless he jumps. Labour doesn't dump leaders. Besides, I think he might prove superficially quite popular for a while. I could well see him keeping on board or winning back many of the oppositionist Lib Dems and Greens that Miliband lost late on. It might be a different kettle of fish once the election starts getting closer. That, of course, assumes that Labour can provide some sort of internal cohesion which would be very far from a given with all the people Corbyn would have leapfrogged over. The unions will be happy to see him stay though.
So, let's get this straight: 43% of Labour members propose, as their first choice, choosing as their candidate for Prime Minister, with the ultimate control over our nuclear deterrent, Jeremy Corbyn, the well-known CND caampaigner? He who invited the IRA into parliament two weeks after the attack on Her Majesty's government which was almost successful and which left 5 dead and several more horrendously maimed and disabled? He who classes Hamas and Hizbollah amongst his friends, and supports the Argentine claim to the Falklands? That Jeremy Corbyn? Have I got the right one?
If I have, and if he does become leader, then a split of the Labour Party is inevitable.
Peter Mandelson needs to take Andy, Yvette and Liz to a nice restaurant where they can decide which one of them stands as the "Stop Corbyn" candidate and which two drop out. A kind of "Granita mark 2" event.
what on earth does "in touch with the concerns of ordinary people" mean?
Looking and sounding like a typical next door neighbour in a middle class neighbourhood. Corbyn is much closer to that than the other 3 who look and sound robotic, if they speak at all.
Your typical next door neighbour in a middle class neighbourhood wants to improve his lot in life, earn more money, provide for his family and build a financial safety net.
Labour seems to be against all that.
Try to explain that to the non-Corbyn candidates, they probably won't even speak, they will just smile and shrug you off. If you try to explain it to Corbyn you will probably get a torrent of thousands of words.
Corbyn is like a political warrior, the other 3 so far look like empty suits, that's why Corbyn is ahead.
If Mr Corbyn does get it, I can see him spending 2-3 years changing the direction of the labour party and the setup of how members influence the direction of policy.
Then once he has set a left wing agenda I can see the left of the party trying to get a centre left candidate in before the election that may be more appealing to the electorate / younger. So could be another Blairite / centre left battle in 2 years time.
Or earlier of course if the blairites seek to remove him. But that will absolutely be the death knell of labour.
@Andy_Cooke I am taking issue with your claim that the change is retrospective. It is not. A true retrospective change would be in year X to increase the fees that had been charged in years X-1, X-2, and X-3. As far as I can understand, this is simply a change to the terms on which the student must repay the agreed sum. It may be a good thing or a bad thing, but it is not retrospective. The comparison with tax law is inexact, but the comparison with a bilateral contract for debt doesn't work either, since a student does not owe a debt in the ordinary sense of the term; his obligations are regulated principally by public, not private law.
Let us, however, assume that the comparison with an ordinary contract for debt is apt. Consider the following two examples. (1) Parliament in 2000 chooses to declare void all future and subsisting terms of contracts of a particular character. (2) Parliament in 2000 declares that such terms were void as of 1 January 1990. The second change is genuinely retrospective. The first simply alters existing rights with prospective effect. An individual may plan his affairs on the basis that the general law governing the validity of contracts will stay the same, but he must always be prepared to accept that that that law may change.
The obligations run up by the student were run up under condition A. Now that the repayment phase commences, he or she is told that actually the obligations are being treated under condition B.
The total amount that will be paid has changed after the transaction was completed. The terms under which the transaction was entered were valid as of 2012; Parliament has decreed that the 2012 transaction be treated under different terms. The service has already been consumed; the price of it is being changed subsequent to its consumption.
@Casino_Royale I doubt those voting for Corbyn are thinking along those lines. People who want to 'get their party back' so to speak.
@SouthamObserver What kind of shake-up do think a Corbyn leadership will result in?
My hope - probably folorn - is that losing to Corbyn will consign the last of the 97-10 deadwood to the further reaches of obscurity; while at the same time it will quickly dawn on the membership that tacking left is not going to cut it. That may allow a new generation, under someone like Jarvis, to emerge a fair while before 2020. If not, I guess I'll join millions of others in leaving Labour behind forever. Lucky LibDems!!
With Corbyn there will be a pretty thorough purge, though many may walk before being purged. A whole new generation, and a lot of has-beens generating by-elections.
Peter Mandelson needs to take Andy, Yvette and Liz to a nice restaurant where they can decide which one of them stands as the "Stop Corbyn" candidate and which two drop out. A kind of "Granita mark 2" event.
They'd do a toss up of Yvette and Andy. That said, I can see one candidate dropping out after this.
Labour's approach to its leadership election is the party political approach of taking to the bottle after losing your job, and then stumbling, pissed, to your ex-employer to scream abuse at them from outside the office building.
Very interesting program on C4 - at the same time pretty damning indictment of the worst of the benefit class (obviously really sad to see for everyone), but also revealing of those who don't want to be where they are, and willing to try and improve their lot.
Looks like Dan Jarvis will be leading Labour into the 2020 election if this poll is right.
This is why I don't understand the "Tories for Corbyn" business (insofar as it's real - obviously a lot of them like Toby Young are just showing off to their Twitter mates). It's looking like the Labour establishment won't allow a Corbyn victory to stand. So if he does win, they might well replace him with someone more marketable than the other candidates, such as Jarvis. But if he doesn't win, then Labour are stuck with Burnham or Cooper.
If Corbyn does win there must be an outside chance of UKIP taking second place in the polls in the run-up to and following EU ref
There's this assumption that every country needs a right-wing party and a left-wing party as the big two, but countries like Ireland shows that is not necessarily the case.
Ireland has SF and the Greens and Labour too, if left is split amongst several parties and main centre left party leader weak no reason a populist party cannot take second, France too is an example where FN and Le Pen runners up to centre right
When you think about recent Labour leaders , you think Blair.. won three elections despite illegal wars.. Then in comes completely bonkers Brown.. then they pick a lefty nutter in Ed, now it looks like they might pick Corbyn whom even Foot would despise.. Are they completely fffffing MAD ???
I do not know if Labour do not decapitate their leaders. Ed Miliband had a fair lead in polls after a reasonable two-year period, as did Michael Foot and Neil Kinnock. The problem is that the polls did not accurately reflect votes in any of these cases, and they kept believing each time that they did. In contrast, the polls said in 2003 that the Conservatives wouldn't win, and indeed they didn't.
@RodCrosby makes a good point. Even though this will be a very politically engaged electorate, a proportion will not use their preferences in a useful way, or at all.
Peter Mandelson needs to take Andy, Yvette and Liz to a nice restaurant where they can decide which one of them stands as the "Stop Corbyn" candidate and which two drop out. A kind of "Granita mark 2" event.
Or, Mandy could bide his time and await another leadership race in 2018, with Chukka or Tristram, Stella or Jarvis or other.
On another topic, that of which movies / TV shows are worth watching, I can report that "Vacuuming Completely Nude in Paradise" - a BBC TV movie, is absolutely awful.
What are the odds for the first Labour MP to defect to the LibDems?
None. The Blairites are a handful left, and whoever want's to get rid of Corbyn will stay in, to backstab him later and overthrow him.
No point now leftwing Farron in charge, the LDs voted against the welfare bill with Labour rebels, Blairites more likely to defect to Tories under Cameron and Osborne
How long do we expect Corbyn to last if he does win?
5 years unless he jumps. Labour doesn't dump leaders. Besides, I think he might prove superficially quite popular for a while. I could well see him keeping on board or winning back many of the oppositionist Lib Dems and Greens that Miliband lost late on. It might be a different kettle of fish once the election starts getting closer. That, of course, assumes that Labour can provide some sort of internal cohesion which would be very far from a given with all the people Corbyn would have leapfrogged over. The unions will be happy to see him stay though.
Yes. Even under Corbyn, Labour may do well enough in polls and local elections, until the next General Election approaches.
Well the only thing positive for Labour with a Corbyn leadership is that they might take Scotland back from the SNP, the overlap of Corbyn and the SNP's policies is almost 100%.
When you think about recent Labour leaders , you think Blair.. won three elections despite illegal wars.. Then in comes completely bonkers Brown.. then they pick a lefty nutter in Ed, now it looks like they might pick Corbyn whom even Foot would despise.. Are they completely fffffing MAD ???
To be fair, most labour people picked David M, the unions swung it by some pretty dodgy tactics.
George Osborne, the Chancellor, is considering historic plans to merge Income Tax with National Insurance
So my letter got to him.. I suggested it in 2010/. you could do away with thousands of pen pushers . Why not pay benefits based on the TAX you have paid.. All the sloth claimants would find themselves without a bean...
Shocked by how few followers, retweets and faves he has. But then, looking at the substance of his output, he isn't putting much out there that would encourage folk to pay attention.
Agree or disagree with his politics, he has a top-class political mind, and could easily have cut a living as a political correspondent, risk analyst or strategist. What a waste.
Looks like Dan Jarvis will be leading Labour into the 2020 election if this poll is right.
This is why I don't understand the "Tories for Corbyn" business (insofar as it's real - obviously a lot of them like Toby Young are just showing off to their Twitter mates). It's looking like the Labour establishment won't allow a Corbyn victory to stand. So if he does win, they might well replace him with someone more marketable than the other candidates, such as Jarvis. But if he doesn't win, then Labour are stuck with Burnham or Cooper.
Well the only thing positive for Labour with a Corbyn leadership is that they might take Scotland back from the SNP, the overlap of Corbyn and the SNP's policies is almost 100%.
As for the rest of the country, time will tell.
Nope - Scotland is about identity not policy. A bearded London lefty is not going to win vote backs from the SNP.
What are the odds for the first Labour MP to defect to the LibDems?
None. The Blairites are a handful left, and whoever want's to get rid of Corbyn will stay in, to backstab him later and overthrow him.
No point now leftwing Farron in charge, the LDs voted against the welfare bill with Labour rebels, Blairites more likely to defect to Tories under Cameron and Osborne
They won't win their seats in the by-elections that follow MP defections you know. You forgotten the "Carswell Rule".
Peter Mandelson needs to take Andy, Yvette and Liz to a nice restaurant where they can decide which one of them stands as the "Stop Corbyn" candidate and which two drop out. A kind of "Granita mark 2" event.
They'd do a toss up of Yvette and Andy. That said, I can see one candidate dropping out after this.
(EDIT) I'm just glad that Philip Gould isn't around to see this, after all the hard work that he did to make Labour electable in the 1990s.
What are the odds for the first Labour MP to defect to the LibDems?
None. The Blairites are a handful left, and whoever want's to get rid of Corbyn will stay in, to backstab him later and overthrow him.
No point now leftwing Farron in charge, the LDs voted against the welfare bill with Labour rebels, Blairites more likely to defect to Tories under Cameron and Osborne
They won't win their seats in the by-elections that follow MP defections you know. You forgotten the "Carswell Rule".
There used to be a rule, that when someone was first appointed to the cabinet, they had to resign their seat and fight a by-election.
I suspect the Carswell rule will last as long as it is politically expedient.
Given the likely non-transferable votes by people who don't understand AV, Corbyn might only need 45% of first prefs to secure victory, perhaps less...
I suspect he'd still need transfers, though taken together with the non-transferables, he'd be a shoo-in on 45%. Assuming something like a 25/20/10 split for the others, it'd take a third of the Kendall / Cooper votes to be non-transferable for Corbyn to be over the line on first preferences alone, and I suspect that's a little too high, but only a little.
I expect some more mainstream Labour voters to begin coalescing around the best placed alternative candidate to Corbyn. Anyone But Corbyn = Andy Burnham Campaign. Cooper and Kendall are out of the running... The real choice is Burnham or Corbyn.
Looks like Dan Jarvis will be leading Labour into the 2020 election if this poll is right.
This is why I don't understand the "Tories for Corbyn" business (insofar as it's real - obviously a lot of them like Toby Young are just showing off to their Twitter mates). It's looking like the Labour establishment won't allow a Corbyn victory to stand. So if he does win, they might well replace him with someone more marketable than the other candidates, such as Jarvis. But if he doesn't win, then Labour are stuck with Burnham or Cooper.
How do they 'just replace him'? Possibly if the whole of the front bench refuse to serve it might make his position untenable but it'd also look like incredible sour grapes.
Well the only thing positive for Labour with a Corbyn leadership is that they might take Scotland back from the SNP, the overlap of Corbyn and the SNP's policies is almost 100%.
As for the rest of the country, time will tell.
Nope - Scotland is about identity not policy. A bearded London lefty is not going to win vote backs from the SNP.
I doubt that, the big problem in scotland is that the middle of the road is to the left of what it is in E&W. Labour were swept away in scotland because they were perceived as not left wing enough and not caring about their voters.
Peter Mandelson needs to take Andy, Yvette and Liz to a nice restaurant where they can decide which one of them stands as the "Stop Corbyn" candidate and which two drop out. A kind of "Granita mark 2" event.
They'd do a toss up of Yvette and Andy. That said, I can see one candidate dropping out after this.
(EDIT) I'm just glad that Philip Gould isn't around to see this, after all the hard work that he did to make Labour electable in the 1990s.
I can't believe I (again) misjudged the Labour party. Back in 2010, I really thought they wouldn't elect Ed Miliband....
Agree or disagree with his politics, he has a top-class political mind, and could easily have cut a living as a political correspondent, risk analyst or strategist. What a waste.
George Osborne lost the election by eating a burger. Or crying at a funeral. Or getting on a boat, out of a car, on a train.
@BethRigby: Yvette campaign on times poll. Labour cant win by "shifting a narrow party further to the left or by returning to dismal days of 1980s"
This is an opportunity for Yvette: if she tacks slightly right, as the sane unifying figure who's actually vaguely electable and who isn't an obvious loser like Andy B, she could garner support from a wide spectrum of the party.
Peter Mandelson needs to take Andy, Yvette and Liz to a nice restaurant where they can decide which one of them stands as the "Stop Corbyn" candidate and which two drop out. A kind of "Granita mark 2" event.
They'd do a toss up of Yvette and Andy. That said, I can see one candidate dropping out after this.
(EDIT) I'm just glad that Philip Gould isn't around to see this, after all the hard work that he did to make Labour electable in the 1990s.
I can't believe I (again) misjudged the Labour party. Back in 2010, I really thought they wouldn't elect Ed Miliband....
Leadership elections are simply selecting the least worst option. If Labour voters think the least worst option is Corbyn then it says volumes about how low they perceive the other 3 candidates.
Peter Mandelson needs to take Andy, Yvette and Liz to a nice restaurant where they can decide which one of them stands as the "Stop Corbyn" candidate and which two drop out. A kind of "Granita mark 2" event.
They'd do a toss up of Yvette and Andy. That said, I can see one candidate dropping out after this.
(EDIT) I'm just glad that Philip Gould isn't around to see this, after all the hard work that he did to make Labour electable in the 1990s.
I can't believe I (again) misjudged the Labour party. Back in 2010, I really thought they wouldn't elect Ed Miliband....
A lot of people would say Ed M is Ayn Rand compared to Jezza.
Agree or disagree with his politics, he has a top-class political mind, and could easily have cut a living as a political correspondent, risk analyst or strategist. What a waste.
George Osborne lost the election by eating a burger. Or crying at a funeral. Or getting on a boat, out of a car, on a train.
Top-class.
The poster who thought a millionaire was avoiding tax by dying ? Top class.
@BethRigby: Yvette campaign on times poll. Labour cant win by "shifting a narrow party further to the left or by returning to dismal days of 1980s"
This is an opportunity for Yvette: if she tacks slightly right, as the sane unifying figure who's actually vaguely electable and who isn't an obvious loser like Andy B, she could garner support from a wide spectrum of the party.
I think the days of a Labour "wide spectrum" are proved to be over..
I don't blame LDs for gloating. I'd gloat if I was an LD as well, given all the flack LDs have taken from Labour activists/members/MPs.
It was pretty much unrelenting. They paraded their moral superiority about not being in a coalition government with the Conservatives.
Then they abstained on social welfare. You would despair for them.
I didn't know you were an LD. I personally, didn't begrudge the LDs for entering coalition - I thought it was the right decision, all things considered.
Labour are embarrassing right now. I'm wondering whether I'll even pay the £3 to vote for in the leadership election, at this stage.
Comments
One was anointed despite showing clear signs of being a net vote loser, one was elected despite showing signs of being a net vote loser. These things can happen.
There will be a mass assault on Corbyn's candidacy soon. If you think the Labour party will think electoral politics (or perhaps just plain decent sense) first when it comes to casting the vote then you have a straightforward betting market by taking Corbyn out.
What is curious is the apparent decline of the broadly Blairite wing of the party represented by Kendall. Bearing in mind David Miliband was just pipped last time around is there an actual decline in that wing of Labour or is Kendall simply not the name to carry it?
It's like a political Stockholm syndrome.
I once walked the Peddar's Way through Norfolk in November, wild camping. Early one morning I reached a small shop in a village near Hunstanton, where an old lady warily served me in my balaclava. As I went to pay, my tub of vaseline flew out my pocket and onto the counter.
Fortunately they took it well. Or perhaps they were humouring me.
The forthcoming epoch of the beardie-weardie codgers in sandals looks bright!
Vote HUM∀AN
Labour seems to be against all that.
I am taking issue with your claim that the change is retrospective. It is not. A true retrospective change would be in year X to increase the fees that had been charged in years X-1, X-2, and X-3. As far as I can understand, this is simply a change to the terms on which the student must repay the agreed sum. It may be a good thing or a bad thing, but it is not retrospective. The comparison with tax law is inexact, but the comparison with a bilateral contract for debt doesn't work either, since a student does not owe a debt in the ordinary sense of the term; his obligations are regulated principally by public, not private law.
Let us, however, assume that the comparison with an ordinary contract for debt is apt. Consider the following two examples. (1) Parliament in 2000 chooses to declare void all future and subsisting terms of contracts of a particular character. (2) Parliament in 2000 declares that such terms were void as of 1 January 1990. The second change is genuinely retrospective. The first simply alters existing rights with prospective effect. An individual may plan his affairs on the basis that the general law governing the validity of contracts will stay the same, but he must always be prepared to accept that that that law may change.
Since then it's been losing voters and MP's.
Since 2001 the number of rightwing MP's elected on the Labour party platform has dropped significantly as Labour has lost more and more marginals. And since MP's in safe Labour seats are left wing, the fewer seats Labour wins the more left wing the remaining party becomes.
That's how the Tory party ejected it's Heseltine wing during the 1997-2001 period, since the only thing that remained after 1997 was the core Thatcherite party, and how as the Tories gain more and more seats they become more liberal and less right wing.
The left is taking its revenge on Tony Blair - by electing Tom and Jerry.
https://twitter.com/GOsborneGenius/with_replies
If I have, and if he does become leader, then a split of the Labour Party is inevitable.
If you try to explain it to Corbyn you will probably get a torrent of thousands of words.
Corbyn is like a political warrior, the other 3 so far look like empty suits, that's why Corbyn is ahead.
Then once he has set a left wing agenda I can see the left of the party trying to get a centre left candidate in before the election that may be more appealing to the electorate / younger. So could be another Blairite / centre left battle in 2 years time.
Or earlier of course if the blairites seek to remove him. But that will absolutely be the death knell of labour.
Now that the repayment phase commences, he or she is told that actually the obligations are being treated under condition B.
The total amount that will be paid has changed after the transaction was completed. The terms under which the transaction was entered were valid as of 2012; Parliament has decreed that the 2012 transaction be treated under different terms. The service has already been consumed; the price of it is being changed subsequent to its consumption.
May do well in Scotland too.
And Christmas comes early for Farron!
Unite run the MPs now.
Labour are finished .
Corbyn might be on his way to take the majority of first preferences, thus winning on the first round.
The other 3 are like empty suits, an endorsement of one empty suit to another won't do a thing, especially if the other 3 are collectively a minority.
The Blairites are a handful left, and whoever want's to get rid of Corbyn will stay in, to backstab him later and overthrow him.
Unite have done a reverse take over with added poison pill.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/georgeosborne/11754609/Is-this-the-end-of-National-Insurance.html
George Osborne, the Chancellor, is considering historic plans to merge Income Tax with National Insurance
@davidtorrance: Nicola Sturgeon: Decision over third Heathrow runway will be decided by SNP vote http://t.co/7zKra3YwtH
As for the rest of the country, time will tell.
Agree or disagree with his politics, he has a top-class political mind, and could easily have cut a living as a political correspondent, risk analyst or strategist. What a waste.
You forgotten the "Carswell Rule".
I suspect the Carswell rule will last as long as it is politically expedient.
Labour were swept away in scotland because they were perceived as not left wing enough and not caring about their voters.
Then they abstained on social welfare. You would despair for them.
I can't believe I (again) misjudged the Labour party. Back in 2010, I really thought they wouldn't elect Ed Miliband....
Top-class.
If Labour voters think the least worst option is Corbyn then it says volumes about how low they perceive the other 3 candidates.
Luckily she's Labour temp. leader for only a few months, imagine the carnage if she was Labour leader for years.
Cooper +6.3
Corbyn +5.5
Burnham +4.9
Kendall -2.2
Labour are embarrassing right now. I'm wondering whether I'll even pay the £3 to vote for in the leadership election, at this stage.
If Corbyn wins, then that proves that the other 3 candidates were so rubbish that they couldn't even beat him, much less the Tories.
Goodnight.