So Nicola, what you're saying is the SNP hasn't decided whether a commitment to an independence referendum will be in the 2016 manifesto? Pull the other one. Finalised or not, the SNP must have a clear view on that already.
Ok so another country shoots in nukes at us and we being a pseudo nuclear power quickly re- arm to shoot back in the 15 minutes* allowed before the nukes arrive. Yeah I can see how that would work....
* ok perhaps half an hour then?
"One option, that is to be considered, is for Britain to become a “virtual nuclear state” like Japan and Iran – free of nuclear weapons but with the possibility of re-arming in a short period of time"
That is an extremely stupid idea, much like the Lib Dem idea of keeping the subs in port and only put them to sea in a crisis.
Both ideas would be exceedingly provocative, and if anything would invite a first strike before the subs can be put to see or the warheads manufactured.
Remember who is running the review - a man with no background or understanding of military matters having spent his entire adult life opposing anything that would constitute a proper military defence policy. Livingstone is not fit to determine policy on this matter - and Thornberry is no better.
Ok so another country shoots in nukes at us and we being a pseudo nuclear power quickly re- arm to shoot back in the 15 minutes* allowed before the nukes arrive. Yeah I can see how that would work....
* ok perhaps half an hour then?
"One option, that is to be considered, is for Britain to become a “virtual nuclear state” like Japan and Iran – free of nuclear weapons but with the possibility of re-arming in a short period of time"
That is an extremely stupid idea, much like the Lib Dem idea of keeping the subs in port and only putting them to sea in a crisis.
Both ideas would be exceedingly provocative if put into action, and if anything would invite a first strike before the subs can be put to see or the warheads manufactured.
Yes. Which touches on the question of whether multilateral disarmament is really desirable: there would be frenzied suspicion everywhere and a huge incentive to become the first New Nuclear power.
Ok so another country shoots in nukes at us and we being a pseudo nuclear power quickly re- arm to shoot back in the 15 minutes* allowed before the nukes arrive. Yeah I can see how that would work....
* ok perhaps half an hour then?
"One option, that is to be considered, is for Britain to become a “virtual nuclear state” like Japan and Iran – free of nuclear weapons but with the possibility of re-arming in a short period of time"
That is an extremely stupid idea, much like the Lib Dem idea of keeping the subs in port and only putting them to sea in a crisis.
Both ideas would be exceedingly provocative if put into action, and if anything would invite a first strike before the subs can be put to see or the warheads manufactured.
We should remember what a seemingly innocuous act like withdrawing the ice breaker Endurance led to.
Remember who is running the review - a man with no background or understanding of military matters having spent his entire adult life opposing anything that would constitute a proper military defence policy. Livingstone is not fit to determine policy on this matter - and Thornberry is no better.
No wonder it makes absolutely no sense.
You can quite easily see the flaws if you reverse the positions. If say North Korean subs carrying nuclear weapons suddenly put to sea, that would be seen as an increasing threat. If Iran couldn't explain where several hundred Kg of enriched uranium had gone, that would be seen as an increasing threat.
There are good reasons why militaries try to maintain a constant military posture, you don't wont to spook your opponents into preemptive action, and particularly with nuclear weapons and materiel this is especially dangerous behaviour.
That serious people in the Lib Dems and Labour don't get something so simple is worrying.
The all time worst idea along these lines was conventional Trident missiles as a weapon for Prompt Global Strike, the Russians quite reasonably pointed out that whacking terrorists with a weapon that couldn't easily be distinguished from the start of WWIII was a bad idea.
I just paid £50 for a new hat, which given most people don't wear hats, is probably seen as unforgivable extravagance.
Not at all
One should have nice stuff if one can afford it. And better to have one good hat than five bad ones.
Never skimp on shoes. Expensive ones last longer and more than justify the expense.
Advice I know I should take, and I've always been taken by the 'Samuel Vimes Boots Theory of Socio-Economic Unfairness' as advanced by Sir Terry Pratchett, but for some reason there are some things I'm happy to spend a lot on, and others I am not. Shoes I have an upper limit on, along with most clothes in general to be honest.
I never skimp on shoes.
So many people tell me they can tell a lot about a man by his footwear.
Some people, such as Boris, have a natural charisma that money cannot buy.
Other more insecure, attention seeking mummy's boy types do immature things like wear outrageous shoes in a sad bid to attract attention.
There's so much wrong with that.
But I do love the obsession that some Kippers have with me.
Really doesn't reinforce any stereotypes about you lot.
No idea what you are talking about, though your hatred of Kippers is laughable.
Lol, I don't hate anyone. I like mocking Kippers yes, but hatred no.
Kippers are quite entertaining, every zoo should have a pair.
Not all that keen on Kippers myself these days, Farage shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the Leave campaign, and having watched Winston McKenzie on CBB I'm truly pleased he is now with another lot, at least he is this week.
I want out of the EU and a nationwide return to grammar schools, they are the reasons I voted Ukip originally.
@SDoughtyMP: Uh oh... He's coming! Thought he was running for Mayor but clearly has other plans! #shouldnthavetweeted the cat pic https://t.co/BGC03G6EY7
@SDoughtyMP: Uh oh... He's coming! Thought he was running for Mayor but clearly has other plans! #shouldnthavetweeted the cat pic https://t.co/BGC03G6EY7
Is he going to defend labour's record on the NHS in Wales, or is he going to run crying to nanny? He is not leadership material, but then who is in Labour.
Is he going to defend labour's record on the NHS in Wales, or is he going to run crying to nanny? He is not leadership material, but then who is in Labour.
Is he going to defend labour's record on the NHS in Wales, or is he going to run crying to nanny? He is not leadership material, but then who is in Labour.
I think Labour are way beyond any quick or easy fix for their problems. The idea that anybody can sweep Corbyn aside and restore the preceding state of the party is ludicrous, they will be lucky if they can get out of this mess before 2020.
Is he going to defend labour's record on the NHS in Wales, or is he going to run crying to nanny? He is not leadership material, but then who is in Labour.
I think Labour are way beyond any quick or easy fix for their problems. The idea that anybody can sweep Corbyn aside and restore the preceding state of the party is ludicrous, they will be lucky if they can get out of this mess before 2020.
That seems to be the common view, but IDK - things have gone full Corbyn very quickly, I can see things reversing just as quickly if the conditions are right. Those conditions would include an impressive Tory meltdown, just for starters.
Is he going to defend labour's record on the NHS in Wales, or is he going to run crying to nanny? He is not leadership material, but then who is in Labour.
I think Labour are way beyond any quick or easy fix for their problems. The idea that anybody can sweep Corbyn aside and restore the preceding state of the party is ludicrous, they will be lucky if they can get out of this mess before 2020.
As has been mentioned more than once even if they do dislodge Jez they are still in deep Doo Doo.
The Tories will just keep pointing out that Labour are just a hairs breadth of a leftie takeover over and over again. They haven't gone away you know.....
Is he going to defend labour's record on the NHS in Wales, or is he going to run crying to nanny? He is not leadership material, but then who is in Labour.
I think Labour are way beyond any quick or easy fix for their problems. The idea that anybody can sweep Corbyn aside and restore the preceding state of the party is ludicrous, they will be lucky if they can get out of this mess before 2020.
That seems to be the common view, but IDK - things have gone full Corbyn very quickly, I can see things reversing just as quickly if the conditions are right. Those conditions would include an impressive Tory meltdown, just for starters.
Not even an impressive Tory meltdown will save labour
Is he going to defend labour's record on the NHS in Wales, or is he going to run crying to nanny? He is not leadership material, but then who is in Labour.
I think Labour are way beyond any quick or easy fix for their problems. The idea that anybody can sweep Corbyn aside and restore the preceding state of the party is ludicrous, they will be lucky if they can get out of this mess before 2020.
As has been mentioned more than once even if they do dislodge Jez they are still in deep Doo Doo.
The Tories will just keep pointing out that Labour are just a hairs breadth of a leftie takeover over and over again. They haven't gone away you know.....
Any alternate leader of Labour will still be leading a party that has swung diabolically to the left and will inevitably be a left wing labour MP. There is no interest in coming to terms with reality as far as Labour are concerned..
Is he going to defend labour's record on the NHS in Wales, or is he going to run crying to nanny? He is not leadership material, but then who is in Labour.
I think Labour are way beyond any quick or easy fix for their problems. The idea that anybody can sweep Corbyn aside and restore the preceding state of the party is ludicrous, they will be lucky if they can get out of this mess before 2020.
It is not as if the preceding state was a healthy one. Labour wasn't electable in 2015. It is even less electable now.
I can't see them returning to the mid 90s in the medium term in terms of electability. There is no Blair on the horizon
That seems to be the common view, but IDK - things have gone full Corbyn very quickly, I can see things reversing just as quickly if the conditions are right. Those conditions would include an impressive Tory meltdown, just for starters.
Getting rid of Corbyn will be much easier than getting rid of his supporters. How moderates prevent Corbyn Mk II taking power is a big problem.
Is he going to defend labour's record on the NHS in Wales, or is he going to run crying to nanny? He is not leadership material, but then who is in Labour.
I think Labour are way beyond any quick or easy fix for their problems. The idea that anybody can sweep Corbyn aside and restore the preceding state of the party is ludicrous, they will be lucky if they can get out of this mess before 2020.
That seems to be the common view, but IDK - things have gone full Corbyn very quickly, I can see things reversing just as quickly if the conditions are right. Those conditions would include an impressive Tory meltdown, just for starters.
Not even an impressive Tory meltdown will save labour
Is he going to defend labour's record on the NHS in Wales, or is he going to run crying to nanny? He is not leadership material, but then who is in Labour.
I think Labour are way beyond any quick or easy fix for their problems. The idea that anybody can sweep Corbyn aside and restore the preceding state of the party is ludicrous, they will be lucky if they can get out of this mess before 2020.
It is not as if the preceding state was a healthy one. Labour wasn't electable in 2015. It is even less electable now.
I can't see them returning to the mid 90s in the medium term in terms of electability. There is no Blair on the horizon
If I were a Labour supporter I'd be a bit worried that Trump is more likely to be POTUS than Corbyn is to win an election for Labour, according to all the bookies.
The Observer front page story about Alison McGovern stepping down from a policy review role is almost laughable featuring, as it does, Corbyn's call for party unity.
If you spend you political career being a rebel, you can't expect others to fall in line with your views - no matter how often you wave your mandate in front of them.
Perhaps Corbyn, McDonnell, Livingstone and Abbott should just go silent for a week. I am sure we would appreciate it.
From out here in the provinces it appears that Sadiq is making all the running. Is that how it seems in London? Is Zac actually campaigning hard and we just don't hear about it in the stix?
I can't honestly say that either of them are in evidence in my area in terms of actual campaign literature delivered, though I think cyclefree said she was getting quite a lot and she liked Goldsmith's material more. Khan is I think getting more stories into the Standard, which is probably the most important channel for this election (and whose vitriolic campaign against Livingstone has been replaced by apparent neutrality this time). There does seem to be a certain coolness in some Tory sectors about Goldsmith, as we've seen now and then here: he's not seen as quite "one of us" by some.
Really too soon to say, but the polls showing Khan a bit ahead are probably about right.
I've not received any material from Khan. The Goldsmith material is very professionally produced. I don't read the Standard. I know the Goldsmith campaign is campaigning hard in places like Pinner and Harrow and Hendon. No other insights, I'm afraid.
If I were a Labour supporter I'd be a bit worried that Trump is more likely to be POTUS than Corbyn is to win an election for Labour, according to all the bookies.
Vladimir Putin is more likely to be POTUS than Corbyn is to win an election for Labour.
'And when the UK loses a war and our government is overthrown, then maybe our soldiers will be fair game for war crimes trials from our victors. Until that day, no chance. '
No, and your trying to bring Hitler and the SS into the argument is doing yourself no favours.
The UK allows anyone to claim for "Justice" against it in a number of ways. If someone has been aggrieved by the UK or it's representatives, the government or its SoS for the relevant department will happily see them in court. This is how litigation against the government has worked for centuries in this country, which I remind you again is not Germany in 1945 and has a stable and democratic government which subjects itself to a number of international treaties.
What's not acceptable is for a bunch of vexatious claims be logged against individual members of the British military in UK courts, paid for by British legal aid, purely for the purpose of generating a bill from the scumbag lawyers involved.
People are not 'sued' in the civil courts for serious allegations such as murder and rape - they are 'prosecuted' in the criminal courts. The idea that the UK taxpayer should foot the bill for any successful claim against the UK Government for compensation is quite obscene. Your comments give rise to a strong suspicion that some of the accused have something to hide.
The lawyers basically went around Iraq like ambulance chasers, finding people to bad-mouth British soldiers in order to generate work for themselves in acting for these Iraqis making complaints to the military in the UK. If you really think that's "Justice" then why are the lawyers involved subject to a professional tribunal that could see individuals banned from practicing law?
I'm not going to engage with you any further on this as you're quite clearly trolling and keep bringing the discussion back to Hitler.
But where the evidence is so weak the allegations will be dismissed and no charges would be forthcoming!
'And when the UK loses a war and our government is overthrown, then maybe our soldiers will be fair game for war crimes trials from our victors. Until that day, no chance. '
Are you seriously saying that justice is dependant upon whether a country is successful in war? You are certainly implying something rather venal - that the normal rules do not apply to the victors - ie that countries may commit whatever atrocities they see fit as long as they make sure that they win. You clearly have a lot in common with the morality of Adolf Hitler!
You're very fond of comparing the British government and its officials to the Nazis eg Arbeit Macht Frei. You need to get a grip.
Some people are very keen to hide behind Godwin's Law to divert attention from what really motivates them.
"Two-thirds of Conservative MPs now support Britain’s exit from the European Union, despite David Cameron’s clear preference for staying in, according to senior sources within the party.
Key figures in Tory high command say analysis of public statements and private views expressed by their 330 MPs shows that at least 210 now believe that the UK would be better off “out”."
"Two-thirds of Conservative MPs now support Britain’s exit from the European Union, despite David Cameron’s clear preference for staying in, according to senior sources within the party.
Key figures in Tory high command say analysis of public statements and private views expressed by their 330 MPs shows that at least 210 now believe that the UK would be better off “out”."
"Two-thirds of Conservative MPs now support Britain’s exit from the European Union, despite David Cameron’s clear preference for staying in, according to senior sources within the party.
Key figures in Tory high command say analysis of public statements and private views expressed by their 330 MPs shows that at least 210 now believe that the UK would be better off “out”."
I think it's a bit more nuanced than that: I know of at least one Tory MP who is publicly for Out, but I'd planning on supporting whatever David Cameron comes back with.
From out here in the provinces it appears that Sadiq is making all the running. Is that how it seems in London? Is Zac actually campaigning hard and we just don't hear about it in the stix?
I can't honestly say that either of them are in evidence in my area in terms of actual campaign literature delivered, though I think cyclefree said she was getting quite a lot and she liked Goldsmith's material more. Khan is I think getting more stories into the Standard, which is probably the most important channel for this election (and whose vitriolic campaign against Livingstone has been replaced by apparent neutrality this time). There does seem to be a certain coolness in some Tory sectors about Goldsmith, as we've seen now and then here: he's not seen as quite "one of us" by some.
Really too soon to say, but the polls showing Khan a bit ahead are probably about right.
I've not received any material from Khan. The Goldsmith material is very professionally produced. I don't read the Standard. I know the Goldsmith campaign is campaigning hard in places like Pinner and Harrow and Hendon. No other insights, I'm afraid.
"Two-thirds of Conservative MPs now support Britain’s exit from the European Union, despite David Cameron’s clear preference for staying in, according to senior sources within the party.
Key figures in Tory high command say analysis of public statements and private views expressed by their 330 MPs shows that at least 210 now believe that the UK would be better off “out”."
I think it's a bit more nuanced than that: I know of at least one Tory MP who is publicly for Out, but I'd planning on supporting whatever David Cameron comes back with.
From out here in the provinces it appears that Sadiq is making all the running. Is that how it seems in London? Is Zac actually campaigning hard and we just don't hear about it in the stix?
I can't honestly say that either of them are in evidence in my area in terms of actual campaign literature delivered, though I think cyclefree said she was getting quite a lot and she liked Goldsmith's material more. Khan is I think getting more stories into the Standard, which is probably the most important channel for this election (and whose vitriolic campaign against Livingstone has been replaced by apparent neutrality this time). There does seem to be a certain coolness in some Tory sectors about Goldsmith, as we've seen now and then here: he's not seen as quite "one of us" by some.
Really too soon to say, but the polls showing Khan a bit ahead are probably about right.
I've not received any material from Khan. The Goldsmith material is very professionally produced. I don't read the Standard. I know the Goldsmith campaign is campaigning hard in places like Pinner and Harrow and Hendon. No other insights, I'm afraid.
"Two-thirds of Conservative MPs now support Britain’s exit from the European Union, despite David Cameron’s clear preference for staying in, according to senior sources within the party.
Key figures in Tory high command say analysis of public statements and private views expressed by their 330 MPs shows that at least 210 now believe that the UK would be better off “out”."
Looking through the US polls before going to bed, the thing that strikes me is how pathetic the sample sizes often are. Take New Hampshire Democrats. The latest poll has Sanders 13 ahead, but one taken the day before has Clinton 3 ahead. The samples are 386 and 480 respectively - and it's not even clear that those don't include a bunch of don't knows. The margin of error on those must be huge - 5 or 6 each way, I should think.
That doesn't mean they can be disregarded, but to a much larger extent than in the UK we need to avoid putting much weight on any single poll. Trump is clearly ahead in NH and it's apparently close with Cruz in Iowa. Clinton is ahead in Iowa and it's unclear in NH. We really don't know much more than that on either state.
"Two-thirds of Conservative MPs now support Britain’s exit from the European Union, despite David Cameron’s clear preference for staying in, according to senior sources within the party.
Key figures in Tory high command say analysis of public statements and private views expressed by their 330 MPs shows that at least 210 now believe that the UK would be better off “out”."
I think it's a bit more nuanced than that: I know of at least one Tory MP who is publicly for Out, but I'd planning on supporting whatever David Cameron comes back with.
I reckon the true split is:
One third, genuine BOOers One third, don't really want to rock the boat, would probably slightly prefer out, but could live with in given concessions One third, Inners
I think quite a few of people tagged with being BOOers, such as Philip Hammond, are really in the second group. I think Boris is actually in the third group, but I think he sees that an "Out" vote is the only way he can get his grubby hands on the levers of power. I therefore expect him to back Out. (He will then run into trouble when it transpires he was very pro-In in front of City audiences a few years ago.)
"Two-thirds of Conservative MPs now support Britain’s exit from the European Union, despite David Cameron’s clear preference for staying in, according to senior sources within the party.
Key figures in Tory high command say analysis of public statements and private views expressed by their 330 MPs shows that at least 210 now believe that the UK would be better off “out”."
How on earth do they react if Cameron leads to a remain win? Some will acc pt it but this an issue where there will be bitterness and lots of it.
How on earth will pro Brexit Tory MPs just accept a 51 - 49 REMAIN result ? All this bullshit that Europe will be forgotten is just that: bullshit !
I think that if it is close than 55:45, then it is highly likely the Conservative Party will adopt an official "Out" position by the time of the next election.
"Two-thirds of Conservative MPs now support Britain’s exit from the European Union, despite David Cameron’s clear preference for staying in, according to senior sources within the party.
Key figures in Tory high command say analysis of public statements and private views expressed by their 330 MPs shows that at least 210 now believe that the UK would be better off “out”."
How on earth do they react if Cameron leads to a remain win? Some will acc pt it but this an issue where there will be bitterness and lots of it.
How on earth will pro Brexit Tory MPs just accept a 51 - 49 REMAIN result ? All this bullshit that Europe will be forgotten is just that: bullshit !
I think that if it is close than 55:45, then it is highly likely the Conservative Party will adopt an official "Out" position by the time of the next election.
*However* I think the official Tory position would likely be EFTA/EEA, which would probably not be Out enough for most UKIPpers.
On a serious note per a comment downthread, if a senior (£900 per hour) Solicitor is really charging 5,500 hours in three years, he should have some pretty good justification to back it up. Leaving aside the huge hourly rate, this equates to more than 36 hours a week (not including any holiday etc.) - Full time, essentially. He should be asked to explain his activities over the three year period and should be made to explain the timings to the Law Society.
And, btw, £900 is an outrageous rate to pay a solicitor. Magic Circle firms are absolutely the wrong benchmark to use and that should be challenged.
To put it in perspective, we've moved a lot of our legal work to an excellent firm in Oxford where the senior partner charges us £270 per hour and is remarkably efficient.
There does seem to be a certain coolness in some Tory sectors about Goldsmith, as we've seen now and then here: he's not seen as quite "one of us" by some.
Nick,
Perhaps some more colour on what you mean by that?
Given its historical antecedents it's a very specific phrase to use.
Now another Labour MP quits her post over 'closet Tory' jibe The head of a Labour review of child poverty quit last night after a row over a ‘closet Tory’ jibe by Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell. Labour MP Alison McGovern, a former aide to Gordon Brown, resigned amid growing signs that Jeremy Corbyn is losing control of his party. McGovern, head of the Blairite campaign group Progress, threw in the towel after McDonnell claimed that MPs in groups such as Progress pursued a ‘hard Right-wing agenda.’ Her resignation followed a heated Commons clash between the Shadow Chancellor and the previous head of Progress, Labour MP John Woodcock, who challenged McDonnell in the voting lobby.
Comments
https://twitter.com/nathanbriscoe_1/status/685938729320607744
https://twitter.com/suttonnick/status/685951839913676800
No wonder it makes absolutely no sense.
You can still get 28/1
There are good reasons why militaries try to maintain a constant military posture, you don't wont to spook your opponents into preemptive action, and particularly with nuclear weapons and materiel this is especially dangerous behaviour.
That serious people in the Lib Dems and Labour don't get something so simple is worrying.
The all time worst idea along these lines was conventional Trident missiles as a weapon for Prompt Global Strike, the Russians quite reasonably pointed out that whacking terrorists with a weapon that couldn't easily be distinguished from the start of WWIII was a bad idea.
I want out of the EU and a nationwide return to grammar schools, they are the reasons I voted Ukip originally.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2016/01/exclusive-owen-smith-i-am-interested-being-labour-leader
"He described Conservative plans to devolve powers over income tax to the Welsh Assembly as "a trap"
http://sports.williamhill.com/bet/en-gb/betting/e/3686164/2016-US-Presidential-Election.html
5m5 minutes ago
Vanessa Frost @aeon456
@SDoughtyMP Keep tweeting so we know you're still alive!
The Tories will just keep pointing out that Labour are just a hairs breadth of a leftie takeover over and over again.
They haven't gone away you know.....
I can't see them returning to the mid 90s in the medium term in terms of electability. There is no Blair on the horizon
http://therightscoop.com/bob-beckel-says-he-knows-potentially-damaging-information-about-the-donald-and-princess-diana/
Sans everything...
I mean this is someone who stood against Labour and fought a sewage-drenched campaign just a few months ago, now setting himself up as witchfinder?
That's all....
It's too low?
If you spend you political career being a rebel, you can't expect others to fall in line with your views - no matter how often you wave your mandate in front of them.
Perhaps Corbyn, McDonnell, Livingstone and Abbott should just go silent for a week. I am sure we would appreciate it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/12090822/Revealed-Government-body-helps-asylum-seekers-quash-convictions-for-illegal-entry-to-Britain.html
Is that not a massive conflict of interest?
Key figures in Tory high command say analysis of public statements and private views expressed by their 330 MPs shows that at least 210 now believe that the UK would be better off “out”."
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jan/09/tory-mps-britain-european-union-eu-brexit
That doesn't mean they can be disregarded, but to a much larger extent than in the UK we need to avoid putting much weight on any single poll. Trump is clearly ahead in NH and it's apparently close with Cruz in Iowa. Clinton is ahead in Iowa and it's unclear in NH. We really don't know much more than that on either state.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HdoocAtdSQ
One third, genuine BOOers
One third, don't really want to rock the boat, would probably slightly prefer out, but could live with in given concessions
One third, Inners
I think quite a few of people tagged with being BOOers, such as Philip Hammond, are really in the second group. I think Boris is actually in the third group, but I think he sees that an "Out" vote is the only way he can get his grubby hands on the levers of power. I therefore expect him to back Out. (He will then run into trouble when it transpires he was very pro-In in front of City audiences a few years ago.)
"Why women and asylum-seekers are now feeling uneasy"
To put it in perspective, we've moved a lot of our legal work to an excellent firm in Oxford where the senior partner charges us £270 per hour and is remarkably efficient.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3392212/Canoe-conman-John-Darwin-living-cramped-room-Philippines-selling-underwear-wife-s-market-stall.html
Now another Labour MP quits her post over 'closet Tory' jibe
The head of a Labour review of child poverty quit last night after a row over a ‘closet Tory’ jibe by Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell.
Labour MP Alison McGovern, a former aide to Gordon Brown, resigned amid growing signs that Jeremy Corbyn is losing control of his party.
McGovern, head of the Blairite campaign group Progress, threw in the towel after McDonnell claimed that MPs in groups such as Progress pursued a ‘hard Right-wing agenda.’
Her resignation followed a heated Commons clash between the Shadow Chancellor and the previous head of Progress, Labour MP John Woodcock, who challenged McDonnell in the voting lobby.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3392128/Revolt-Corbyn-s-attack-Middle-England-Labour-leader-spells-new-local-taxes-copy-Scotland.html#ixzz3wobyzxDs