This continuing Labour farce is all down to the cowardice of EdM who shirked his responsibility and ran away as soon as he could, instead of following Howard's splendid example. Will EdM attend the Labour party conference?
The reaction to the prospective Labour candidates reminds me of the scene in a James Bond film, when in Asia he is offered a bottle of champagne which is labelled Fu-Yuk.
Britain should create closer ties with Russia, Jeremy Corbyn has hinted as he surged ahead in the latest Labour leadership poll.
Mr Corbyn, who takes 53% of support in the latest YouGov polling, told Russia Today that Britain should treat international opponents with more respect.
Mr Corbyn told the channel: "What is security? Is security the ability to bomb, maim, kill, destroy, or is security the ability to get on with other people and have some kind of respectful existence with them?"
More seriously, are we now becoming a one-Party state, and, if so, is that not what most successful countries (the USA being the obvious exception) are? Entrepreneurship requires freedom of speech & action, but perhaps not as much of even those as we like to think (look at Asian tigers) - it does not require more than one governmental party.
Most of the successful Asian Tigers are what amount to beneficent dictatorships, leaders take decisive action with broadly popular support. What they lack in freedom they make up for in terms of discipline and decisiveness. When we need some national project to make the economy work, such as a new airport, we get lost in a couple of decades of wrangling and enquiry, where as in a lot of Asia the ruling party decides it needs to be done, and makes it happen very rapidly.
Granted it isn't everyone's cup of tea, but a lot of the populations appear to be happy by and large to give away significant freedoms in exchange for rampant prosperity and a comfortable lifestyle - the same deal was supposed implicitly on offer for us with the EU, except the upside kind of didn't happen
India is no one party state it has more parties than the UK nor is Japan or South Korea
Only China really and dominated by factions
The U.S. Republicans have lost more recent general elections than Labour
I don't measure democracy by the number of parties but by the frequency with which the governing party is turned out of office.
India only recently thŕew the Congress Party out of office
Mr Corbyn told the channel: "What is security? Is security the ability to bomb, maim, kill, destroy, or is security the ability to get on with other people and have some kind of respectful existence with them?"
Please forgive the analogy, but I can't think of a better one ...
The Labour party is reaching the end of a long, self-satisfied wank. Soon it will ejaculate Jeremy Corbyn into the face of the British public; and will then be mystified about why everyone is revolted instead of cheering to the rafters.
IMO the only hope for Labour (and the country) is that at this late stage the other three candidates come together and two agree to swallow their pride and withdraw from the contest. For all the theoretical arguments about how it doesn't matter if they all stay in because their votes can transfer between each other, in practice it is very difficult to win an election solely on an "anyone but" prospectus. This election is no longer for Labour about electing the best leader, it is about preventing Corbyn winning. And to do that i think the opposition has to have one candidate to rally behind.
1. The reason votes don't transfer cleanly between the non-Corbyn candidates is the same reason that strategy would fail. Some Burnham / Cooper votes would go to Corbyn anyway. 2. It's probably too late. I don't know the precise rules about withdrawal but even if they can theoretically do it, the ballot papers will almost certainly have already been printed. 3. Corbyn is likely to win on the first round with four candidates, so what the rest do is shuffling deckchairs on the Titanic. 4. In the extremely unlikely event that it is possible, were done and achieved, the left of the Labour party would scream electoral robbery and may well regard the new leader and his/her whip as illegitimate. It may well lead to a full split, including unions and their money.
No, for Labour's future, the other three have to stick it out now.
And of course, David, you have the best interests of the Labour Party in the front of your mind...
Saw the headline lead on Sky News last night. Andy Burnham has committed the most stupid tactical blunder since Antiochus III thought that putting elephants in the middle of his densely packed heavy infantry would win him the Battle of Magnesia.
It's more stupid than Varro at Cannae. What were they thinking?
However, we should recall that polls can be wrong. Such as in the UK General Election this year. Or the Greek referendum. Or the Israeli election.
When was the last time that polls were wrong by 10-12% each way though? Corbyn's lead is 20-24%. That'd be like a 1992 GE result after the 1997 polls.
Indeed, I can understand the polls being 'wrong', but being 'that' wrong?
Please forgive the analogy, but I can't think of a better one ...
The Labour party is reaching the end of a long, self-satisfied wank. Soon it will ejaculate Jeremy Corbyn into the face of the British public; and will then be mystified about why everyone is revolted instead of cheering to the rafters.
This continuing Labour farce is all down to the cowardice of EdM who shirked his responsibility and ran away as soon as he could, instead of following Howard's splendid example. Will EdM attend the Labour party conference?
The reaction to the prospective Labour candidates reminds me of the scene in a James Bond film, when in Asia he is offered a bottle of champagne which is labelled Fu-Yuk.
It seems to me that this is the LP committing political suicide and accepting they are incapable of winning another election but are destined to become merely a fringe protest party
Of the 3 other contenders is a fair summary that Burnham is finished but there might be scope for YC and LK to return in a "told you so" vien in 2019 ?
Or will they disappear to the circuit like the righwing Miliband brother ?
Nope ad they poll worse than Burnham with the public
More seriously, are we now becoming a one-Party state, and, if so, is that not what most successful countries (the USA being the obvious exception) are? Entrepreneurship requires freedom of speech & action, but perhaps not as much of even those as we like to think (look at Asian tigers) - it does not require more than one governmental party.
Most of the successful Asian Tigers are what amount to beneficent dictatorships, leaders take decisive action with broadly popular support. What they lack in freedom they make up for in terms of discipline and decisiveness. When we need some national project to make the economy work, such as a new airport, we get lost in a couple of decades of wrangling and enquiry, where as in a lot of Asia the ruling party decides it needs to be done, and makes it happen very rapidly.
Granted it isn't everyone's cup of tea, but a lot of the populations appear to be happy by and large to give away significant freedoms in exchange for rampant prosperity and a comfortable lifestyle - the same deal was supposed implicitly on offer for us with the EU, except the upside kind of didn't happen
India is no one party state it has more parties than the UK nor is Japan or South Korea
IMO the only hope for Labour (and the country) is that at this late stage the other three candidates come together and two agree to swallow their pride and withdraw from the contest. For all the theoretical arguments about how it doesn't matter if they all stay in because their votes can transfer between each other, in practice it is very difficult to win an election solely on an "anyone but" prospectus. This election is no longer for Labour about electing the best leader, it is about preventing Corbyn winning. And to do that i think the opposition has to have one candidate to rally behind.
I would expect that to provoke an immediate split as an "Establishment/Blairite Stitch-up" with quite a lot of Corbyn's supports and whole swathes of Labour activists picking up their metaphorical beds and walking in disgust.
It seems to me that this is the LP committing political suicide and accepting they are incapable of winning another election but are destined to become merely a fringe protest party
Not destined, even if Corbyn wins and proves as troublesome as most of us predict - if he falls, the clear signal Labour have changed could still work in their favour, so long as the Tories have no captialised by seizing the middle ground, which given they will have been in government for 8 years or so by then, is not guaranteed, as governments do unpopular things and splits are on the horizon.
This continuing Labour farce is all down to the cowardice of EdM who shirked his responsibility and ran away as soon as he could, instead of following Howard's splendid example. Will EdM attend the Labour party conference?
The reaction to the prospective Labour candidates reminds me of the scene in a James Bond film, when in Asia he is offered a bottle of champagne which is labelled Fu-Yuk.
@JananGanesh: Corbyn as Labour leader. No historic analogy does it justice. Not Foot, not IDS. Would be like Arsenal appointing Gunnersaurus as manager.
LOL...although nearly as strange a thing has happened with...
This continuing Labour farce is all down to the cowardice of EdM who shirked his responsibility and ran away as soon as he could, instead of following Howard's splendid example. Will EdM attend the Labour party conference?
The reaction to the prospective Labour candidates reminds me of the scene in a James Bond film, when in Asia he is offered a bottle of champagne which is labelled Fu-Yuk.
Howard gained seats, and the party wanted him to stay on because they felt that their poor performance was not his fault (or at least, not entirely his fault). He also cut the government majority in half. Miliband had a huge net loss of seats and saw the governing party gain a majority. He also saw most of the senior members of the shadow cabinet get the push (of the top 4, 2 lost their seats). Rumour is Miliband was under very heavy pressure from his wife to go at once, because she thought his staying would be completely pointless, which Howard wasn't. Finally, Howard had a clear goal in mind - to change the leadership election rules. He failed, but at least it gave him an excuse to stay on a bit, at least until the party conference. It should not be forgotten though that Damian Green, probably on behalf of David Davis, ran a heavy-duty campaign all the way through that time to try and force him out at once.
Which brings us to the crucial point and the reason why he survived. With the exception of Ann Widdecombe, Conservative MPs liked Howard. I don't think Miliband was ever personally popular within the Labour party.
When this is the sort of thinking from a senior Labour person.. indeed the current leader, you really have to shake your head. What a loathsome individual Harman is.
IMO the only hope for Labour (and the country) is that at this late stage the other three candidates come together and two agree to swallow their pride and withdraw from the contest. For all the theoretical arguments about how it doesn't matter if they all stay in because their votes can transfer between each other, in practice it is very difficult to win an election solely on an "anyone but" prospectus. This election is no longer for Labour about electing the best leader, it is about preventing Corbyn winning. And to do that i think the opposition has to have one candidate to rally behind.
I would expect that to provoke an immediate split as an "Establishment/Blairite Stitch-up" with quite a lot of Corbyn's supports and whole swathes of Labour activists picking up their metaphorical beds and walking in disgust.
Please forgive the analogy, but I can't think of a better one ...
The Labour party is reaching the end of a long, self-satisfied wank. Soon it will ejaculate Jeremy Corbyn into the face of the British public; and will then be mystified about why everyone is revolted instead of cheering to the rafters.
This continuing Labour farce is all down to the cowardice of EdM who shirked his responsibility and ran away as soon as he could, instead of following Howard's splendid example. Will EdM attend the Labour party conference?
The reaction to the prospective Labour candidates reminds me of the scene in a James Bond film, when in Asia he is offered a bottle of champagne which is labelled Fu-Yuk.
This continuing Labour farce is all down to the cowardice of EdM who shirked his responsibility and ran away as soon as he could, instead of following Howard's splendid example. Will EdM attend the Labour party conference?
The reaction to the prospective Labour candidates reminds me of the scene in a James Bond film, when in Asia he is offered a bottle of champagne which is labelled Fu-Yuk.
Not casting aspersions on the Hon. Lady's memory, but is that the Man With the Golden Gun that was on ITV4 last night?
This continuing Labour farce is all down to the cowardice of EdM who shirked his responsibility and ran away as soon as he could, instead of following Howard's splendid example. Will EdM attend the Labour party conference?
The reaction to the prospective Labour candidates reminds me of the scene in a James Bond film, when in Asia he is offered a bottle of champagne which is labelled Fu-Yuk.
One things for sure - if Corbyn does lose, the Left will cite this poll as evidence they lost due to Zimbabwean-scale ballot stuffing....and not accept the leader's validity.
But Corbyn is not going to lose. Agent Miliband, report to Checkpoint Charlie - your work is complete and we are bringing you in.
The Any-to-Come bet Ladbrokes would not let me place,allowed me,when I collected my winnings to nip round the corner to go to Corals and get the 6-4 on JC in labour leadership,Laddies were only offering 5-4.I see he is around 1-2 this am. Having come in from 100-1,this as a political betting coup of historic proportions and a guide to political campaigning-don't worry about losing donors,the leggers will provide the funds.
Is it the law or by convention that the leader of the opposition is made a privy councillor and is briefed in on national security matters? If Corbyn wins, would any right minded person want him anywhere near anything secret or important. It's not worth the risk of him sharing it with his Hamas or Russian friends.
Is it the law or by convention that the leader of the opposition is made a privy councillor and is briefed in on national security matters? If Corbyn wins, would any right minded person want him anywhere near anything secret or important. It's not worth the risk of him sharing it with his Hamas or Russian friends.
There are strictly speaking no 'laws' around the operation of the Commons, so it is a convention.
However, it is hard to see how Corbyn could not be sworn of the Privy Council, given some of the people who have held membership of it in the past and allowing for the fact that almost every senior political figure is one - e.g. how could it be justified to allow Fiona McTaggart to be one, and not Corbyn as LOTO?
More difficult will be the question of security briefings. Much may depend on whether the Security Service is willing to share stuff with him. However, it's not at all hard to imagine that if he is denied such briefings he will then ask questions in the Commons designed to provoke public answers on the subject OR make Cameron look shifty by refusing to answer.
This continuing Labour farce is all down to the cowardice of EdM who shirked his responsibility and ran away as soon as he could, instead of following Howard's splendid example. Will EdM attend the Labour party conference?
The reaction to the prospective Labour candidates reminds me of the scene in a James Bond film, when in Asia he is offered a bottle of champagne which is labelled Fu-Yuk.
Not casting aspersions on the Hon. Lady's memory, but is that the Man With the Golden Gun that was on ITV4 last night?
Please forgive the analogy, but I can't think of a better one ...
The Labour party is reaching the end of a long, self-satisfied wank. Soon it will ejaculate Jeremy Corbyn into the face of the British public; and will then be mystified about why everyone is revolted instead of cheering to the rafters.
Blair, Murdoch and the BBC will be blamed.
I'd say it's more of a mass bukake on to the face of the electorate.
Now why is anyone surprised of the outcome when the intellectually confident Ed Miliband decides the electoral system and timeframe that Labour ends up in this position? We also have the strategic genius that is Harriet Harman presiding over it. Allied to the choices made by the Labour MPs that are from just 20% of the work force in the public sector and are heavily dominated by unions and ex SPADs. There was also the Gordon Brown legacy and his heavy roller squashing any sign of a rival and leaving the party bereft of talent. We now have a live car crash played out each day in front of us. Will the death of the Labour party take 5, 10, or 15 years?
Golly, Checkpoint Charlie. Haven't heard that in ages. I wonder how long it typically takes for a common expression to go out of date/popular understanding.
I watched a review of the OJ Simpson case last night and that was 21yrs ago IIRC - will youngsters like @The_Apocalypse get the reference in say another ten years?
One things for sure - if Corbyn does lose, the Left will cite this poll as evidence they lost due to Zimbabwean-scale ballot stuffing....and not accept the leader's validity.
But Corbyn is not going to lose. Agent Miliband, report to Checkpoint Charlie - your work is complete and we are bringing you in.
Is it the law or by convention that the leader of the opposition is made a privy councillor and is briefed in on national security matters? If Corbyn wins, would any right minded person want him anywhere near anything secret or important. It's not worth the risk of him sharing it with his Hamas or Russian friends.
There are strictly speaking no 'laws' around the operation of the Commons, so it is a convention.
However, it is hard to see how Corbyn could not be sworn of the Privy Council, given some of the people who have held membership of it in the past and allowing for the fact that almost every senior political figure is one - e.g. how could it be justified to allow Fiona McTaggart to be one, and not Corbyn as LOTO?
More difficult will be the question of security briefings. Much may depend on whether the Security Service is willing to share stuff with him. However, it's not at all hard to imagine that if he is denied such briefings he will then ask questions in the Commons designed to provoke public answers on the subject OR make Cameron look shifty by refusing to answer.
AFAIK, appointments to the PC are made on the advice of the Government, but no P Counsellor has a right to attend all meetings which are held under the oath of secrecy. However I believe that at times such meetings can have a selective composition.
When this is the sort of thinking from a senior Labour person.. indeed the current leader, you really have to shake your head. What a loathsome individual Harman is.
More seriously, are we now becoming a one-Party state, and, if so, is that not what most successful countries (the USA being the obvious exception) are? Entrepreneurship requires freedom of speech & action, but perhaps not as much of even those as we like to think (look at Asian tigers) - it does not require more than one governmental party.
Most of the successful Asian Tigers are what amount to beneficent dictatorships, leaders take decisive action with broadly popular support. What they lack in freedom they make up for in terms of discipline and decisiveness. When we need some national project to make the economy work, such as a new airport, we get lost in a couple of decades of wrangling and enquiry, where as in a lot of Asia the ruling party decides it needs to be done, and makes it happen very rapidly.
Granted it isn't everyone's cup of tea, but a lot of the populations appear to be happy by and large to give away significant freedoms in exchange for rampant prosperity and a comfortable lifestyle - the same deal was supposed implicitly on offer for us with the EU, except the upside kind of didn't happen
India is no one party state it has more parties than the UK nor is Japan or South Korea
Only China really and dominated by factions
The U.S. Republicans have lost more recent general elections than Labour
I don't measure democracy by the number of parties but by the frequency with which the governing party is turned out of office.
You must rank the UK very low then, given that's only happened twice in the last 35 years.
The Any-to-Come bet Ladbrokes would not let me place,allowed me,when I collected my winnings to nip round the corner to go to Corals and get the 6-4 on JC in labour leadership,Laddies were only offering 5-4.I see he is around 1-2 this am. Having come in from 100-1,this as a political betting coup of historic proportions and a guide to political campaigning-don't worry about losing donors,the leggers will provide the funds.
I am still mentally beating myself up that I did not put the bet on at 100-1 when I was boring all of my friends senseless that Corbyn could win this.
F1: from the BBC gossip column: "Sebastian Vettel says Ferrari should consider the "morale and atmosphere" in the team when considering who should partner him in 2016. (Crash.net)"
That sounds like unsubtle code for "not Ricciardo".
On the other hand, the Aussie's reportedly got a tight contract with Red Bull (although in F1 contracts are always negotiable to an extent). The prime candidates would appear to be Bottas or Hulkenberg. Not sure I can recall either significant friendliness or any contretemps between either driver and Vettel.
The Any-to-Come bet Ladbrokes would not let me place,allowed me,when I collected my winnings to nip round the corner to go to Corals and get the 6-4 on JC in labour leadership,Laddies were only offering 5-4.I see he is around 1-2 this am. Having come in from 100-1,this as a political betting coup of historic proportions and a guide to political campaigning-don't worry about losing donors,the leggers will provide the funds.
Not only a betting coup. The party has got itself into a god-awful mess IMHO. If this poll is right then the first Labour by-election will be interesting, to say the least.
Is it the law or by convention that the leader of the opposition is made a privy councillor and is briefed in on national security matters? If Corbyn wins, would any right minded person want him anywhere near anything secret or important. It's not worth the risk of him sharing it with his Hamas or Russian friends.
However, it is hard to see how Corbyn could not be sworn of the Privy Council, given some of the people who have held membership of it in the past and allowing for the fact that almost every senior political figure is one - e.g. how could it be justified to allow Fiona McTaggart to be one, and not Corbyn as LOTO?
Can you explain that, please?
I'm aware that McTaggart has tried to used faked up data on People Trafficking in the Commons, but so has virtually everyone on that side of that argument, including the police.
And there's the episode where she wavered on the protestors/thugs who closed down that play in Brum.
But has she associated with murderers before the fellow MP they had murdered was hardly cold in his grave?
Corbyn can be beaten but we should not think this election will mark an end to the ideological strife that has engulfed the party. Whoever wins will try to reunify but the bitterness that has been expressed can’t be easily unsaid. If Corbyn his leadership will inevitably be dominated by conflict with a PLP who will resent being “led” by someone who has perpetually broken the whip; who will want to draw a line in the sand somewhere when their principles and beliefs on many policy issues will be under attack; and who will be torn between fear of deselection by a resurgent left and losing their seats anyway if they go into the 2020 General Election with a manifesto even less resonant with swing voters than the 2015 one was.
If he loses some of his supporters will melt away as they were looking for a quick fix, but the Hard Left in general will have been strengthened by the new recruits of the last few months and the sense it is no longer inevitably a minority faction, and will be looking to reassert itself at Conference, in internal elections for the NEC and CAC, in selections and in CLPs and councils.
A non-Corbyn leader will find themselves more engaged with the internal politics of the party and fire-fighting an insurrectionary internal opposition than any leader since Kinnock. All this at a time when we desperately need to look outwards and reconnect with what Middle England (and Middle Scotland and Wales) are actually thinking.
Mr. Eagles, Hardman's a clever lass. Bit under-used on electoral coverage (not unlike poor Sophie Raworth. Miles better than Huw Edwards but relegated to prancing about in the cold with an over-sized jigsaw funded by the Department for Condescension).
Isabel Hardman made an interesting point the other day. Electing Corbyn turns the Tory majority in the Commons from 12 to 32.
You can't see the 10 DUP/UUP MPs voting along side the party that has just elected a leader who wants a united Ireland.
They will be on team blue no matter what.
Interesting. You are also forgetting the N number of Blairites MPs, who will have weigh loyalty against belief on every vote. HS2 will be a test case for example.
Is it the law or by convention that the leader of the opposition is made a privy councillor and is briefed in on national security matters? If Corbyn wins, would any right minded person want him anywhere near anything secret or important. It's not worth the risk of him sharing it with his Hamas or Russian friends.
However, it is hard to see how Corbyn could not be sworn of the Privy Council, given some of the people who have held membership of it in the past and allowing for the fact that almost every senior political figure is one - e.g. how could it be justified to allow Fiona McTaggart to be one, and not Corbyn as LOTO?
Can you explain that, please?
I'm aware that McTaggart has tried to used faked up data on People Trafficking in the Commons, but so has virtually everyone on that side of that argument, including the police.
And there's the episode where she wavered on the protestors/thugs who closed down that play in Brum.
But has she associated with murderers before the fellow MP they had murdered was hardly cold in his grave?
Have I missed something?
My point, Matt, was that she was a very junior undersecretary ten years ago. Therefore, in terms of status she would rank well below the Leader of the Opposition - yet she has just been made a privy counsellor, so there would be no grounds for refusing it to Corbyn. Officially she was appointed as a 'long-serving MP', yet she has served for only just over half the time Corbyn has. It was not a comment on her policies or her personality (although from what I know of her she is not exactly an easy person to like, that is totally irrelevant to her status).
Security briefings are a separate issue, and not related to PC membership. The LOTO is traditionally briefed on matters pertaining to national security, if only to avoid difficult questions or accidental blunders. But could they give sensitive information to a man who has openly described Hamas as his friends?
Isabel Hardman made an interesting point the other day. Electing Corbyn turns the Tory majority in the Commons from 12 to 32.
You can't see the 10 DUP/UUP MPs voting along side the party that has just elected a leader who wants a united Ireland.
They will be on team blue no matter what.
Interesting. You are also forgetting the N number of Blairites MPs, who will have weigh loyalty against belief on every vote. HS2 will be a test case for example.
Will HS2 get through the house if Corbyn is in charge. Previous calculations have relied on Labour front bench in favour iirc...
Mr. Eagles, Hardman's a clever lass. Bit under-used on electoral coverage (not unlike poor Sophie Raworth. Miles better than Huw Edwards but relegated to prancing about in the cold with an over-sized jigsaw funded by the Department for Condescension).
Hardman's not BBC. She's Spectator and also various freelancing gigs like Telegraph. But undoubtedly a major future talent.
This continuing Labour farce is all down to the cowardice of EdM who shirked his responsibility and ran away as soon as he could, instead of following Howard's splendid example. Will EdM attend the Labour party conference?
The reaction to the prospective Labour candidates reminds me of the scene in a James Bond film, when in Asia he is offered a bottle of champagne which is labelled Fu-Yuk.
Not casting aspersions on the Hon. Lady's memory, but is that the Man With the Golden Gun that was on ITV4 last night?
When this is the sort of thinking from a senior Labour person.. indeed the current leader, you really have to shake your head. What a loathsome individual Harman is.
If Corbyn wins, it's worth noting that he is likely - both by what he says and by his general temperament and approach - to break with the tradition in all parties in recent years that the leaders make up policy and the party reads about it in the morning paper and pretends to agree. For example, I was as surprised as anyone to find that we were suddenly in favour of an electricity price freeze, and basically thought, "Well, OK, I can see that might be attractive". I felt in no way involved in the decision. Tories, LibDems and UKIP supporters will have had similar surprises.
He sees himself more as a facilitator of a democratic party than a "Follow me, chaps!" leader. He plans much more inclusive debate within ther party - which isn't entirely a good thing, since it means endless discussions and slow decision-making. But it has refreshing elements, and puts into perspective the idea that he'll suddenly start expelling right-wingers (or storming out of NATO or reinstating Clause 4). Rather, he'll invite them to take part in lengthy policy discussions. Some will have the stomach for it and may find themselves rewarded (e.g. I can see Kendall getting the chance to lead a policy group on mental health, an area she's specialised in), some won't bother.
Is it the law or by convention that the leader of the opposition is made a privy councillor and is briefed in on national security matters? If Corbyn wins, would any right minded person want him anywhere near anything secret or important. It's not worth the risk of him sharing it with his Hamas or Russian friends.
However, it is hard to see how Corbyn could not be sworn of the Privy Council, given some of the people who have held membership of it in the past and allowing for the fact that almost every senior political figure is one - e.g. how could it be justified to allow Fiona McTaggart to be one, and not Corbyn as LOTO?
Can you explain that, please?
I'm aware that McTaggart has tried to used faked up data on People Trafficking in the Commons, but so has virtually everyone on that side of that argument, including the police.
And there's the episode where she wavered on the protestors/thugs who closed down that play in Brum.
But has she associated with murderers before the fellow MP they had murdered was hardly cold in his grave?
Have I missed something?
My point, Matt, was that she was a very junior undersecretary ten years ago. Therefore, in terms of status she would rank well below the Leader of the Opposition - yet she has just been made a privy counsellor, so there would be no grounds for refusing it to Corbyn. Officially she was appointed as a 'long-serving MP', yet she has served for only just over half the time Corbyn has. It was not a comment on her policies or her personality (although from what I know of her she is not exactly an easy person to like, that is totally irrelevant to her status).
Security briefings are a separate issue, and not related to PC membership. The LOTO is traditionally briefed on matters pertaining to national security, if only to avoid difficult questions or accidental blunders. But could they give sensitive information to a man who has openly described Hamas as his friends?
Isabel Hardman made an interesting point the other day. Electing Corbyn turns the Tory majority in the Commons from 12 to 32.
You can't see the 10 DUP/UUP MPs voting along side the party that has just elected a leader who wants a united Ireland.
They will be on team blue no matter what.
Interesting. You are also forgetting the N number of Blairites MPs, who will have weigh loyalty against belief on every vote. HS2 will be a test case for example.
Will HS2 get through the house if Corbyn is in charge. Previous calculations have relied on Labour front bench in favour iirc...
It seems unlikely, although a promise to start building out from Glasgow/Edinburgh at the same time southwards might bring SNP on-side. Truly a national high speed system.
IMO the only hope for Labour (and the country) is that at this late stage the other three candidates come together and two agree to swallow their pride and withdraw from the contest. For all the theoretical arguments about how it doesn't matter if they all stay in because their votes can transfer between each other, in practice it is very difficult to win an election solely on an "anyone but" prospectus. This election is no longer for Labour about electing the best leader, it is about preventing Corbyn winning. And to do that i think the opposition has to have one candidate to rally behind.
1. The reason votes don't transfer cleanly between the non-Corbyn candidates is the same reason that strategy would fail. Some Burnham / Cooper votes would go to Corbyn anyway. 2. It's probably too late. I don't know the precise rules about withdrawal but even if they can theoretically do it, the ballot papers will almost certainly have already been printed. 3. Corbyn is likely to win on the first round with four candidates, so what the rest do is shuffling deckchairs on the Titanic. 4. In the extremely unlikely event that it is possible, were done and achieved, the left of the Labour party would scream electoral robbery and may well regard the new leader and his/her whip as illegitimate. It may well lead to a full split, including unions and their money.
No, for Labour's future, the other three have to stick it out now.
And of course, David, you have the best interests of the Labour Party in the front of your mind...
Good government, and the long term interests of the Conservative party, require a credible opposition to stop the government from doing anything stupid simply because it can. Or at least, from not rowing back on something stupid once its been done.
Is it the law or by convention that the leader of the opposition is made a privy councillor and is briefed in on national security matters? If Corbyn wins, would any right minded person want him anywhere near anything secret or important. It's not worth the risk of him sharing it with his Hamas or Russian friends.
There are strictly speaking no 'laws' around the operation of the Commons, so it is a convention.
However, it is hard to see how Corbyn could not be sworn of the Privy Council, given some of the people who have held membership of it in the past and allowing for the fact that almost every senior political figure is one - e.g. how could it be justified to allow Fiona McTaggart to be one, and not Corbyn as LOTO?
More difficult will be the question of security briefings. Much may depend on whether the Security Service is willing to share stuff with him. However, it's not at all hard to imagine that if he is denied such briefings he will then ask questions in the Commons designed to provoke public answers on the subject OR make Cameron look shifty by refusing to answer.
AFAIK, appointments to the PC are made on the advice of the Government, but no P Counsellor has a right to attend all meetings which are held under the oath of secrecy. However I believe that at times such meetings can have a selective composition.
Yes - just because you are a PC does not mean that you get automatic updates on top secret info by some sort of round robin email. In any event, if as a LOTO Corbyn refuses to be or turns out to be incapable of keeping a promise of confidentiality then he simply will not be told or advised of anything. And of course if Corbyn were to prove so unreliable its hard to see how any sane Labour MP could in all conscience (don't laugh) continue in the party. I suppose given the motives of all the new labour party members since the election that Corbyn now is a shoo in, even if he dropped his trousers in the middle of Trafalgar Sq and whistled Dixie. However it is still a pretty disgraceful state of affairs that an allegedly serious political party can elect such an evil man as its leader.
This continuing Labour farce is all down to the cowardice of EdM who shirked his responsibility and ran away as soon as he could, instead of following Howard's splendid example. Will EdM attend the Labour party conference?
The reaction to the prospective Labour candidates reminds me of the scene in a James Bond film, when in Asia he is offered a bottle of champagne which is labelled Fu-Yuk.
Not casting aspersions on the Hon. Lady's memory, but is that the Man With the Golden Gun that was on ITV4 last night?
One things for sure - if Corbyn does lose, the Left will cite this poll as evidence they lost due to Zimbabwean-scale ballot stuffing....and not accept the leader's validity.
But Corbyn is not going to lose. Agent Miliband, report to Checkpoint Charlie - your work is complete and we are bringing you in.
The true agent of disaster for Labour was Gordon Brown and his work started the moment he entered Edinburgh University. Or rather his state of delusion became apparent then and the work he did as a result was allowed to continue. He is the biggest disaster to afflict the UK in its post war history. His path of destruction through the Labour Party is clearly apparent now.
Kids Company is facing a fresh storm of controversy after it emerged that two of the vice-chairman’s children were on the charity’s payroll before its collapse.
Sasha and Jamie Handover were both handed coveted jobs at the organisation where their father Richard, a former boss of WH Smith, has been a board member since 2005.
The siblings were paid around £50,000 a year between them by the taxpayer-subsidised charity until it imploded last week amid allegations of financial mismanagement and sexual abuse on its premises.
This continuing Labour farce is all down to the cowardice of EdM who shirked his responsibility and ran away as soon as he could, instead of following Howard's splendid example. Will EdM attend the Labour party conference?
The reaction to the prospective Labour candidates reminds me of the scene in a James Bond film, when in Asia he is offered a bottle of champagne which is labelled Fu-Yuk.
Not casting aspersions on the Hon. Lady's memory, but is that the Man With the Golden Gun that was on ITV4 last night?
:-o
Snap.
Moonraker was the best by far of the 'Carry On' Bonds. Lewis Gilbert, legendary director.
This continuing Labour farce is all down to the cowardice of EdM who shirked his responsibility and ran away as soon as he could, instead of following Howard's splendid example. Will EdM attend the Labour party conference?
The reaction to the prospective Labour candidates reminds me of the scene in a James Bond film, when in Asia he is offered a bottle of champagne which is labelled Fu-Yuk.
Not casting aspersions on the Hon. Lady's memory, but is that the Man With the Golden Gun that was on ITV4 last night?
:-o
Snap.
Moonraker was the best by far of the 'Carry On' Bonds. Lewis Gilbert, legendary director.
This continuing Labour farce is all down to the cowardice of EdM who shirked his responsibility and ran away as soon as he could, instead of following Howard's splendid example. Will EdM attend the Labour party conference?
The reaction to the prospective Labour candidates reminds me of the scene in a James Bond film, when in Asia he is offered a bottle of champagne which is labelled Fu-Yuk.
Not casting aspersions on the Hon. Lady's memory, but is that the Man With the Golden Gun that was on ITV4 last night?
:-o
Snap.
Moonraker was the best by far of the 'Carry On' Bonds. Lewis Gilbert, legendary director.
. Rather, he'll invite them to take part in lengthy policy discussions. .
Then ignore them like Ed did to Cruddas ?
I think you just said it. For Ed the fact that a centre-right type like yourself thinks there were some good ideas in there automatically damns it beyond any hope of redemption. Why ? As my son would say, because "reasons".
This continuing Labour farce is all down to the cowardice of EdM who shirked his responsibility and ran away as soon as he could, instead of following Howard's splendid example. Will EdM attend the Labour party conference?
The reaction to the prospective Labour candidates reminds me of the scene in a James Bond film, when in Asia he is offered a bottle of champagne which is labelled Fu-Yuk.
Not casting aspersions on the Hon. Lady's memory, but is that the Man With the Golden Gun that was on ITV4 last night?
Kids Company is facing a fresh storm of controversy after it emerged that two of the vice-chairman’s children were on the charity’s payroll before its collapse.
Sasha and Jamie Handover were both handed coveted jobs at the organisation where their father Richard, a former boss of WH Smith, has been a board member since 2005.
The siblings were paid around £50,000 a year between them by the taxpayer-subsidised charity until it imploded last week amid allegations of financial mismanagement and sexual abuse on its premises.
Kids Company is facing a fresh storm of controversy after it emerged that two of the vice-chairman’s children were on the charity’s payroll before its collapse.
Blimey - a highly paid 'music co-ordinator' to add to the cost of facials, massages, nail bars, reflexology, hairdressing, acupuncture, therapy, meals, summer holidays and brown envelopes stuffed with ‘pocket money’ – Surprised KC lasted as long as it did.
One things for sure - if Corbyn does lose, the Left will cite this poll as evidence they lost due to Zimbabwean-scale ballot stuffing....and not accept the leader's validity.
But Corbyn is not going to lose. Agent Miliband, report to Checkpoint Charlie - your work is complete and we are bringing you in.
The true agent of disaster for Labour was Gordon Brown and his work started the moment he entered Edinburgh University. Or rather his state of delusion became apparent then and the work he did as a result was allowed to continue. He is the biggest disaster to afflict the UK in its post war history. His path of destruction through the Labour Party is clearly apparent now.
Not sure I follow this one. What has 1000s of young idealists and Green supporters suddenly joining the party for a £3 vote got to do with him?
I think that any national political party is going to find it increasingly difficult to reconcile the views and values of supporters in (i) rural areas (ii) towns and small cities (iii) London and Core Cities (iv) Scotland. For Labour, this is particularly acute, as it seems almost to have written off (i) and (ii), has imploded in (iv), and is overwhelmingly dependent on (iii) whose population is not big enough to win an election on its own, and whose values are alien to (i) (ii) and (iv).
The inheritance of the new leader is immeasurably worse than the already catastrophic electoral situation bequeathed on 7 May. We can add to the public’s opinion of Labour as well meaning but out-of-touch and probably economically incompetent dreamers several months intense media evidence that we are hopelessly divided, more interested in fighting each other than the Tories, and contain within our ranks very large numbers of people whose thinking owes more to the St Petersburg Soviet in 1917 than it does to voters in Nuneaton in 2015
This continuing Labour farce is all down to the cowardice of EdM who shirked his responsibility and ran away as soon as he could, instead of following Howard's splendid example. Will EdM attend the Labour party conference?
The reaction to the prospective Labour candidates reminds me of the scene in a James Bond film, when in Asia he is offered a bottle of champagne which is labelled Fu-Yuk.
Not casting aspersions on the Hon. Lady's memory, but is that the Man With the Golden Gun that was on ITV4 last night?
:-o
Snap.
Moonraker was the best by far of the 'Carry On' Bonds. Lewis Gilbert, legendary director.
The inheritance of the new leader is immeasurably worse than the already catastrophic electoral situation bequeathed on 7 May. We can add to the public’s opinion of Labour as well meaning but out-of-touch and probably economically incompetent dreamers several months intense media evidence that we are hopelessly divided, more interested in fighting each other than the Tories, and contain within our ranks very large numbers of people whose thinking owes more to the St Petersburg Soviet in 1917 than it does to voters in Nuneaton in 2015
Ouch!
Although on a point of order, it should be the Petrograd Soviet, as the city was renamed on the outbreak of the First World War.
Another grand old Soviet joke:
A sociological survey: “Where were you born?” St. Petersburg. “Where did you go to school?” Petrograd. “Where do you live now?” Leningrad. “Where would you like to live?” St. Petersburg
This continuing Labour farce is all down to the cowardice of EdM who shirked his responsibility and ran away as soon as he could, instead of following Howard's splendid example. Will EdM attend the Labour party conference?
The reaction to the prospective Labour candidates reminds me of the scene in a James Bond film, when in Asia he is offered a bottle of champagne which is labelled Fu-Yuk.
Not casting aspersions on the Hon. Lady's memory, but is that the Man With the Golden Gun that was on ITV4 last night?
:-o
Snap.
My favourite has always been From Russia with Love.
This continuing Labour farce is all down to the cowardice of EdM who shirked his responsibility and ran away as soon as he could, instead of following Howard's splendid example. Will EdM attend the Labour party conference?
The reaction to the prospective Labour candidates reminds me of the scene in a James Bond film, when in Asia he is offered a bottle of champagne which is labelled Fu-Yuk.
Howard gained seats, and the party wanted him to stay on because they felt that their poor performance was not his fault (or at least, not entirely his fault). He also cut the government majority in half. Miliband had a huge net loss of seats and saw the governing party gain a majority. He also saw most of the senior members of the shadow cabinet get the push (of the top 4, 2 lost their seats). Rumour is Miliband was under very heavy pressure from his wife to go at once, because she thought his staying would be completely pointless, which Howard wasn't. Finally, Howard had a clear goal in mind - to change the leadership election rules. He failed, but at least it gave him an excuse to stay on a bit, at least until the party conference. It should not be forgotten though that Damian Green, probably on behalf of David Davis, ran a heavy-duty campaign all the way through that time to try and force him out at once.
Which brings us to the crucial point and the reason why he survived. With the exception of Ann Widdecombe, Conservative MPs liked Howard. I don't think Miliband was ever personally popular within the Labour party.
Two things strike me from your comments. One is the self serving nature of David Davis. The other is that I thought Howard did change the election rules. (Yes the tories did put on seats but only from a base of 165 - will Labour score so highly in 2020?) One other point of course is popularity. Everyone in Labour hates everyone else. Even brothers plot against each other (funny ha ha that they all used to call each other 'brother'). Since virtually no one in the Parliamentary Labour Party likes Corbyn its pretty clear he does not like them.
If Corbyn wins, it's worth noting that he is likely - both by what he says and by his general temperament and approach - to break with the tradition in all parties in recent years that the leaders make up policy and the party reads about it in the morning paper and pretends to agree. For example, I was as surprised as anyone to find that we were suddenly in favour of an electricity price freeze, and basically thought, "Well, OK, I can see that might be attractive". I felt in no way involved in the decision. Tories, LibDems and UKIP supporters will have had similar surprises.
He sees himself more as a facilitator of a democratic party than a "Follow me, chaps!" leader. He plans much more inclusive debate within ther party - which isn't entirely a good thing, since it means endless discussions and slow decision-making. But it has refreshing elements, and puts into perspective the idea that he'll suddenly start expelling right-wingers (or storming out of NATO or reinstating Clause 4). Rather, he'll invite them to take part in lengthy policy discussions. Some will have the stomach for it and may find themselves rewarded (e.g. I can see Kendall getting the chance to lead a policy group on mental health, an area she's specialised in), some won't bother.
Always look on the bright side of life eh Nick?
Face it, with a mad lefite like Corbyn leading them, Labour could be out of power even longer than the 18 years from 79-97 (cause at least Foot's leadership was early on in Lab's wilderness years, where-as now Lab's already been out of power for five years and the "blood bath" of the 2020 election will come a decade after Labour lost power!)
One things for sure - if Corbyn does lose, the Left will cite this poll as evidence they lost due to Zimbabwean-scale ballot stuffing....and not accept the leader's validity.
But Corbyn is not going to lose. Agent Miliband, report to Checkpoint Charlie - your work is complete and we are bringing you in.
The true agent of disaster for Labour was Gordon Brown and his work started the moment he entered Edinburgh University. Or rather his state of delusion became apparent then and the work he did as a result was allowed to continue. He is the biggest disaster to afflict the UK in its post war history. His path of destruction through the Labour Party is clearly apparent now.
Not sure I follow this one. What has 1000s of young idealists and Green supporters suddenly joining the party for a £3 vote got to do with him?
1. Brown effectively killed off talent at the top of the Labour party. 2. Brown's domination of SLAB with his "machine politics" stifled the party from operating in a healthy way to regenerate itself and nurture talent. 3. By undermining the "legacy" and regard for Blair , Brown made "hating Blair" become a common view amongst the younger Labour activists.
One things for sure - if Corbyn does lose, the Left will cite this poll as evidence they lost due to Zimbabwean-scale ballot stuffing....and not accept the leader's validity.
But Corbyn is not going to lose. Agent Miliband, report to Checkpoint Charlie - your work is complete and we are bringing you in.
The true agent of disaster for Labour was Gordon Brown and his work started the moment he entered Edinburgh University. Or rather his state of delusion became apparent then and the work he did as a result was allowed to continue. He is the biggest disaster to afflict the UK in its post war history. His path of destruction through the Labour Party is clearly apparent now.
Not sure I follow this one. What has 1000s of young idealists and Green supporters suddenly joining the party for a £3 vote got to do with him?
He politically assassinated a whole range of credible and respectable future leadership candidates which might have stood and not left people casting around for an alternative to the three stooges and landing on Corbyn.
Consider the sort of big names who I do not agree with politically, but had character and "bottom" gone, Straw, Blunkett, Darling, Beckett, Reid all tower over the pygmies on offer at the moment.
I saw a bio of Sean Connery the other day - in an intv he said that he'd only read a couple of Bond's [though he knew/liked Fleming a lot]. He found them too serious/lacked humour.
I love the books and the films - have the whole lot, and I don't mind if they aren't the same. That's very rare for me - usually I won't watch the film if I've read the book first, as they miss out so much.
Stopped watching them after Skyfall - what a truly crap film that was. I didn't rate remake of Casino Royale either. My favourite book though, along with Dr No.
This continuing Labour farce is all down to the cowardice of EdM who shirked his responsibility and ran away as soon as he could, instead of following Howard's splendid example. Will EdM attend the Labour party conference?
The reaction to the prospective Labour candidates reminds me of the scene in a James Bond film, when in Asia he is offered a bottle of champagne which is labelled Fu-Yuk.
Not casting aspersions on the Hon. Lady's memory, but is that the Man With the Golden Gun that was on ITV4 last night?
:-o
Snap.
Moonraker was the best by far of the 'Carry On' Bonds. Lewis Gilbert, legendary director.
This continuing Labour farce is all down to the cowardice of EdM who shirked his responsibility and ran away as soon as he could, instead of following Howard's splendid example. Will EdM attend the Labour party conference?
The reaction to the prospective Labour candidates reminds me of the scene in a James Bond film, when in Asia he is offered a bottle of champagne which is labelled Fu-Yuk.
Not casting aspersions on the Hon. Lady's memory, but is that the Man With the Golden Gun that was on ITV4 last night?
:-o
Snap.
My favourite has always been From Russia with Love.
Mine is The Living Daylights. Timothy Dalton is also my favourite Bond.
This continuing Labour farce is all down to the cowardice of EdM who shirked his responsibility and ran away as soon as he could, instead of following Howard's splendid example. Will EdM attend the Labour party conference?
The reaction to the prospective Labour candidates reminds me of the scene in a James Bond film, when in Asia he is offered a bottle of champagne which is labelled Fu-Yuk.
Not casting aspersions on the Hon. Lady's memory, but is that the Man With the Golden Gun that was on ITV4 last night?
:-o
Snap.
My favourite has always been From Russia with Love.
'On Her Majesty's Secret Service' has always been underrated, but remains one of the best.
As I recall, he wanted to change the rules back to their pre-97 state of only the PCP electing the leader. That did not get through. He may have made other changes I have forgotten about, but the system that elected Cameron looked essentially the same as the one that elected IDS. Of course, his staying on had other major advantages, notably the talent show at the autumn conference before the election, which proved a game-changer. But I don't think that was his primary reason.
If Labour do not get 165 seats, with the way the electoral system works and their great strength in the inner cities, then we will truly be in a one party state.
Comments
The reaction to the prospective Labour candidates reminds me of the scene in a James Bond film, when in Asia he is offered a bottle of champagne which is labelled Fu-Yuk.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11795420/Jeremy-Corbyn-surges-ahead-in-Labour-leadership.html
Britain should create closer ties with Russia, Jeremy Corbyn has hinted as he surged ahead in the latest Labour leadership poll.
Mr Corbyn, who takes 53% of support in the latest YouGov polling, told Russia Today that Britain should treat international opponents with more respect.
Mr Corbyn told the channel: "What is security? Is security the ability to bomb, maim, kill, destroy, or is security the ability to get on with other people and have some kind of respectful existence with them?"
I don't measure democracy by the number of parties but by the frequency with which the governing party is turned out of office.
India only recently thŕew the Congress Party out of office
Corbyn is going to win.
Cruddas on how Labour failed to combat UKIP
Stay chipper, Labour.
The physio who became a manager
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulfletcher/2010/10/when_a_physio_becomes_a_manage.html
Which brings us to the crucial point and the reason why he survived. With the exception of Ann Widdecombe, Conservative MPs liked Howard. I don't think Miliband was ever personally popular within the Labour party.
Hate. Alive and well on the Left.
@campbellclaret: @HackneyAbbott @simon_brooke oh do grow up Diane.
:-o
But Corbyn is not going to lose. Agent Miliband, report to Checkpoint Charlie - your work is complete and we are bringing you in.
Having come in from 100-1,this as a political betting coup of historic proportions and a guide to political campaigning-don't worry about losing donors,the leggers will provide the funds.
If Corbyn wins, would any right minded person want him anywhere near anything secret or important. It's not worth the risk of him sharing it with his Hamas or Russian friends.
However, it is hard to see how Corbyn could not be sworn of the Privy Council, given some of the people who have held membership of it in the past and allowing for the fact that almost every senior political figure is one - e.g. how could it be justified to allow Fiona McTaggart to be one, and not Corbyn as LOTO?
More difficult will be the question of security briefings. Much may depend on whether the Security Service is willing to share stuff with him. However, it's not at all hard to imagine that if he is denied such briefings he will then ask questions in the Commons designed to provoke public answers on the subject OR make Cameron look shifty by refusing to answer.
We now have a live car crash played out each day in front of us. Will the death of the Labour party take 5, 10, or 15 years?
Mr. Doethur, and their Balls
I watched a review of the OJ Simpson case last night and that was 21yrs ago IIRC - will youngsters like @The_Apocalypse get the reference in say another ten years?
I see Cooper has drifted even further whilst I've been asleep. Madness.
"Sebastian Vettel says Ferrari should consider the "morale and atmosphere" in the team when considering who should partner him in 2016. (Crash.net)"
That sounds like unsubtle code for "not Ricciardo".
On the other hand, the Aussie's reportedly got a tight contract with Red Bull (although in F1 contracts are always negotiable to an extent). The prime candidates would appear to be Bottas or Hulkenberg. Not sure I can recall either significant friendliness or any contretemps between either driver and Vettel.
You can't see the 10 DUP/UUP MPs voting along side the party that has just elected a leader who wants a united Ireland.
They will be on team blue no matter what.
I'm aware that McTaggart has tried to used faked up data on People Trafficking in the Commons, but so has virtually everyone on that side of that argument, including the police.
And there's the episode where she wavered on the protestors/thugs who closed down that play in Brum.
But has she associated with murderers before the fellow MP they had murdered was hardly cold in his grave?
Have I missed something?
Security briefings are a separate issue, and not related to PC membership. The LOTO is traditionally briefed on matters pertaining to national security, if only to avoid difficult questions or accidental blunders. But could they give sensitive information to a man who has openly described Hamas as his friends?
Would that apply to the two Ulster Unionists as well? Or is there still bad blood over that split a few years back?EDIT - then I went and read it properly. Whoops.
And she thought a look from Margaret Thatcher was a threat to a child? Deluded.
He sees himself more as a facilitator of a democratic party than a "Follow me, chaps!" leader. He plans much more inclusive debate within ther party - which isn't entirely a good thing, since it means endless discussions and slow decision-making. But it has refreshing elements, and puts into perspective the idea that he'll suddenly start expelling right-wingers (or storming out of NATO or reinstating Clause 4). Rather, he'll invite them to take part in lengthy policy discussions. Some will have the stomach for it and may find themselves rewarded (e.g. I can see Kendall getting the chance to lead a policy group on mental health, an area she's specialised in), some won't bother.
@hugorifkind: @IsabelHardman The model is what happened with indyref. Genuinely. It'll be a "movement", which was " betrayed". Spare us.
In any event, if as a LOTO Corbyn refuses to be or turns out to be incapable of keeping a promise of confidentiality then he simply will not be told or advised of anything. And of course if Corbyn were to prove so unreliable its hard to see how any sane Labour MP could in all conscience (don't laugh) continue in the party.
I suppose given the motives of all the new labour party members since the election that Corbyn now is a shoo in, even if he dropped his trousers in the middle of Trafalgar Sq and whistled Dixie. However it is still a pretty disgraceful state of affairs that an allegedly serious political party can elect such an evil man as its leader.
More likely the DUP/UUP block abstains where they might once have voted against. The Tories still need to keep their rebellions very small.
Or rather his state of delusion became apparent then and the work he did as a result was allowed to continue. He is the biggest disaster to afflict the UK in its post war history. His path of destruction through the Labour Party is clearly apparent now.
Kids Company is facing a fresh storm of controversy after it emerged that two of the vice-chairman’s children were on the charity’s payroll before its collapse.
Sasha and Jamie Handover were both handed coveted jobs at the organisation where their father Richard, a former boss of WH Smith, has been a board member since 2005.
The siblings were paid around £50,000 a year between them by the taxpayer-subsidised charity until it imploded last week amid allegations of financial mismanagement and sexual abuse on its premises.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3192918/
Hahahahahahahahahahaahahhahaahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahah
Although on a point of order, it should be the Petrograd Soviet, as the city was renamed on the outbreak of the First World War.
Another grand old Soviet joke:
One other point of course is popularity. Everyone in Labour hates everyone else. Even brothers plot against each other (funny ha ha that they all used to call each other 'brother'). Since virtually no one in the Parliamentary Labour Party likes Corbyn its pretty clear he does not like them.
Face it, with a mad lefite like Corbyn leading them, Labour could be out of power even longer than the 18 years from 79-97 (cause at least Foot's leadership was early on in Lab's wilderness years, where-as now Lab's already been out of power for five years and the "blood bath" of the 2020 election will come a decade after Labour lost power!)
2. Brown's domination of SLAB with his "machine politics" stifled the party from operating in a healthy way to regenerate itself and nurture talent.
3. By undermining the "legacy" and regard for Blair , Brown made "hating Blair" become a common view amongst the younger Labour activists.
Consider the sort of big names who I do not agree with politically, but had character and "bottom" gone, Straw, Blunkett, Darling, Beckett, Reid all tower over the pygmies on offer at the moment.
I love the books and the films - have the whole lot, and I don't mind if they aren't the same. That's very rare for me - usually I won't watch the film if I've read the book first, as they miss out so much.
Stopped watching them after Skyfall - what a truly crap film that was. I didn't rate remake of Casino Royale either. My favourite book though, along with Dr No.
Bond: Do you expect me to talk?
Goldfinger: No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die.
If Labour do not get 165 seats, with the way the electoral system works and their great strength in the inner cities, then we will truly be in a one party state.