Apropos of nothing, there is an interview with Ruth Davidson in today's Telegraph that is worth reading. A very interesting lady and a politician that could make a very good contribution if she could be persuaded to come to Westminster.
Hurst, given she will be lucky to get a consolation list seat in May she may be there sooner than you think. She has had to elbow someone out in Edinburgh to have a hope given Glasgow will be a Tory free zone.
In regard to surnames and keeping or leaving them the Spanish have a rather good and an odd way of doing them.
A few years ago t was working with some Spanish ladies in an office in London and they explained that the surnames off the offspring are both mother and fathers surnames so that was good insofar no argument about names. Children hold both.
However in the event that the father is not known ( or named ) then the offspring is given the mothers surname twice. Hence you can always tell right away the father is not known simply from the make up of the persons surname.
I have no idea if that is actually correct but having no reason to disbelieve the explanation it seemed odd to me to label someone at birth like that. As most were / are Catholic I think I put it down to that influence ?
That is not quite correct.
Each child has two surnames with the father's surname preceding the mother's. To be precise, they have the father's first surname followed by the mother's first surname. So the child of Pedro Lopez Garcia and Maria Santos Gomez would have the surnames Lopez Santos.
Where the father is not known the child is given both the mother's surnames but usually with the order reversed. So the illegitimate child of Maria Santos Gomez would have the surnames Gomez Santos.
" If the reactionary thought-criminals of the PLP think they are being "provoked" by Corbyn, they are hallucinating.
In a sense I agree - the opposition to Corbyn has been at times openly hostile, so anything he does is provocation in one sense - although if he escalates the cold war or instigates a new front, he might still be considered the provocateur. I think he's right, as leader, to want a team that at least partially supports him - I am not convinced that the level of open hostility and near contempt from some he has faced is just usual business - and might as well do it now as better for both sides in the long run, but they cannot get offended. I think even Dan Hodges was a little mocking of the Labour rebels acting offended.
Maggie purged the 'wets' as the weren't 'One of us'. Corby should do the same.
I think the fact that many on the right and centre are encouraging Jeremy to go for it might just give him pause for thought......
Interesting too that while Tony Benn caused problems for Kinnock from the left and ultimately stood against him for leader in 1988, now Hilary Benn is causing problems for Corbyn to his right. In any case as is suggested Benn is unlikely to be sacked but moved to another role
You think Benn will take another role? If you're Shad FS, you'd want Chancellor or Leader; everything else is humiliation.
Apropos of nothing, there is an interview with Ruth Davidson in today's Telegraph that is worth reading. A very interesting lady and a politician that could make a very good contribution if she could be persuaded to come to Westminster.
She hopefully could make a major contribution as Leader of the Opposition in Scotland; a role not to be underestimated in importance. That said, I don't think she quite will this time; Labour's residual strength is too long but give it another four (or five) years with the SNP gunning for Labour's heartland and leaving space on the right, and it's quite possible.
@OliverCooper: If Corbyn makes Thornberry Shadow Foreign Secretary, Labour will be led by the MPs for Islington North and Islington South. A broad church.
Is Labour aiming for a shadow cabinet based entirely within the M25?
" If the reactionary thought-criminals of the PLP think they are being "provoked" by Corbyn, they are hallucinating.
In a sense I agree - the opposition to Corbyn has been at times openly hostile, so anything he does is provocation in one sense - although if he escalates the cold war or instigates a new front, he might still be considered the provocateur. I think he's right, as leader, to want a team that at least partially supports him - I am not convinced that the level of open hostility and near contempt from some he has faced is just usual business - and might as well do it now as better for both sides in the long run, but they cannot get offended. I think even Dan Hodges was a little mocking of the Labour rebels acting offended.
Maggie purged the 'wets' as the weren't 'One of us'. Corby should do the same.
I think the fact that many on the right and centre are encouraging Jeremy to go for it might just give him pause for thought......
I'd be amazed if JC is paying a scintilla of attention to what those on the right are saying that he should or shouldn't do. He seems imo to be the ultimate example of group think.
Not Diane then? Anyway, what is the mechanism for toppling Corbyn?
35 MPs can call an election as a challenge, but Corbyn's automatically on the ballot if he chooses, same process that got him elected in the first place with all the three quidders again.
He's basically leader until he chooses to resign, or until the wider Labour 'community' of members, TU members and £3ers decide to vote for a specific someone else! The MPs as a group are almost completely neutered by the new electoral system once the process is underway.
Not necessarily true, Labour's own lawyers have now said that if a challenger receives sufficient nominations Corbyn would then also need 35 MPs backing him to get on a ballot
@OliverCooper: So Labour's Shadow Education Secretary doesn't want children to be "forced" to learn times tables? Incredible. https://t.co/6XXAK8NmZ4
@OliverCooper: Britain: "Hi, Labour - what cause do you want to champion today?" Labour: "We don't want kids learning their times tables." Oh.
It's the new Lucy Labour mantra 'educashon educashon' - she's not mastered number 3 yet.
This is not about times tables which are standard fare anyway (at least up to 10) but about testing -- teachers are generally opposed to tests; HMG is using this as a Trojan horse for computerised testing.
So what? Maths is none subject that is very amenable to computerised testing.
This is mental arithmetic, so yes. Maths as maths is understood by mathematicians probably is not, since it is more about method than final answer. NPXMP has a PhD in sums iirc so might be able to shed more light.
Not Diane then? Anyway, what is the mechanism for toppling Corbyn?
35 MPs can call an election as a challenge, but Corbyn's automatically on the ballot if he chooses, same process that got him elected in the first place with all the three quidders again.
He's basically leader until he chooses to resign, or until the wider Labour 'community' of members, TU members and £3ers decide to vote for a specific someone else! The MPs as a group are almost completely neutered by the new electoral system once the process is underway.
Not necessarily true, Labour's own lawyers have now said that if a challenger receives sufficient nominations Corbyn would then also need 35 MPs backing him to get on a ballot
You've said that a hundred times but it doesn't change the fact that it's the NEC that interprets the rules and they will surely find for Corbyn.
Not Diane then? Anyway, what is the mechanism for toppling Corbyn?
35 MPs can call an election as a challenge, but Corbyn's automatically on the ballot if he chooses, same process that got him elected in the first place with all the three quidders again.
He's basically leader until he chooses to resign, or until the wider Labour 'community' of members, TU members and £3ers decide to vote for a specific someone else! The MPs as a group are almost completely neutered by the new electoral system once the process is underway.
Not necessarily true, Labour's own lawyers have now said that if a challenger receives sufficient nominations Corbyn would then also need 35 MPs backing him to get on a ballot
Owen Jones @OwenJones84 15m15 minutes ago Making Emily Thornberry Shadow Foreign Secretary seems like a sound plan to me. First off: top 4 Labour jobs are men, which is unacceptable
Owen Jones @OwenJones84 15m15 minutes ago Making Emily Thornberry Shadow Foreign Secretary seems like a sound plan to me. First off: top 4 Labour jobs are men, which is unacceptable
Owen Jones @OwenJones84 15m15 minutes ago Making Emily Thornberry Shadow Foreign Secretary seems like a sound plan to me. First off: top 4 Labour jobs are men, which is unacceptable
Radical thought for Owen, how about the best people for the job being the "acceptable" one...
Silly Stokes! 300 was there for the taking, man! A clanger of a drop from AB de Villiers of all people, but Stokes hadn't made his ground like he could have and AB runs him out.
Owen Jones @OwenJones84 15m15 minutes ago Making Emily Thornberry Shadow Foreign Secretary seems like a sound plan to me. First off: top 4 Labour jobs are men, which is unacceptable
Radical thought for Owen, how about the best people for the job being the "acceptable" one...
" If the reactionary thought-criminals of the PLP think they are being "provoked" by Corbyn, they are hallucinating.
In a sense I agree - the opposition to Corbyn has been at times openly hostile, so anything he does is provocation in one sense - although if he escalates the cold war or instigates a new front, he might still be considered the provocateur. I think he's right, as leader, to want a team that at least partially supports him - I am not convinced that the level of open hostility and near contempt from some he has faced is just usual business - and might as well do it now as better for both sides in the long run, but they cannot get offended. I think even Dan Hodges was a little mocking of the Labour rebels acting offended.
Maggie purged the 'wets' as the weren't 'One of us'. Corby should do the same.
I think the fact that many on the right and centre are encouraging Jeremy to go for it might just give him pause for thought......
In fact Maggie removed or demoted only those who were plotting against her *and* were nightly briefing the press against her. The wets existed in her cabinet until the day she resigned.
If you read the accounts of the period, both by herself and others, she saw her role as leader of a party that had a range of views. She believed leadership consisted of leading these groups in a common direction. Not in destroying all those who weren't born again Thatcherites.
Bairstow picking up where Stokes left off. He gets 150 and Captain Cook calls them in. Eng 629/6dec. The most amazing Test innings I think I've ever watched - I'm supposed to be working today, fat chance of that happening now.
Owen Jones @OwenJones84 15m15 minutes ago Making Emily Thornberry Shadow Foreign Secretary seems like a sound plan to me. First off: top 4 Labour jobs are men, which is unacceptable
Radical thought for Owen, how about the best people for the job being the "acceptable" one...
The Labour Party are becoming farcical; almost masonic in their promotion and support of mediocrity and trying to justify it on the basis that they're 'our people'.
@OliverCooper: So Labour's Shadow Education Secretary doesn't want children to be "forced" to learn times tables? Incredible. https://t.co/6XXAK8NmZ4
@OliverCooper: Britain: "Hi, Labour - what cause do you want to champion today?" Labour: "We don't want kids learning their times tables." Oh.
It's the new Lucy Labour mantra 'educashon educashon' - she's not mastered number 3 yet.
This is not about times tables which are standard fare anyway (at least up to 10) but about testing -- teachers are generally opposed to tests; HMG is using this as a Trojan horse for computerised testing.
The national curriculum expects children to know their tables by 9. In fact most reasonably performing schools have done this by 7-8.
The results from a national test like this will clearly identify the sink, failing schools.
Obviously it is much better that we ignore this and the fact that we actually have secondary modern schools in all but name.
Yes, it's a trifecta of ironies. If the British hadn't carted so much of looted Assyria to London, and instead left it in situ, then virtually all would now be gone.
Similarly, I'm sure the Elgin Marbles would currently be sitting in a Berlin museum...
@OliverCooper: So Labour's Shadow Education Secretary doesn't want children to be "forced" to learn times tables? Incredible. https://t.co/6XXAK8NmZ4
@OliverCooper: Britain: "Hi, Labour - what cause do you want to champion today?" Labour: "We don't want kids learning their times tables." Oh.
It's the new Lucy Labour mantra 'educashon educashon' - she's not mastered number 3 yet.
This is not about times tables which are standard fare anyway (at least up to 10) but about testing -- teachers are generally opposed to tests; HMG is using this as a Trojan horse for computerised testing.
The national curriculum expects children to know their tables by 9. In fact most reasonably performing schools have done this by 7-8.
The results from a national test like this will clearly identify the sink, failing schools.
Obviously it is much better that we ignore this and the fact that we actually have secondary modern schools in all but name.
It is all part of the defence of mediocrity that Labour have become. More hilarious pressure group politics.
Labour have seemingly abandoned the idea that consumers are the beneficiaries of the welfare state.
@OliverCooper: So Labour's Shadow Education Secretary doesn't want children to be "forced" to learn times tables? Incredible. https://t.co/6XXAK8NmZ4
@OliverCooper: Britain: "Hi, Labour - what cause do you want to champion today?" Labour: "We don't want kids learning their times tables." Oh.
It's the new Lucy Labour mantra 'educashon educashon' - she's not mastered number 3 yet.
This is not about times tables which are standard fare anyway (at least up to 10) but about testing -- teachers are generally opposed to tests; HMG is using this as a Trojan horse for computerised testing.
The national curriculum expects children to know their tables by 9. In fact most reasonably performing schools have done this by 7-8.
The results from a national test like this will clearly identify the sink, failing schools.
Obviously it is much better that we ignore this and the fact that we actually have secondary modern schools in all but name.
It is all part of the defence of mediocrity that Labour have become. More hilarious pressure group politics.
Labour have seemingly abandoned the idea that consumers are the beneficiaries of the welfare state.
Only a Tory thinks the schools are there to educate children. They are much more important than that - without teachers who would buy the TES???
@Mr_Mark_Brown: You'd think it was nothing more than a storm in a tea cake, but the boycott brigade are thrashing their keyboards https://t.co/4N7Cdf1Ctg
@OliverCooper: So Labour's Shadow Education Secretary doesn't want children to be "forced" to learn times tables? Incredible. https://t.co/6XXAK8NmZ4
@OliverCooper: Britain: "Hi, Labour - what cause do you want to champion today?" Labour: "We don't want kids learning their times tables." Oh.
It's the new Lucy Labour mantra 'educashon educashon' - she's not mastered number 3 yet.
This is not about times tables which are standard fare anyway (at least up to 10) but about testing -- teachers are generally opposed to tests; HMG is using this as a Trojan horse for computerised testing.
The national curriculum expects children to know their tables by 9. In fact most reasonably performing schools have done this by 7-8.
The results from a national test like this will clearly identify the sink, failing schools.
Obviously it is much better that we ignore this and the fact that we actually have secondary modern schools in all but name.
It is all part of the defence of mediocrity that Labour have become. More hilarious pressure group politics.
Labour have seemingly abandoned the idea that consumers are the beneficiaries of the welfare state.
Only a Tory thinks the schools are there to educate children. They are much more important than that - without teachers who would buy the TES???
@Mr_Mark_Brown: You'd think it was nothing more than a storm in a tea cake, but the boycott brigade are thrashing their keyboards https://t.co/4N7Cdf1Ctg
I swear I hadn't seen any Tunnock's stuff for ages until last year, and now it pops up everywhere - I don't know if I just stopped noticing them in the shops, or if they have made more of a push down south recently.
@OliverCooper: So Labour's Shadow Education Secretary doesn't want children to be "forced" to learn times tables? Incredible. https://t.co/6XXAK8NmZ4
@OliverCooper: Britain: "Hi, Labour - what cause do you want to champion today?" Labour: "We don't want kids learning their times tables." Oh.
It's the new Lucy Labour mantra 'educashon educashon' - she's not mastered number 3 yet.
This is not about times tables which are standard fare anyway (at least up to 10) but about testing -- teachers are generally opposed to tests; HMG is using this as a Trojan horse for computerised testing.
The national curriculum expects children to know their tables by 9. In fact most reasonably performing schools have done this by 7-8.
The results from a national test like this will clearly identify the sink, failing schools.
Obviously it is much better that we ignore this and the fact that we actually have secondary modern schools in all but name.
Yes, as I said, this is about testing because times tables are already standard.
Actually, national tests might not only identify the sink schools. In the United States, similar testing exposed pockets of failure in the "best" schools that had been hidden by league tables. http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/no-child-left-behind-worked/
Not Diane then? Anyway, what is the mechanism for toppling Corbyn?
35 MPs can call an election as a challenge, but Corbyn's automatically on the ballot if he chooses, same process that got him elected in the first place with all the three quidders again.
He's basically leader until he chooses to resign, or until the wider Labour 'community' of members, TU members and £3ers decide to vote for a specific someone else! The MPs as a group are almost completely neutered by the new electoral system once the process is underway.
Not necessarily true, Labour's own lawyers have now said that if a challenger receives sufficient nominations Corbyn would then also need 35 MPs backing him to get on a ballot
Wishful thinking.
If and when Labour start losing by-elections it will be an argument rebel MPs will use
Not Diane then? Anyway, what is the mechanism for toppling Corbyn?
35 MPs can call an election as a challenge, but Corbyn's automatically on the ballot if he chooses, same process that got him elected in the first place with all the three quidders again.
He's basically leader until he chooses to resign, or until the wider Labour 'community' of members, TU members and £3ers decide to vote for a specific someone else! The MPs as a group are almost completely neutered by the new electoral system once the process is underway.
Not necessarily true, Labour's own lawyers have now said that if a challenger receives sufficient nominations Corbyn would then also need 35 MPs backing him to get on a ballot
You've said that a hundred times but it doesn't change the fact that it's the NEC that interprets the rules and they will surely find for Corbyn.
Depends on the circumstances and how bad Labour's electoral predicament is, in any case the NEC does not yet have a Corbynite majority
@Mr_Mark_Brown: You'd think it was nothing more than a storm in a tea cake, but the boycott brigade are thrashing their keyboards https://t.co/4N7Cdf1Ctg
I swear I hadn't seen any Tunnock's stuff for ages until last year, and now it pops up everywhere - I don't know if I just stopped noticing them in the shops, or if they have made more of a push down south recently.
At a random guess, the use of the Union Jack would be an attempt to increase sales overseas. In China, for example, people are mad for "British" stuff. Also India. Particularly if you can market it as "traditional"...
Interesting too that while Tony Benn caused problems for Kinnock from the left and ultimately stood against him for leader in 1988, now Hilary Benn is causing problems for Corbyn to his right. In any case as is suggested Benn is unlikely to be sacked but moved to another role
You think Benn will take another role? If you're Shad FS, you'd want Chancellor or Leader; everything else is humiliation.
Yes but the best way for him to become Leader is to loyally take whatever else is offered and sit and wait, that way he can play the party loyalty card and keep his profile up while being the natural choice for rebels as Corbyn's replacement. David Davis was demoted by IDS from Party Chairman to become Prescott's Shadow in 2002, he did not leave for the backbenches but stayed in post, very nearly ran against Howard in 2003 and became the frontrunner in 2005 to be the new leader (and as Hilary Benn has showed he is a far better speechmaker than DD)
Yes, it's a trifeca of ironies. If the British hadn't carted so much of looted Assyria to London, and instead left it in situ, then virtually all would now be gone.
Similarly, I'm sure the Elgin Marbles would currently be sitting in a Berlin museum...
They would have rotted away by 1941 wouldn't they?
@Mr_Mark_Brown: You'd think it was nothing more than a storm in a tea cake, but the boycott brigade are thrashing their keyboards https://t.co/4N7Cdf1Ctg
Never heard of them but I'm surprised they felt it necessary to drop the Scottish lion -- we are used to lions on our eggs and, in England, on our football shirts. In any case, is there any evidence of Scottish produce being shunned by shoppers south of Hadrian's Wall? Have Scotch drinkers switched en masse to Jameson's or Jack Daniel's? It looks like the marketing department has a tin ear.
Interesting too that while Tony Benn caused problems for Kinnock from the left and ultimately stood against him for leader in 1988, now Hilary Benn is causing problems for Corbyn to his right. In any case as is suggested Benn is unlikely to be sacked but moved to another role
You think Benn will take another role? If you're Shad FS, you'd want Chancellor or Leader; everything else is humiliation.
Yes but the best way for him to become Leader is to loyally take whatever else is offered and sit and wait, that way he can play the party loyalty card and keep his profile up while being the natural choice for rebels as Corbyn's replacement. David Davis was demoted by IDS from Party Chairman to become Prescott's Shadow, he did not leave for the backbenches but stayed in post, very nearly ran against Howard in 2003 and became the frontrunner in 2005 to be the new leader (and as Hilary Benn has showed he is a far better speechmaker than DD)
You do know that the future doesn't have to follow the past, right?
Not Diane then? Anyway, what is the mechanism for toppling Corbyn?
35 MPs can call an election as a challenge, but Corbyn's automatically on the ballot if he chooses, same process that got him elected in the first place with all the three quidders again.
He's basically leader until he chooses to resign, or until the wider Labour 'community' of members, TU members and £3ers decide to vote for a specific someone else! The MPs as a group are almost completely neutered by the new electoral system once the process is underway.
Not necessarily true, Labour's own lawyers have now said that if a challenger receives sufficient nominations Corbyn would then also need 35 MPs backing him to get on a ballot
You've said that a hundred times but it doesn't change the fact that it's the NEC that interprets the rules and they will surely find for Corbyn.
Quite so. Moreover, it is in reality inconceivable that MPs should conspire to remove a leader who gained 60% of the vote and prevent the membership from having a say. That is one action that would lead even the most moderate members to support mass deselection. If anyone wants to replace him with candidate X, X needs to say explicitly that (s)he wants the job, and to set out the alternative programme that they propose. At that point, 35 MPs can bring an election about and people can choose between Corbyn, X and anyone else who puts themselves forward.
At present, there is no X in sight (the only person who has said he's ready to stand is Mr Danczuk - good luck with that) and no alternative programme. So opponents should see if they can address that issue and otherwise stop wasting everyone's time.
@Mr_Mark_Brown: You'd think it was nothing more than a storm in a tea cake, but the boycott brigade are thrashing their keyboards https://t.co/4N7Cdf1Ctg
Never heard of them but I'm surprised they felt it necessary to drop the Scottish lion -- we are used to lions on our eggs and, in England, on our football shirts. In any case, is there any evidence of Scottish produce being shunned by shoppers south of Hadrian's Wall? Have Scotch drinkers switched en masse to Jameson's or Jack Daniel's? It looks like the marketing department has a tin ear.
Apparently they are doing really well at the moment, so their decisions have worked to date I guess.
Not Diane then? Anyway, what is the mechanism for toppling Corbyn?
35 MPs can call an election as a challenge, but Corbyn's automatically on the ballot if he chooses, same process that got him elected in the first place with all the three quidders again.
He's basically leader until he chooses to resign, or until the wider Labour 'community' of members, TU members and £3ers decide to vote for a specific someone else! The MPs as a group are almost completely neutered by the new electoral system once the process is underway.
Not necessarily true, Labour's own lawyers have now said that if a challenger receives sufficient nominations Corbyn would then also need 35 MPs backing him to get on a ballot
You've said that a hundred times but it doesn't change the fact that it's the NEC that interprets the rules and they will surely find for Corbyn.
Depends on the circumstances and how bad Labour's electoral predicament is, in any case the NEC does not yet have a Corbynite majority
Afternoon all,
I doubt there will be moves against Corbyn this early in parliament. He has to at least lead the party to slaughter in May's elections before doubts amongst the faithful start to sink in.
Labour's more moderate wing would do well to spend this time thinking about what they actually stand for and outlining new policies ready for the post GE-2020 internal bloodbath, I mean debate.
Mentally cooked. Glad I got my £20 in on England at 1.91.
The next 20 minutes until tea are crucial, if SA lose another now they're probably screwed. Anderson and Broad hammering them down near off stump with four slips in place probably isn't helping their nerves much either.
@Mr_Mark_Brown: You'd think it was nothing more than a storm in a tea cake, but the boycott brigade are thrashing their keyboards https://t.co/4N7Cdf1Ctg
That Daily Record article is fairly bananas, too. "1 billion people watched the opening ceremony of the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow."
They literally believe that 15% of humanity say down and watched an obscure athletics ceremony with dancing teacakes broadcast from Britain's fifth biggest city.
Do Scots actually believe all this Nationalistic chest-beating nonsense?
The Daily Record isn't 'Nationalistic', more Glasgowistic. Not many people of any persuasion believe its guff.
@Mr_Mark_Brown: You'd think it was nothing more than a storm in a tea cake, but the boycott brigade are thrashing their keyboards https://t.co/4N7Cdf1Ctg
That Daily Record article is fairly bananas, too. "1 billion people watched the opening ceremony of the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow."
They literally believe that 15% of humanity say down and watched an obscure athletics ceremony with dancing teacakes broadcast from Britain's fifth biggest city.
Do Scots actually believe all this Nationalistic chest-beating nonsense?
Quite possible when you consider India takes part in the Commonwealth Games and has a population of over 1 billion just by itself
That was surely Elgar's fault. Van Zyl ran the best part of 2.
50/50. That was no easy single, even if it was Van Zyl's call he shouldn't have charged quite so much without seeing that Elgar was coming as well.
No for me its Elgar. As you say it was Van Zyl's call. If he had come and not hesitated it would have been fairly straightforward. Brain fade from too much time in the field and a thumping with the ball.
Not Diane then? Anyway, what is the mechanism for toppling Corbyn?
35 MPs can call an election as a challenge, but Corbyn's automatically on the ballot if he chooses, same process that got him elected in the first place with all the three quidders again.
He's basically leader until he chooses to resign, or until the wider Labour 'community' of members, TU members and £3ers decide to vote for a specific someone else! The MPs as a group are almost completely neutered by the new electoral system once the process is underway.
Not necessarily true, Labour's own lawyers have now said that if a challenger receives sufficient nominations Corbyn would then also need 35 MPs backing him to get on a ballot
You've said that a hundred times but it doesn't change the fact that it's the NEC that interprets the rules and they will surely find for Corbyn.
Quite so. Moreover, it is in reality inconceivable that MPs should conspire to remove a leader who gained 60% of the vote and prevent the membership from having a say. That is one action that would lead even the most moderate members to support mass deselection. If anyone wants to replace him with candidate X, X needs to say explicitly that (s)he wants the job, and to set out the alternative programme that they propose. At that point, 35 MPs can bring an election about and people can choose between Corbyn, X and anyone else who puts themselves forward.
At present, there is no X in sight (the only person who has said he's ready to stand is Mr Danczuk - good luck with that) and no alternative programme. So opponents should see if they can address that issue and otherwise stop wasting everyone's time.
A Frank Field stalking horse leadership challenge might work...
To be honest, if the Labour MPs are afraid of their membership then they're not fit for government. With the current membership they'll never take power.
@Mr_Mark_Brown: You'd think it was nothing more than a storm in a tea cake, but the boycott brigade are thrashing their keyboards https://t.co/4N7Cdf1Ctg
That Daily Record article is fairly bananas, too. "1 billion people watched the opening ceremony of the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow."
They literally believe that 15% of humanity say down and watched an obscure athletics ceremony with dancing teacakes broadcast from Britain's fifth biggest city.
Do Scots actually buy all this Nationalistic chest-beating nonsense?
Interesting too that while Tony Benn caused problems for Kinnock from the left and ultimately stood against him for leader in 1988, now Hilary Benn is causing problems for Corbyn to his right. In any case as is suggested Benn is unlikely to be sacked but moved to another role
You think Benn will take another role? If you're Shad FS, you'd want Chancellor or Leader; everything else is humiliation.
Yes but the best way for him to become Leader is to loyally take whatever else is offered and sit and wait, that way he can play the party loyalty card and keep his profile up while being the natural choice for rebels as Corbyn's replacement. David Davis was demoted by IDS from Party Chairman to become Prescott's Shadow, he did not leave for the backbenches but stayed in post, very nearly ran against Howard in 2003 and became the frontrunner in 2005 to be the new leader (and as Hilary Benn has showed he is a far better speechmaker than DD)
You do know that the future doesn't have to follow the past, right?
No but the similarities between Corbyn's leadership and IDS' leadership of the Tory Party are uncanny and both were elected by 60% of party members while failing to win the backing of their MPs
Interesting too that while Tony Benn caused problems for Kinnock from the left and ultimately stood against him for leader in 1988, now Hilary Benn is causing problems for Corbyn to his right. In any case as is suggested Benn is unlikely to be sacked but moved to another role
You think Benn will take another role? If you're Shad FS, you'd want Chancellor or Leader; everything else is humiliation.
Yes but the best way for him to become Leader is to loyally take whatever else is offered and sit and wait, that way he can play the party loyalty card and keep his profile up while being the natural choice for rebels as Corbyn's replacement. David Davis was demoted by IDS from Party Chairman to become Prescott's Shadow, he did not leave for the backbenches but stayed in post, very nearly ran against Howard in 2003 and became the frontrunner in 2005 to be the new leader (and as Hilary Benn has showed he is a far better speechmaker than DD)
You do know that the future doesn't have to follow the past, right?
No but the similarities between Corbyn's leadership and IDS' leadership of the Tory Party are uncanny and both were elected by 60% of party members while failing to win the backing of their MPs
Corbyn and IDS also are similar in that they are both men.
A dog has four legs, my cat has four legs, therefore my cat is a dog.
Interesting too that while Tony Benn caused problems for Kinnock from the left and ultimately stood against him for leader in 1988, now Hilary Benn is causing problems for Corbyn to his right. In any case as is suggested Benn is unlikely to be sacked but moved to another role
You think Benn will take another role? If you're Shad FS, you'd want Chancellor or Leader; everything else is humiliation.
Yes but the best way for him to become Leader is to loyally take whatever else is offered and sit and wait, that way he can play the party loyalty card and keep his profile up while being the natural choice for rebels as Corbyn's replacement. David Davis was demoted by IDS from Party Chairman to become Prescott's Shadow, he did not leave for the backbenches but stayed in post, very nearly ran against Howard in 2003 and became the frontrunner in 2005 to be the new leader (and as Hilary Benn has showed he is a far better speechmaker than DD)
You do know that the future doesn't have to follow the past, right?
No but the similarities between Corbyn's leadership and IDS' leadership of the Tory Party are uncanny and both were elected by 60% of party members while failing to win the backing of their MPs
Corbyn and IDS also are similar in that they are both men.
A dog has four legs, my cat has four legs, therefore my cat is a dog.
Not Diane then? Anyway, what is the mechanism for toppling Corbyn?
35 MPs can call an election as a challenge, but Corbyn's automatically on the ballot if he chooses, same process that got him elected in the first place with all the three quidders again.
He's basically leader until he chooses to resign, or until the wider Labour 'community' of members, TU members and £3ers decide to vote for a specific someone else! The MPs as a group are almost completely neutered by the new electoral system once the process is underway.
Not necessarily true, Labour's own lawyers have now said that if a challenger receives sufficient nominations Corbyn would then also need 35 MPs backing him to get on a ballot
You've said that a hundred times but it doesn't change the fact that it's the NEC that interprets the rules and they will surely find for Corbyn.
Quite so. Moreover, it is in reality inconceivable that MPs should conspire to remove a leader who gained 60% of the vote and prevent the membership from having a say. That is one action that would lead even the most moderate members to support mass deselection. If anyone wants to replace him with candidate X, X needs to say explicitly that (s)he wants the job, and to set out the alternative programme that they propose. At that point, 35 MPs can bring an election about and people can choose between Corbyn, X and anyone else who puts themselves forward.
At present, there is no X in sight (the only person who has said he's ready to stand is Mr Danczuk - good luck with that) and no alternative programme. So opponents should see if they can address that issue and otherwise stop wasting everyone's time.
A Frank Field stalking horse leadership challenge might work...
To be honest, if the Labour MPs are afraid of their membership then they're not fit for government. With the current membership they'll never take power.
Yes, there needs to be an alternative programme. One of the papers this morning had some briefing from Corbyn's guys that the party is generally in agreement on domestic matters such as the economy - it is only foreign and defence that is causing upsets. Is this true? Seems highly unlikely that Chukka and Hunt are in favour of people's QE and mass nationalisations.
Interesting too that while Tony Benn caused problems for Kinnock from the left and ultimately stood against him for leader in 1988, now Hilary Benn is causing problems for Corbyn to his right. In any case as is suggested Benn is unlikely to be sacked but moved to another role
You think Benn will take another role? If you're Shad FS, you'd want Chancellor or Leader; everything else is humiliation.
Yes but the best way for him to become Leader is to loyally take whatever else is offered and sit and wait, that way he can play the party loyalty card and keep his profile up while being the natural choice for rebels as Corbyn's replacement. David Davis was demoted by IDS from Party Chairman to become Prescott's Shadow, he did not leave for the backbenches but stayed in post, very nearly ran against Howard in 2003 and became the frontrunner in 2005 to be the new leader (and as Hilary Benn has showed he is a far better speechmaker than DD)
You do know that the future doesn't have to follow the past, right?
No but the similarities between Corbyn's leadership and IDS' leadership of the Tory Party are uncanny and both were elected by 60% of party members while failing to win the backing of their MPs
Corbyn and IDS also are similar in that they are both men.
A dog has four legs, my cat has four legs, therefore my cat is a dog.
Not Diane then? Anyway, what is the mechanism for toppling Corbyn?
35 MPs can call an election as a challenge, but Corbyn's automatically on the ballot if he chooses, same process that got him elected in the first place with all the three quidders again.
He's basically leader until he chooses to resign, or until the wider Labour 'community' of members, TU members and £3ers decide to vote for a specific someone else! The MPs as a group are almost completely neutered by the new electoral system once the process is underway.
Not necessarily true, Labour's own lawyers have now said that if a challenger receives sufficient nominations Corbyn would then also need 35 MPs backing him to get on a ballot
You've said that a hundred times but it doesn't change the fact that it's the NEC that interprets the rules and they will surely find for Corbyn.
Quite so. Moreover, it is in reality inconceivable that MPs should conspire to remove a leader who gained 60% of the vote and prevent the membership from having a say. That is one action that would lead even the most moderate members to support mass deselection. If anyone wants to replace him with candidate X, X needs to say explicitly that (s)he wants the job, and to set out the alternative programme that they propose. At that point, 35 MPs can bring an election about and people can choose between Corbyn, X and anyone else who puts themselves forward.
At present, there is no X in sight (the only person who has said he's ready to stand is Mr Danczuk - good luck with that) and no alternative programme. So opponents should see if they can address that issue and otherwise stop wasting everyone's time.
Why not? IDS won 60.7% of Tory members votes in 2001 and was deposed by Tory MPs without giving the membership a say, Corbyn won 59.5% of Labour members votes, technically fewer than IDS did. There was no mass deselection of Tory MPs as a result. There is no point even launching a challenge if members are consulted as they will obviously back Corbyn just as Tory members would have likely backed IDS in 2003
Ha, Bairstow dropped!!!! When it's not your day...
You are actually believing all this? You will be cheerleading for the Tour de France next.
If your implication is there is corruption going on, I prefer to enjoy my sporting moments with innocence, and wait for dark truths to ruin it later, should that happen, rather than just mope about how it is all fake and corrupt beforehand, and be unable to enjoy it at any time.
@Mr_Mark_Brown: You'd think it was nothing more than a storm in a tea cake, but the boycott brigade are thrashing their keyboards https://t.co/4N7Cdf1Ctg
Never heard of them but I'm surprised they felt it necessary to drop the Scottish lion -- we are used to lions on our eggs and, in England, on our football shirts. In any case, is there any evidence of Scottish produce being shunned by shoppers south of Hadrian's Wall? Have Scotch drinkers switched en masse to Jameson's or Jack Daniel's? It looks like the marketing department has a tin ear.
Not at all. If you read the article they are trying to surf the "Great British Bake Off" wave. Sees eminently sensible to me, as the programme has become an emblem of new inclusive Britishness, and our great tradition of cakes (not that I ever watch it, I prefer Masterchef)
I did read it but cannot see why removing the lion was necessary: I don't think we care and frankly, I doubt we'd recognise the lion as Scottish anyway. And yes, Masterchef is far better than Bake Off. If Mark hasn't got a star in the next two years, we should boycott French tyres.
Edit: also, Bake Off is generally abbreviated to Bake Off, without the Great British, just as Strictly is known as Strictly.
Not Diane then? Anyway, what is the mechanism for toppling Corbyn?
35 MPs can call an election as a challenge, but Corbyn's automatically on the ballot if he chooses, same process that got him elected in the first place with all the three quidders again.
He's basically leader until he chooses to resign, or until the wider Labour 'community' of members, TU members and £3ers decide to vote for a specific someone else! The MPs as a group are almost completely neutered by the new electoral system once the process is underway.
Not necessarily true, Labour's own lawyers have now said that if a challenger receives sufficient nominations Corbyn would then also need 35 MPs backing him to get on a ballot
You've said that a hundred times but it doesn't change the fact that it's the NEC that interprets the rules and they will surely find for Corbyn.
Depends on the circumstances and how bad Labour's electoral predicament is, in any case the NEC does not yet have a Corbynite majority
Afternoon all,
I doubt there will be moves against Corbyn this early in parliament. He has to at least lead the party to slaughter in May's elections before doubts amongst the faithful start to sink in.
Labour's more moderate wing would do well to spend this time thinking about what they actually stand for and outlining new policies ready for the post GE-2020 internal bloodbath, I mean debate.
I would agree with that, it would take terrible local election results, falling behind the Tories in Scotland, losing the London Mayoral race or losing a by-election to UKIP for Corbyn to be toppled
Not Diane then? Anyway, what is the mechanism for toppling Corbyn?
35 MPs can call an election as a challenge, but Corbyn's automatically on the ballot if he chooses, same process that got him elected in the first place with all the three quidders again.
He's basically leader until he chooses to resign, or until the wider Labour 'community' of members, TU members and £3ers decide to vote for a specific someone else! The MPs as a group are almost completely neutered by the new electoral system once the process is underway.
Not necessarily true, Labour's own lawyers have now said that if a challenger receives sufficient nominations Corbyn would then also need 35 MPs backing him to get on a ballot
You've said that a hundred times but it doesn't change the fact that it's the NEC that interprets the rules and they will surely find for Corbyn.
Quite so. Moreover, it is in reality inconceivable that MPs should conspire to remove a leader who gained 60% of the vote and prevent the membership from having a say. That is one action that would lead even the most moderate members to support mass deselection. If anyone wants to replace him with candidate X, X needs to say explicitly that (s)he wants the job, and to set out the alternative programme that they propose. At that point, 35 MPs can bring an election about and people can choose between Corbyn, X and anyone else who puts themselves forward.
At present, there is no X in sight (the only person who has said he's ready to stand is Mr Danczuk - good luck with that) and no alternative programme. So opponents should see if they can address that issue and otherwise stop wasting everyone's time.
A Frank Field stalking horse leadership challenge might work...
To be honest, if the Labour MPs are afraid of their membership then they're not fit for government. With the current membership they'll never take power.
Yes, there needs to be an alternative programme. One of the papers this morning had some briefing from Corbyn's guys that the party is generally in agreement on domestic matters such as the economy - it is only foreign and defence that is causing upsets. Is this true? Seems highly unlikely that Chukka and Hunt are in favour of people's QE and mass nationalisations.
Hah! I had forgotten about people's QE!
Just shows how 'well' the Labour Party are doing at communicating their 'message':
Inactivity abroad, getting along with everyone who dislikes us and bolstering a mediocre public sector...
Interesting too that while Tony Benn caused problems for Kinnock from the left and ultimately stood against him for leader in 1988, now Hilary Benn is causing problems for Corbyn to his right. In any case as is suggested Benn is unlikely to be sacked but moved to another role
You think Benn will take another role? If you're Shad FS, you'd want Chancellor or Leader; everything else is humiliation.
Yes but the best way for him to become Leader is to loyally take whatever else is offered and sit and wait, that way he can play the party loyalty card and keep his profile up while being the natural choice for rebels as Corbyn's replacement. David Davis was demoted by IDS from Party Chairman to become Prescott's Shadow, he did not leave for the backbenches but stayed in post, very nearly ran against Howard in 2003 and became the frontrunner in 2005 to be the new leader (and as Hilary Benn has showed he is a far better speechmaker than DD)
You do know that the future doesn't have to follow the past, right?
No but the similarities between Corbyn's leadership and IDS' leadership of the Tory Party are uncanny and both were elected by 60% of party members while failing to win the backing of their MPs
Corbyn and IDS also are similar in that they are both men.
A dog has four legs, my cat has four legs, therefore my cat is a dog.
And, amazingly, they're both politicians....
Will the similarities never end.
Is Corbyn a politician? He doesn't seem very good at politics.
Not Diane then? Anyway, what is the mechanism for toppling Corbyn?
35 MPs can call an election as a challenge, but Corbyn's automatically on the ballot if he chooses, same process that got him elected in the first place with all the three quidders again.
He's basically leader until he chooses to resign, or until the wider Labour 'community' of members, TU members and £3ers decide to vote for a specific someone else! The MPs as a group are almost completely neutered by the new electoral system once the process is underway.
Not necessarily true, Labour's own lawyers have now said that if a challenger receives sufficient nominations Corbyn would then also need 35 MPs backing him to get on a ballot
You've said that a hundred times but it doesn't change the fact that it's the NEC that interprets the rules and they will surely find for Corbyn.
Depends on the circumstances and how bad Labour's electoral predicament is, in any case the NEC does not yet have a Corbynite majority
Afternoon all,
I doubt there will be moves against Corbyn this early in parliament. He has to at least lead the party to slaughter in May's elections before doubts amongst the faithful start to sink in.
Labour's more moderate wing would do well to spend this time thinking about what they actually stand for and outlining new policies ready for the post GE-2020 internal bloodbath, I mean debate.
I would agree with that, it would take terrible local election results, falling behind the Tories in Scotland, losing the London Mayoral race or losing a by-election to UKIP for Corbyn to be toppled
Some of these can be arranged! Perhaps not all of them though.
Interesting too that while Tony Benn caused problems for Kinnock from the left and ultimately stood against him for leader in 1988, now Hilary Benn is causing problems for Corbyn to his right. In any case as is suggested Benn is unlikely to be sacked but moved to another role
You think Benn will take another role? If you're Shad FS, you'd want Chancellor or Leader; everything else is humiliation.
Yes but the best way for him to become Leader is to loyally take whatever else is offered and sit and wait, that way he can play the party loyalty card and keep his profile up while being the natural choice for rebels as Corbyn's replacement. David Davis was demoted by IDS from Party Chairman to become Prescott's Shadow, he did not leave for the backbenches but stayed in post, very nearly ran against Howard in 2003 and became the frontrunner in 2005 to be the new leader (and as Hilary Benn has showed he is a far better speechmaker than DD)
You do know that the future doesn't have to follow the past, right?
No but the similarities between Corbyn's leadership and IDS' leadership of the Tory Party are uncanny and both were elected by 60% of party members while failing to win the backing of their MPs
Corbyn and IDS also are similar in that they are both men.
A dog has four legs, my cat has four legs, therefore my cat is a dog.
And, amazingly, they're both politicians....
Will the similarities never end.
Is Corbyn a politician? He doesn't seem very good at politics.
Have you not seen his mahoosive majority in Islington? Sign of an awesome politician the Corbynites on twitter tell me.
Not Diane then? Anyway, what is the mechanism for toppling Corbyn?
35 MPs can call an election as a challenge, but Corbyn's automatically on the ballot if he chooses, same process that got him elected in the first place with all the three quidders again.
He's basically leader until he chooses to resign, or until the wider Labour 'community' of members, TU members and £3ers decide to vote for a specific someone else! The MPs as a group are almost completely neutered by the new electoral system once the process is underway.
Not necessarily true, Labour's own lawyers have now said that if a challenger receives sufficient nominations Corbyn would then also need 35 MPs backing him to get on a ballot
You've said that a hundred times but it doesn't change the fact that it's the NEC that interprets the rules and they will surely find for Corbyn.
Depends on the circumstances and how bad Labour's electoral predicament is, in any case the NEC does not yet have a Corbynite majority
Afternoon all,
I doubt there will be moves against Corbyn this early in parliament. He has to at least lead the party to slaughter in May's elections before doubts amongst the faithful start to sink in.
Labour's more moderate wing would do well to spend this time thinking about what they actually stand for and outlining new policies ready for the post GE-2020 internal bloodbath, I mean debate.
I would agree with that, it would take terrible local election results, falling behind the Tories in Scotland, losing the London Mayoral race or losing a by-election to UKIP for Corbyn to be toppled
Some of these can be arranged! Perhaps not all of them though.
It does not necessarily have to be all, though if the former all occurred next May a challenge would be inevitable and if Labour does start losing by-elections a challenge would likely not be too far off either
@Mr_Mark_Brown: You'd think it was nothing more than a storm in a tea cake, but the boycott brigade are thrashing their keyboards https://t.co/4N7Cdf1Ctg
Never heard of them but I'm surprised they felt it necessary to drop the Scottish lion -- we are used to lions on our eggs and, in England, on our football shirts. In any case, is there any evidence of Scottish produce being shunned by shoppers south of Hadrian's Wall? Have Scotch drinkers switched en masse to Jameson's or Jack Daniel's? It looks like the marketing department has a tin ear. </blockquote
they are diehard unionists, with a bit of luck no-one will buy their crap products. Ashamed to be Scottish, pathetic cretins.
Ha, Bairstow dropped!!!! When it's not your day...
You are actually believing all this? You will be cheerleading for the Tour de France next.
If gamblers in Singapore wanted to fix a match to their profit, they wouldn't be so stupid as to demand a world record breaking session of play.
It's like picking someone's pocket by pushing the victim to the ground and slowly rummaging through all their pockets while wearing a tartan clown jumpsuit.
And to get it, you'd need to bribe half the South African team.
Not Diane then? Anyway, what is the mechanism for toppling Corbyn?
35 MPs can call an election as a challenge, but Corbyn's automatically on the ballot if he chooses, same process that got him elected in the first place with all the three quidders again.
He's basically leader until he chooses to resign, or until the wider Labour 'community' of members, TU members and £3ers decide to vote for a specific someone else! The MPs as a group are almost completely neutered by the new electoral system once the process is underway.
Not necessarily true, Labour's own lawyers have now said that if a challenger receives sufficient nominations Corbyn would then also need 35 MPs backing him to get on a ballot
You've said that a hundred times but it doesn't change the fact that it's the NEC that interprets the rules and they will surely find for Corbyn.
At present, there is no X in sight (the only person who has said he's ready to stand is Mr Danczuk - good luck with that) and no alternative programme. So opponents should see if they can address that issue and otherwise stop wasting everyone's time.
A Frank Field stalking horse leadership challenge might work...
To be honest, if the Labour MPs are afraid of their membership then they're not fit for government. With the current membership they'll never take power.
Yes, there needs to be an alternative programme. One of the papers this morning had some briefing from Corbyn's guys that the party is generally in agreement on domestic matters such as the economy - it is only foreign and defence that is causing upsets. Is this true? Seems highly unlikely that Chukka and Hunt are in favour of people's QE and mass nationalisations.
Hah! I had forgotten about people's QE!
Just shows how 'well' the Labour Party are doing at communicating their 'message':
Inactivity abroad, getting along with everyone who dislikes us and bolstering a mediocre public sector...
Important not to forget people's QE. Perhaps it will be ditched if McDonnell actually listens to his council of Noble-winning economists. Surely Stiglitz would only sanctioned such a policy if there was a 1930s-style depression?
Interesting too that while Tony Benn caused problems for Kinnock from the left and ultimately stood against him for leader in 1988, now Hilary Benn is causing problems for Corbyn to his right. In any case as is suggested Benn is unlikely to be sacked but moved to another role
You think Benn will take another role? If you're Shad FS, you'd want Chancellor or Leader; everything else is humiliation.
Yes but the best way for him to become Leader is to loyally take whatever else is offered and sit and wait, that way he can play the party loyalty card and keep his profile up while being the natural choice for rebels as Corbyn's replacement. David Davis was demoted by IDS from Party Chairman to become Prescott's Shadow, he did not leave for the backbenches but stayed in post, very nearly ran against Howard in 2003 and became the frontrunner in 2005 to be the new leader (and as Hilary Benn has showed he is a far better speechmaker than DD)
You do know that the future doesn't have to follow the past, right?
No but the similarities between Corbyn's leadership and IDS' leadership of the Tory Party are uncanny and both were elected by 60% of party members while failing to win the backing of their MPs
Corbyn and IDS also are similar in that they are both men.
A dog has four legs, my cat has four legs, therefore my cat is a dog.
They are similar in that they represent the victory of an ideological membership over more moderate and pragmatic MPs just after their party has suffered a crushing general election defeat
@Mr_Mark_Brown: You'd think it was nothing more than a storm in a tea cake, but the boycott brigade are thrashing their keyboards https://t.co/4N7Cdf1Ctg
That Daily Record article is fairly bananas, too. "1 billion people watched the opening ceremony of the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow."
They literally believe that 15% of humanity say down and watched an obscure athletics ceremony with dancing teacakes broadcast from Britain's fifth biggest city.
Do Scots actually believe all this Nationalistic chest-beating nonsense?
The Daily Record isn't 'Nationalistic', more Glasgowistic. Not many people of any persuasion believe its guff.
@Mr_Mark_Brown: You'd think it was nothing more than a storm in a tea cake, but the boycott brigade are thrashing their keyboards https://t.co/4N7Cdf1Ctg
Never heard of them but I'm surprised they felt it necessary to drop the Scottish lion -- we are used to lions on our eggs and, in England, on our football shirts. In any case, is there any evidence of Scottish produce being shunned by shoppers south of Hadrian's Wall? Have Scotch drinkers switched en masse to Jameson's or Jack Daniel's? It looks like the marketing department has a tin ear.
Not at all. If you read the article they are trying to surf the "Great British Bake Off" wave. Sees eminently sensible to me, as the programme has become an emblem of new inclusive Britishness, and our great tradition of cakes (not that I ever watch it, I prefer Masterchef)
I did read it but cannot see why removing the lion was necessary: I don't think we care and frankly, I doubt we'd recognise the lion as Scottish anyway. And yes, Masterchef is far better than Bake Off. If Mark hasn't got a star in the next two years, we should boycott French tyres.
Edit: also, Bake Off is generally abbreviated to Bake Off, without the Great British, just as Strictly is known as Strictly.
I can't see the point of changing it south of the border, particularly if they are selling well already - although the scottish brand is strong overseas, I can see for a product like teacakes going with the union flag is possibly more useful, but we'll see. They do appear to be enthusiastic unionists, which is unusual on both sides of the border quite frankly given the financial arguments used up north and lack of passionate support down south, which is nice to see.
" If the reactionary thought-criminals of the PLP think they are being "provoked" by Corbyn, they are hallucinating.
In a sense I agree - the opposition to Corbyn has been at times openly hostile, so anything he does is provocation in one sense - although if he escalates the cold war or instigates a new front, he might still be considered the provocateur. I think he's right, as leader, to want a team that at least partially supports him - I am not convinced that the level of open hostility and near contempt from some he has faced is just usual business - and might as well do it now as better for both sides in the long run, but they cannot get offended. I think even Dan Hodges was a little mocking of the Labour rebels acting offended.
Maggie purged the 'wets' as the weren't 'One of us'. Corby should do the same.
Maggie rarely purged anyone. She created a new cabinet but only after winning an election in 1983. Usually it was the right wingers who (as usual) made tits out of themselves and resigned. Ridley comes to mind.
@Mr_Mark_Brown: You'd think it was nothing more than a storm in a tea cake, but the boycott brigade are thrashing their keyboards https://t.co/4N7Cdf1Ctg
Never heard of them but I'm surprised they felt it necessary to drop the Scottish lion -- we are used to lions on our eggs and, in England, on our football shirts. In any case, is there any evidence of Scottish produce being shunned by shoppers south of Hadrian's Wall? Have Scotch drinkers switched en masse to Jameson's or Jack Daniel's? It looks like the marketing department has a tin ear.
Not at all. If you read the article they are trying to surf the "Great British Bake Off" wave. Sees eminently sensible to me, as the programme has become an emblem of new inclusive Britishness, and our great tradition of cakes (not that I ever watch it, I prefer Masterchef)
I did read it but cannot see why removing the lion was necessary: I don't think we care and frankly, I doubt we'd recognise the lion as Scottish anyway. And yes, Masterchef is far better than Bake Off. If Mark hasn't got a star in the next two years, we should boycott French tyres.
Edit: also, Bake Off is generally abbreviated to Bake Off, without the Great British, just as Strictly is known as Strictly.
“We could have said Scottish but you’re then promoting Scotland. We’re British.”
@Mr_Mark_Brown: You'd think it was nothing more than a storm in a tea cake, but the boycott brigade are thrashing their keyboards https://t.co/4N7Cdf1Ctg
Never heard of them but I'm surprised they felt it necessary to drop the Scottish lion -- we are used to lions on our eggs and, in England, on our football shirts. In any case, is there any evidence of Scottish produce being shunned by shoppers south of Hadrian's Wall? Have Scotch drinkers switched en masse to Jameson's or Jack Daniel's? It looks like the marketing department has a tin ear.
Not at all. If you read the article they are trying to surf the "Great British Bake Off" wave. Sees eminently sensible to me, as the programme has become an emblem of new inclusive Britishness, and our great tradition of cakes (not that I ever watch it, I prefer Masterchef)
I did read it but cannot see why removing the lion was necessary: I don't think we care and frankly, I doubt we'd recognise the lion as Scottish anyway. And yes, Masterchef is far better than Bake Off. If Mark hasn't got a star in the next two years, we should boycott French tyres.
Edit: also, Bake Off is generally abbreviated to Bake Off, without the Great British, just as Strictly is known as Strictly.
“We could have said Scottish but you’re then promoting Scotland. We’re British.”
Seems a tad...ideological.
You meant logical, right? Damn autocorrect.
I am proud to be British and English (and Welsh and N.Irish, too). There isn't any politics there. Just patriotism.
Yes, it's a trifecta of ironies. If the British hadn't carted so much of looted Assyria to London, and instead left it in situ, then virtually all would now be gone.
Isn't there a rather bigger 'If the British hadn't' elephant in the room?
Mr. 1000, one suspects the future of Mr. Cameron will be decided by Mrs. Cameron.
Ha, true. He gives the impression of being a family man who would like to spend time watching his kids grow up, away from the pressure of office. It's a side-effect of politicians becoming younger, and of people in general marrying later in life.
Not to me he, comes across as a snake oil salesman. He will be on lots of boards enriching himself even further for a few hours attendance a year like all these privileged elite plonkers do.
A fair description, IMHO! One of Malc's better posts.
You have got to be joking. The worlds leading snake oil salesman is Salmond
Comments
Each child has two surnames with the father's surname preceding the mother's. To be precise, they have the father's first surname followed by the mother's first surname. So the child of Pedro Lopez Garcia and Maria Santos Gomez would have the surnames Lopez Santos.
Where the father is not known the child is given both the mother's surnames but usually with the order reversed. So the illegitimate child of Maria Santos Gomez would have the surnames Gomez Santos.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8W8-z30j8I8
He seems imo to be the ultimate example of group think.
(edit - Morkel: oops).
Making Emily Thornberry Shadow Foreign Secretary seems like a sound plan to me. First off: top 4 Labour jobs are men, which is unacceptable
And 250+ for Stokes.
How many more?
And that's it!!! Run out for 258 off only 198 balls. Partnership of 399 is a Test record for the sixth wicket.
If you read the accounts of the period, both by herself and others, she saw her role as leader of a party that had a range of views. She believed leadership consisted of leading these groups in a common direction. Not in destroying all those who weren't born again Thatcherites.
"When the legend becomes fact, print the legend."
Eng 629/6dec. The most amazing Test innings I think I've ever watched - I'm supposed to be working today, fat chance of that happening now.
The results from a national test like this will clearly identify the sink, failing schools.
Obviously it is much better that we ignore this and the fact that we actually have secondary modern schools in all but name.
Labour have seemingly abandoned the idea that consumers are the beneficiaries of the welfare state.
#SAvENG
Actually, national tests might not only identify the sink schools. In the United States, similar testing exposed pockets of failure in the "best" schools that had been hidden by league tables.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/no-child-left-behind-worked/
At present, there is no X in sight (the only person who has said he's ready to stand is Mr Danczuk - good luck with that) and no alternative programme. So opponents should see if they can address that issue and otherwise stop wasting everyone's time.
I doubt there will be moves against Corbyn this early in parliament. He has to at least lead the party to slaughter in May's elections before doubts amongst the faithful start to sink in.
Labour's more moderate wing would do well to spend this time thinking about what they actually stand for and outlining new policies ready for the post GE-2020 internal bloodbath, I mean debate.
Not many people of any persuasion believe its guff.
To be honest, if the Labour MPs are afraid of their membership then they're not fit for government. With the current membership they'll never take power.
A dog has four legs, my cat has four legs, therefore my cat is a dog.
Edit: also, Bake Off is generally abbreviated to Bake Off, without the Great British, just as Strictly is known as Strictly.
Just shows how 'well' the Labour Party are doing at communicating their 'message':
Inactivity abroad, getting along with everyone who dislikes us and bolstering a mediocre public sector...
Good day all.
Edit: And they survive to make tea. 24/1, only 605 behind!
Seems a tad...ideological.
1979: 72%
1992: 62%
2010: 54%
2015: 50%
https://twitter.com/robfordmancs?lang=en-gb
I am proud to be British and English (and Welsh and N.Irish, too). There isn't any politics there. Just patriotism.
https://twitter.com/lefty_loons/status/683625130476605440
Not 100% sure, but this could be photoshopped? https://t.co/Py090AAPYM