Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Keeping Benn as shadow Foreign Sec could make Corbyn look
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Keeping Benn as shadow Foreign Sec could make Corbyn look weak but sacking him could be even more dangerous
At present I haven’t seen any betting markets on Hilary Benn’s survival as Corbyn’s shadow Foreign Secretary but no doubt these will be opened. There could be three options: Benn stays in current role: Benn remains as part of top team but in a different role or Benn out of the shadow cabinet completely.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Leaving them in the shadow cabinet will simply continue to allow them with their destabilizing work from a position of authority. This is not a revenge reshuffle but a house cleaning one.
In the last thread I mentioned that Benn had violated the old roman proverb of "Caesar’s wife must not only be honest but must also be seen to be honest".
Continuing with the roman theme, it's as good for Corbyn to get rid of Benn now that he can, as it would for Caesar if he got rid of Brutus before he stabbed him.
And we all know that Benn is going to try to stab Corbyn anyway regardless of whether he's in the shadow cabinet or not, so better to put some distance by removing as much authority from him as possible, preferably throwing him to the political dogs.
Corbyn is damned if he does ("revenge", focus for opposition) and is damned if he doesn't ("weak", dis-united Cabinet), meanwhile the made in heaven for the Tories superlative Labour Media Management machine rumbles on......best evah Tory sleeper, that Milne chap.....
Bolded places I've been to by train
Even that decision was forced upon Corbyn by the threat of multiple resignations by the PLP.
Jeremy’s problem is not that he is a weak leader, which he undoubtedly is, the problem is that those he is attempting to lead, simply do not wish to be led by him.
Probably a good thing - plenty for you to explore yet
A variety of sources, some of whom have been attributed as being "aides" to Jeremy or those "close" to the leader have apparently stood up speculation that Hilary Benn, Rosie Winterton, Maria Eagle and me (amongst others) are all for the chop for not voting against extending military action from Iraq into Syria during the recent free vote in the Commons.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/01/talk-revenge-reshuffle-risks-repeating-worst-new-labour
Sterling work Milne - keep it up!
Paint your chap into a corner - brilliant!
Clearly some of the talking-up of the prospect has been done by those trying to forestall it (see e.g. Dugher in the New Statesman) but I do seem to recall some pro-Corbyn figures militating for an aggressive reshuffle, in a threatening kind of way. (But can't recall who exactly. Backroom boys, not MPs, if memory serves.)
I've answered your question on the previous thread on the previous thread
Incidentally, done nearly 900 miles of "new" rail route in 2015 (ie. routes I hadn't previously done before).
Torn down in 1957, you can still find old films of the "Ovie" or "Docker's Umbrella", but I do like this short CGI reconstruction.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyycp23Tuqs
I often wondered why Herbert Rouse's Tunnel Control Station (the sensational Egyptian/Art Deco building) was built "back-to-front" with its blank wall facing the main street (The Strand). Of course! It had to abut the Overhead Railway Track, so it's entrance and windows are on the other side.
Poor old Huskisson. The equivalent of Churchill going down on the Titanic, I suppose...
Amazing that the smoking, belching, fire-breathing monsters survived such an opening débâcle...
He was a former President of the Board of Trade, Secretary for War, and Leader of the House of Commons.
It amuses me, the constant oohs and aahs over the latest glass abortion to go up in London.
The Liver Building was the tallest and largest office building in the country, for over 50 years, until Shell Mex went up in London in 1962 - a longevity record, at least, which is unlikely ever to be beaten.
We still have the largest clocks in the Kingdom, of course, a metre wider than your Big Ben....
From a "listening for the beast" perspective, it's much more dangerous now. As a youth I regularly crossed the local railway on an unmanned crossing, just keeping a ear cocked for the sound of the approaching steam train. Can't do that with electric.
A series of trains (denoted by colour) were travelling in convoy down one line, stopping periodically to 'inspect' bridges and the like.
Stephenson was patrolling up and down the other line in the Rocket.
A bunch of people got down from the wagons in the train carrying Husskinson, Wellington (the PM) and the other VIPs. They were just sitting in altered wagons, not carriages. The locomotives had no meaningful brakes (in fact, did not have such for a few years).
Husskinson went to talk to Wellington as Stephenson and the Rocket approached on the other line. Shouts warned them of the encroaching Rocket, and they all scrambled either into the wagons, under them, or into the cess on the other side. Husskinson had been ill and clambered half up, holding onto a door. As the Rocket passed, the door swung outwards, crushing his legs. He was taken to a nearby ?farm? as Stephenson rushed to Liverpool to fetch help. Sadly there was little that could be done, and Husskinson died that night.
From memory; details might be wrong ...
So it was not a case of being transfixed; just a case of bad luck, poor timing and non-existent safety standards. Oh, and ripe for a conspiracy theory about Wellington's involvement. Except they did not have tinfoil in those days ...
International politics
Corbyn had better not interrupt the cricket with his damn reshuffle! *goes and gets two lots of popcorn*
http://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/from-the-archive-blog/2011/may/06/newspapers-national-newspapers2
The clear description is he was "flurried" by the approach of The Rocket.
Which suggests he was confused or panicked.
The failure, or swinging, of the door may have been the instant mode of the fatality, but his inability to move with alacrity, despite his companions' ample warnings, suggests some other contributory cause to the accident.
The only point where I'd diverge slightly is on the option of switching Benn to a different post. In practice, while Home Sec probably ranks below Foreign Sec, in Shadow terms it should be the other way round. There are plenty of opportunities for an opposition spokesman to get stuck into the government on the domestic brief; the foreign one usually just involves technical detail or statesmanlike comment. That Benn ended up agreeing with the government and opposing his own side simply showed him more fit for office than opposition.
However, while it might be a promotion of sorts to be switched, it would still be a move of weakness for both men. For Corbyn would still have a Bastard in the ranks and not only that: the prime Bastard around whom others were willing to rally. He could lead a revolt against Corbyn just as much from SHS as from SFS. The issue is not the post he's given, it's whether he's in the Shadow Cabinet or not at all. Meanwhile, for Benn, to allow himself to be moved to what most would see as a lesser role (even if it's not), having made a considerable success of his current one would equally be seen as a sign of acquiescence and weakness.
For both men, if there is to be a reshuffle, it really needs to be all or nothing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dionysius_Lardner
Although there was much more to Lardner than that. I wonder if there's a biography of him somewhere ...
There were lots of people against the new form of transport who would stoke any fear to delay it (e.g. many of the canal owners, landowners).
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Last-Journey-William-Huskisson/dp/0571210481
It's also featured in various biographies of Stephenson, Wellington and others.
Huskisson and Wellington did not get on. Huskisson left government over ?Retford?, taking the Canningite faction with him. It would have been like a motorcade containing Blair and Brown breaking down on the M1 in 2006, and Brown being hit by a passing lorry. All very suspicious to those of a certain mindset.
(Ducks and runs)
I reckon this is what got Huskisson.
Surely too soon to jump just yet...
Add in the factor you mention, and the fact people were not used to trains, then it was literally an accident waiting to happen. As indeed many early railways accidents were.
Wellington's government fell within a month or two. It has been proposed that Huskisson was wanting to talk to Wellington about coming to an accommodation. In which case Earl Grey might not have become PM< and who knows what would have happened to the Great Reform Act.
The first railway death may have changed more than railway history ...
As for the Herald: I see the 'half-inch' claim regularly, and thought it was true ...
Yet it is so very true how quickly the emoting left (empathy rather than that cold stuff about balancing budgets) turns to complete rigidity and orthodoxy.
Has Benn actually been involved in plotting against Corbyn? Has he briefed against him? Or merely been touted as a successor?
The problem the Labour party has at the moment is a lack of depth of talent. True - this affects the parties as well. The Labour problem seems to come from a series of leaders who (especially Brown) destroyed anything that looked like opposition.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkOLq17GReg
The danger is that it will impair his reputation with the party membership. But the twitterati seem fully onside.
In the later book that covers the second world war he explains the real issue - that for proper safety RoRo vessels should be stable with a vehicle deck open to flooding.
I am sure that New Labour will be singing this old folk standard:
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FHKxk719AMc
What are his aims ...
(1) Firstly, convert labour to a Trotskyite party.
(2) Secondly, get elected.
As (1) has precedence, it suggests Benn is dog meat as long as he can do it without too much blow back. As labour is a party of shivering cissies, he may succeed.
However, I listened to one Labour grandee (Kim Howells) yesterday on R5L and he was amusingly honest.
As I live near Rainhill, I took the Aussie grandkids round the railway exhibition when they were here. They loved it.
Milliband, *Johnson*, Purnell - those are your big beasts? LOL. If that was all that Brown could tolerate....
@Tom and, of course, @Cyclefree explained very well the necessary qualities, involving, mainly, the ability to lead.
NPXMPX2 believes that a leader should be a nice bloke.
Let Jezza lead here, let him clear out those who don't agree with him and create a party in his own image. It is, after all, what those few hundred thousand members want. Cons may not like the look of the new shadow cabinet but we would respect the fact (and only that fact) that he has the guts to lead.
He owes it to everybody to oppose this govt, they're really not much cop but are getting a very easy ride as Corbyn sails along seemingly oblivious to what his role as leader of the opposition entails.
No idea who advises him or indeed if he looks for it, but he's making a pigs ear of a once in a lifetime opportunity.
Benn might go for Home Secretary. Depends whether he views it as weakness or a sideways move, compromise between intransigence and outright rebellion.
It would be a sign of weakness, of course.
I doubt he's interested in surrounding himself with bruisers: he's more interested in ideological purity. That does not mean he hypocritically will not discipline or ban bruisers who attack people inside his own party. There are plenty of useful idiots.
Corbyn thinks he's nice. On a personal level that might be true. On a political level it's as far from the truth as you can get.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35218921
After letting bloody everyone in, they've now swung the other way. I wonder if the fourth series of The Bridge will involve a tense case revolving around a man who commutes from Denmark to Sweden for work.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35217418
Still, at least it means Northstowe might finally get started after more than twelve years ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northstowe
Local government used to do a lot of that sort of thing ....... build houses ..... of course!
Why did they stop?
As I keep on saying: you need to build communities, not homes. And that costs much more.
It would indeed be the most absurd notion in the history of reshuffles. Labour have got themselves into a stupid 'damned if they do damned if they don't' position.
I believe the other name this is known by is 'incompetence'.
Brown, by contrast, was implicated in briefings by his allies and colleagues specifically designed to undermine people who might pose a challenge to him. It's too long ago for me to remember the details but I'm pretty sure that the general memory is right.
Jez has a mahoosive mandate, he can do what he pleases, the faithful still think he is like the pre-WW2 Emperor of Japan.
May might be a wake up call for them or it might not be. I suspect an electoral Hiroshima and Nagasaki is needed not a Guadalcanal or Midway.
As it is we have housing associations, separate from local government, who provide rental accommodation.
Sweden has introduced identity checks for travellers from Denmark in an attempt to reduce the number of migrants arriving in the country.
All travellers wanting to cross the Oresund bridge by train or bus, or use ferry services, will be refused entry without the necessary documents."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35218921
It's not perfect, but it's far better than the post-war developments I'd lived in immediately before (e.g. in North Baddesley, Romsey, and Great Shelford). Most of the problems are due to implementation rather than design.
Sadly, they appear to be forgetting some of these lessons with Northstowe, mainly because they are expensive.
McBride's book tells of various plots against rivals (eg Reid) and even Cherie Blair as part of his war with Blair.
If there's no parking, but old shops and brownfield area get made into houses, streets become clogged. If there are no more schools, they become overcrowded. Building on fields mean fewer places for dogs to be walked off-street, and more muck on the pavements.
As an aside, the most interesting geography lesson I had (not that this was a competitive field...) was when we were given graph paper which had a river drawn on it. Using a set of step-by-step guidelines, we had to colour in a few squares at a time to show where we'd build, then expand, a settlement through time. Problems with new ships being too large to go a long way upstream, or the risk of flooding etc, made it quite interesting, as did the variety of settlement layouts that came about.
They may simply decide the electorate are heretics.
I do think, though that you were, for a brief period at least, incredibly lucky in your geography teacher!
During a Key Skills [a short-lived Labour nonsense] 'lesson' I asked the same chap a very simple question and got talked at for literally 40 minutes. The pupils sat ahead of me kept looking back and smirking as I answered in the most bland/disinterested way possible and the bloody man kept on talking.