Has nobody told him about Ed's brave stand against Len?
David Blunkett today warned Ed Miliband that a failure to stand up to the unions would leave Labour as the “party of the graveyard.”
The former Home Secretary spoke out as Labour tried to contain an increasingly bitter row over the selection of a candidate for the Falkirk seat in Scotland.
The party has been forced to suspend the process and put the constituency in “special measures” amid accusations the Unite union tried to fix the selection.
Mr Blunkett said it was time for Labour to “clear up its own house” or risk losing the next general election.
From Jeremy Heywood: "“There is a very, very long way to go. We were reminded only last week that the economy as a whole remains about 4 per cent below the size that it was in 2008. “Five years on from the bottom of the recession we have still not even near recovered all the output we lost in that terribly deep recession that we suffered in 2007-08.
“Those are really daunting numbers that just show the size of the challenge; there is no alternative.”
Labour's legacy.......
Osborne's legacy. Austerity isn't working. Paul Krugman was right. Ed Balls was right. History was right. We are falling behind the Americans because Osborne chose austerity which, as predicted, has paradoxically cost even more.
Osbornes boasts about austerity reducing the deficit while he criticised US stimulus look very silly now. Even the PB Tories have surely recognised that now. Although they seem to always find someone else to blame for Osborne having to find £245 Billion extra to fund current spending after his experiment failed.
Manchester airport has spare capacity.
Seems we should be encouraging it's use first, rather than expanding elsewhere.
And the HS2 spur can speed the new arrivals from China to all points north and south.
If you were smarter you would realize how ridiculous Labour looks every time it does a u-turn,austerity,welfare,cuts,education the list is endless.
Labour are hardly alone in making frequent u-turns, so if it makes them look ridiculous, that applies across the board. Since I like to think I give the government a reasonable chance when they make one, I find I have to with Labour too.
and when the coalition do make a U-turn,labour jump on the bandwagon of attacks,so when labour are u-turning on nearly every policy,it's reasonable we and the tories jump on that passing wagon of criticism ;-)
Yes, but it means neither can claim the high ground. Which is fine, but of course when jumping on the bandwagon one has to pretend to not realize neither has the high ground. All in good fun though - there are few things as amusing as a politician explaining why a u-turn is not a u-turn.
Then give a financial incentive to fly there, such as a lower rate of air passenger duty than Heathrow or Gatwick..
We have a congestion charge on the ground in London, why not also in the air.
The hinterland of Manchester is vast, and most of us prefer to avoid Heathrow, because of the congestion there both on the roads nearby and in the air. When there is fog at Christmas we see misery at Heathrow, and normal flying at Manchester, simply because there is spare capacity.
On your recent mid-East trip did you fly from Manchester, or did you have the long trip to Heathrow added to your jouney?
If you could have flown from Manchester then would you have done so?
What is it that you have against infrastructure development in the North?
From Jeremy Heywood: "“There is a very, very long way to go. We were reminded only last week that the economy as a whole remains about 4 per cent below the size that it was in 2008. “Five years on from the bottom of the recession we have still not even near recovered all the output we lost in that terribly deep recession that we suffered in 2007-08.
“Those are really daunting numbers that just show the size of the challenge; there is no alternative.”
Labour's legacy.......
Osborne's legacy. Austerity isn't working. Paul Krugman was right. Ed Balls was right. History was right. We are falling behind the Americans because Osborne chose austerity which, as predicted, has paradoxically cost even more.
Osbornes boasts about austerity reducing the deficit while he criticised US stimulus look very silly now. Even the PB Tories have surely recognised that now. Although they seem to always find someone else to blame for Osborne having to find £245 Billion extra to fund current spending after his experiment failed.
From Jeremy Heywood: "“There is a very, very long way to go. We were reminded only last week that the economy as a whole remains about 4 per cent below the size that it was in 2008. “Five years on from the bottom of the recession we have still not even near recovered all the output we lost in that terribly deep recession that we suffered in 2007-08.
“Those are really daunting numbers that just show the size of the challenge; there is no alternative.”
Labour's legacy.......
Osborne's legacy. Austerity isn't working. Paul Krugman was right. Ed Balls was right. History was right. We are falling behind the Americans because Osborne chose austerity which, as predicted, has paradoxically cost even more.
Osbornes boasts about austerity reducing the deficit while he criticised US stimulus look very silly now. Even the PB Tories have surely recognised that now. Although they seem to always find someone else to blame for Osborne having to find £245 Billion extra to fund current spending after his experiment failed.
Manchester airport has spare capacity.
Seems we should be encouraging it's use first, rather than expanding elsewhere.
You can do whatever you want with regional airports, it won't address the hub issue you haven't grasped.
I've 'grasped' that you don't want airport expansion in your locale.
From Jeremy Heywood: "“There is a very, very long way to go. We were reminded only last week that the economy as a whole remains about 4 per cent below the size that it was in 2008. “Five years on from the bottom of the recession we have still not even near recovered all the output we lost in that terribly deep recession that we suffered in 2007-08.
“Those are really daunting numbers that just show the size of the challenge; there is no alternative.”
Labour's legacy.......
Osborne's legacy. Austerity isn't working. Paul Krugman was right. Ed Balls was right. History was right. We are falling behind the Americans because Osborne chose austerity which, as predicted, has paradoxically cost even more.
Osbornes boasts about austerity reducing the deficit while he criticised US stimulus look very silly now. Even the PB Tories have surely recognised that now. Although they seem to always find someone else to blame for Osborne having to find £245 Billion extra to fund current spending after his experiment failed.
Manchester airport has spare capacity.
Seems we should be encouraging it's use first, rather than expanding elsewhere.
You can do whatever you want with regional airports, it won't address the hub issue you haven't grasped.
I've 'grasped' that you don't want airport expansion in your locale.
IMO the least worst option for Egypt would be if Morsi just calls new elections.
Why should he call elections? He won a free and fair ballot one year ago. I find it extraordinary how little attachment some pbc-ers have to democracy when it comes to potential coups in Turkey and Egypt and the like.
Indeed. Obviously I have no real sense if Morsi is as bad as his critics say, but when his supporters say he won fairly and has only been in place a year so what did people expect in a year, there is certainly at the least an element of truth there, which makes one think about the other issues with more doubt, rightfully or not.
Yes, we are generally pretty hypocritical about elections when we don't like the outcome. Yeltsin's move against Parliament - actually bombarding the building with tanks - passed off with barely a murmur.
On a vaguely related theme - I'm just finishing the astonishingly good "Vietnam - an oral history". Christian Appy has collected views on the Vietnam war from all sides with scrupulous neutrality - American hawks, American peaceniks, US soldiers, ARVN veterans, NVA and NLF veterans, seinor commanders like Rostow, Haig and Westmoreland and their Vietnamese counterparts. I grew up when it was raging and my view has basically been that the good guys won, but the book overwhelms partisan feeling with a sense of collective tragedy.
My favourite is an obscure (to me) Vietnamese writer called Nguyen Qui Duc, who followed his family to the US when the Southern regime crumbled. He writes: "So much of my life has been coloured by having to leave my homeland. When I go to Vietnam I am not seen as Vietnamese and it hurts. And I could never be what other people are as American. The older I grow the more I think I don't belong anywhere. Nomads in the old days travelled around looking for food, for shelter; modern-day nomads, we travel around looking for ourselves."
IMO the least worst option for Egypt would be if Morsi just calls new elections.
Why should he call elections? He won a free and fair ballot one year ago. I find it extraordinary how little attachment some pbc-ers have to democracy when it comes to potential coups in Turkey and Egypt and the like.
Absolutely, Neil.
But my point was about Morsi's options, in terms of the best outcome for cementing a democratic tradition in Egypt.
FWIW I think the army intervening would be a huge mistake and worryingly reminiscent of Algeria in '91. Let's hope it doesn't happen.
From Jeremy Heywood: "“There is a very, very long way to go. We were reminded only last week that the economy as a whole remains about 4 per cent below the size that it was in 2008. “Five years on from the bottom of the recession we have still not even near recovered all the output we lost in that terribly deep recession that we suffered in 2007-08.
“Those are really daunting numbers that just show the size of the challenge; there is no alternative.”
Labour's legacy.......
Osborne's legacy. Austerity isn't working. Paul Krugman was right. Ed Balls was right. History was right. We are falling behind the Americans because Osborne chose austerity which, as predicted, has paradoxically cost even more.
Osbornes boasts about austerity reducing the deficit while he criticised US stimulus look very silly now. Even the PB Tories have surely recognised that now. Although they seem to always find someone else to blame for Osborne having to find £245 Billion extra to fund current spending after his experiment failed.
Manchester airport has spare capacity.
Seems we should be encouraging it's use first, rather than expanding elsewhere.
You can do whatever you want with regional airports, it won't address the hub issue you haven't grasped.
I've 'grasped' that you don't want airport expansion in your locale.
The choice is simple, no development, or a second hub, and the demand in Manchester is there as Gerry Manders link suggests.
With a proper lowering of the air passenger duty for flights from there, there would be a lot of airlines switching flights to Manchester, not only on cost basis, but also because they cannot get the flying slots that they want.
It is greener flying from Manchester also, as lots of fuel is wasted in holding patterns at London.
From Jeremy Heywood: "“There is a very, very long way to go. We were reminded only last week that the economy as a whole remains about 4 per cent below the size that it was in 2008. “Five years on from the bottom of the recession we have still not even near recovered all the output we lost in that terribly deep recession that we suffered in 2007-08.
“Those are really daunting numbers that just show the size of the challenge; there is no alternative.”
Labour's legacy.......
Osborne's legacy. Austerity isn't working. Paul Krugman was right. Ed Balls was right. History was right. We are falling behind the Americans because Osborne chose austerity which, as predicted, has paradoxically cost even more.
Osbornes boasts about austerity reducing the deficit while he criticised US stimulus look very silly now. Even the PB Tories have surely recognised that now. Although they seem to always find someone else to blame for Osborne having to find £245 Billion extra to fund current spending after his experiment failed.
Manchester airport has spare capacity.
Seems we should be encouraging it's use first, rather than expanding elsewhere.
You can do whatever you want with regional airports, it won't address the hub issue you haven't grasped.
I've 'grasped' that you don't want airport expansion in your locale.
That's pretty obvious.
You can build half a dozen extra runways around the country if you like, but it won't make any difference to the fact that without one national hub airport we can't compete with Schipol Frankfurt and Charles De Gaulle.
Could this be the 'nasty party' gaff of 2015? Red Zombie Party anyone? Dead Miliband or even Dead Balls? Yvette 'Grim Reaper' Cooper perhaps. As for Andy 'The Undertaker' Burnham well I don't fancy his roll much!
Airlines need full flights in and out and intercontinental ones need full biz class. You are much less likely to get that with regional airports - the big money is in London and big international spenders want to go to London.
Brum doesn't need an extra runway, it needs airlines that want to fly there.
Or fly out, presumably.
Well indeed. BA don't use it anymore and there are very few intercontinental flights. Emirates has one to Dubai, Turkish Airlines may have one or two and you can connect to KLM and Air France routes to Asia with a connection at Schipol or CDG. But I don't think there are any US flights anymore. I always have to go via Heathrow.
Warley CLP can't recall anymore why they have been put in special measures.
And in New Labour Blairite mantra being under special measures meant being in control.
It will be interesting to see the list of CLPs under special measurers...other than the usual suspects like Tower Hamlets, Slough, Stoke Central, Birmingham Ladywood and Sparkbrook, etc.
Assuming HS2 goes ahead, Birmingham airport could well end up becoming the main UK hub by 2050 without much fanfare. There's already a runway extension underway & a second runway very much on the cards. There's space for a third.
5 Mins to Brum, half an hour to Euston / Manchester / Liverpool / Leeds.
Brum doesn't need an extra runway, it needs airlines that want to fly there.
Or fly out, presumably.
Well indeed. BA don't use it anymore and there are very few intercontinental flights. Emirates has one to Dubai, Turkish Airlines may have one or two and you can connect to KLM and Air France routes to Asia with a connection at Schipol or CDG. But I don't think there are any US flights anymore. I always have to go via Heathrow.
Brum doesn't need an extra runway, it needs airlines that want to fly there.
Or fly out, presumably.
Well indeed. BA don't use it anymore and there are very few intercontinental flights. Emirates has one to Dubai, Turkish Airlines may have one or two and you can connect to KLM and Air France routes to Asia with a connection at Schipol or CDG. But I don't think there are any US flights anymore. I always have to go via Heathrow.
The Chinese, who presumably tim want's to attract to the UK, wouldn't waste their time bodging another cobbled on expansion to their equivalent of Heathrow.
They'd construct a brand new hub, with 21st century transport links and room for expansion on a better located site, and pull the old airport down.
They might even build one from scratch on a man made island, forward thinking that they are.
With the best will in the world our regional airports could not cut it as serious hubs because not enough high price ticket payers will fly in and out of them. Heathrow is receiving and sending out packed biz class cabins from every part of the world because London is a global city, a major financial centre, a property magnet and a major shopping and tourist destination. Nowhere else in Europe, let alone England, comes close.
The choice is simple, no development, or a second hub, and the demand in Manchester is there as Gerry Manders link suggests.
With a proper lowering of the air passenger duty for flights from there, there would be a lot of airlines switching flights to Manchester, not only on cost basis, but also because they cannot get the flying slots that they want.
It is greener flying from Manchester also, as lots of fuel is wasted in holding patterns at London.
From Jeremy Heywood: "“There is a very, very long way to go. We were reminded only last week that the economy as a whole remains about 4 per cent below the size that it was in 2008. “Five years on from the bottom of the recession we have still not even near recovered all the output we lost in that terribly deep recession that we suffered in 2007-08.
“Those are really daunting numbers that just show the size of the challenge; there is no alternative.”
Labour's legacy.......
Osborne's legacy. Austerity isn't working. Paul Krugman was right. Ed Balls was right. History was right. We are falling behind the Americans because Osborne chose austerity which, as predicted, has paradoxically cost even more.
Osbornes boasts about austerity reducing the deficit while he criticised US stimulus look very silly now. Even the PB Tories have surely recognised that now. Although they seem to always find someone else to blame for Osborne having to find £245 Billion extra to fund current spending after his experiment failed.
Manchester airport has spare capacity.
Seems we should be encouraging it's use first, rather than expanding elsewhere.
You can do whatever you want with regional airports, it won't address the hub issue you haven't grasped.
I've 'grasped' that you don't want airport expansion in your locale.
That's pretty obvious.
You can build half a dozen extra runways around the country if you like, but it won't make any difference to the fact that without one national hub airport we can't compete with Schipol Frankfurt and Charles De Gaulle.
It's not a question of being London centric, but the traffic will go through airports on the continent if it doesn't go througH Heathrow. As for bland statements that the demand is their at other airports then why do you think they are operating at below capacity?
Brum doesn't need an extra runway, it needs airlines that want to fly there.
Or fly out, presumably.
Well indeed. BA don't use it anymore and there are very few intercontinental flights. Emirates has one to Dubai, Turkish Airlines may have one or two and you can connect to KLM and Air France routes to Asia with a connection at Schipol or CDG. But I don't think there are any US flights anymore. I always have to go via Heathrow.
Fair enough. It's the only one then. The point remains - Brum Airport is not attractive to the big carriers. I wish it were otherwise. It would make my life a lot easier.
Brum doesn't need an extra runway, it needs airlines that want to fly there.
Or fly out, presumably.
Well indeed. BA don't use it anymore and there are very few intercontinental flights. Emirates has one to Dubai, Turkish Airlines may have one or two and you can connect to KLM and Air France routes to Asia with a connection at Schipol or CDG. But I don't think there are any US flights anymore. I always have to go via Heathrow.
Don't forget the vital Turkmenistan airlines flight to Ashkabat...
They certainly will not compete as hubs if we only invest in London's infrastructure.
If we want everything in the country to be dominated by London's metropolitan elite, then build there, if we want economic expansion elsewhere then invest in infrastructure elsewhere.
The choice is simple, a second smaller hub now, or no expansion for decades, and jobs created late and only in the overheated overcrowded South East.
There once was a time when the Labour party had some civic pride in its Northern roots, but now only sees safe seats for la belle Luciana to be parachuted into.
With the best will in the world our regional airports could not cut it as serious hubs because not enough high price ticket payers will fly in and out of them. Heathrow is receiving and sending out packed biz class cabins from every part of the world because London is a global city, a major financial centre, a property magnet and a major shopping and tourist destination. Nowhere else in Europe, let alone England, comes close.
The Chinese, who presumably tim want's to attract to the UK, wouldn't waste their time bodging another cobbled on expansion to their equivalent of Heathrow.
They'd construct a brand new hub, with 21st century transport links and room for expansion on a better located site, and pull the old airport down.
They might even build one from scratch on a man made island, forward thinking that they are.
It is true that China has lots of modern airports that very few people use. It's also true that Beijing and Shanghai airports are both huge and very well connected. Shenzhen/Guangdong, though, is much less fabulous, though probably just as important to the Chinese economy.
They certainly will not compete as hubs if we only invest in London's infrastructure.
If we want everything in the country to be dominated by London's metropolitan elite, then build there, if we want economic expansion elsewhere then invest in infrastructure elsewhere.
The choice is simple, a second smaller hub now, or no expansion for decades, and jobs created late and only in the overheated overcrowded South East.
There once was a time when the Labour party had some civic pride in its Northern roots, but now only sees safe seats for la belle Luciana to be parachuted into.
With the best will in the world our regional airports could not cut it as serious hubs because not enough high price ticket payers will fly in and out of them. Heathrow is receiving and sending out packed biz class cabins from every part of the world because London is a global city, a major financial centre, a property magnet and a major shopping and tourist destination. Nowhere else in Europe, let alone England, comes close.
Infrastructure does not have to be an airport. Focus first on rail, road, high speed internet, housing and the like. Make sure the UK is properly interconnected and the airports will look after themselves. And make the most of London, it could and should be a great UK resource. If people want to spend money there make it as easy as possible, then redistribute the proceeds north and west.
For a supposed Northener you seem strangely opposed to development in the North.
As a matter of interest, I have got myself thinking. It is quite common to have Southerners parachuted into safe seats in the North: Luciana Berger, Tristam Hunt, David Miliband, Ed Miliband, Peter Mandelson, Tony Blair etc etc.
Are their any similar cases where able Northerners are parachuted into safe Labour seats in London, or is the traffic only one way?
I think part of the reason that we are so disenchanted with our politicians, and feel that do not represent us, is that they treat us voters as chattels to be traded.
They certainly will not compete as hubs if we only invest in London's infrastructure.
If we want everything in the country to be dominated by London's metropolitan elite, then build there, if we want economic expansion elsewhere then invest in infrastructure elsewhere.
The choice is simple, a second smaller hub now, or no expansion for decades, and jobs created late and only in the overheated overcrowded South East.
There once was a time when the Labour party had some civic pride in its Northern roots, but now only sees safe seats for la belle Luciana to be parachuted into.
With the best will in the world our regional airports could not cut it as serious hubs because not enough high price ticket payers will fly in and out of them. Heathrow is receiving and sending out packed biz class cabins from every part of the world because London is a global city, a major financial centre, a property magnet and a major shopping and tourist destination. Nowhere else in Europe, let alone England, comes close.
We've got a "smaller hub" already if that's what you want to describe it as. But it's irrelevant to the London-Schipol-CdG-Frankfurt competition
For a supposed Northener you seem strangely opposed to development in the North.
As a matter of interest, I have got myself thinking. It is quite common to have Southerners parachuted into safe seats in the North: Luciana Berger, Tristam Hunt, David Miliband, Ed Miliband, Peter Mandelson, Tony Blair etc etc.
Are their any similar cases where able Northerners are parachuted into safe Labour seats in London, or is the traffic only one way?
I think part of the reason that we are so disenchanted with our politicians, and feel that do not represent us, is that they treat us voters as chattels to be traded.
They certainly will not compete as hubs if we only invest in London's infrastructure.
If we want everything in the country to be dominated by London's metropolitan elite, then build there, if we want economic expansion elsewhere then invest in infrastructure elsewhere.
The choice is simple, a second smaller hub now, or no expansion for decades, and jobs created late and only in the overheated overcrowded South East.
There once was a time when the Labour party had some civic pride in its Northern roots, but now only sees safe seats for la belle Luciana to be parachuted into.
With the best will in the world our regional airports could not cut it as serious hubs because not enough high price ticket payers will fly in and out of them. Heathrow is receiving and sending out packed biz class cabins from every part of the world because London is a global city, a major financial centre, a property magnet and a major shopping and tourist destination. Nowhere else in Europe, let alone England, comes close.
We've got a "smaller hub" already if that's what you want to describe it as. But it's irrelevant to the London-Schipol-CdG-Frankfurt competition
Blair is Scottish (born in Edinburgh) and lived either in Durham or Scotland in the UK (he also live in Australia for a while) before attending Oxford. He's no southerner.
FPT "IIRC the Tories were genuinely expecting to poll 35-40% in both the 2004 and 2009 Euro elections and were a bit taken aback to only get 26.7% and 27.7% respectively. In 2009 in particular they thought they'd do much better. It wasn't because of UKIP doing well because their vote increased by just 0.4% from 16.1% to 16.5%."
@AndyJS The 2009 Euro elections were held in the immediate aftermath of the Westminster expenses scandal, and this definitely had an electoral impact on all the parties involved at the time.
I do wonder if that palpable electorate anger towards our politicians over the expenses scandal didn't continue to seep into the GE result, thus denying the Conservatives an overall majority. The lethal combination of the anger generated towards bankers over the Banking collapse, and our politicians over the expenses scandal really did cause immense damage at a time when austerity and very tough cuts were going to impact on the electorate. Although turn out increased at the last GE on the back of a very unpopular Government, did the expenses scandal prevent it from being higher because of a 'plague on all your houses' group who stayed at home?
Anecdotally. I am hearing some real anger on the issue of an MP's pay rise in light of the current austerity drive effecting the electorate, the generous figure being suggested is just fuelling this. Really do think that Cameron has to go big on the fact that the Libdems reneged on their Coalition agreement to see a drop in the number of MP's. Especially after the Conservatives honoured their part of the bargain by delivering an expensive PR Referendum that the electorate didn't ask for, and only the Libdems wanted.
On the issue of the EU Referendum, lots of discussion of how this a problem for the Conservatives as if the current position of both the Libdems or the Labour party isn't an issue. We are about to see a Scottish Referendum on Independence next year, this follows the successful Referendum on Devolution at the end of the 90's. The idea of our Government re-negotiating powers back from the EU is popular among our predominantly Eurosceptic electorate, as is our very expensive membership of the EU. At the moment, the Conservatives are the only party at Westminster offering our English colleagues in the Union a Referendum on a very expensive issue that effects their daily lives. A point so often missed here when it comes to any debate on the EU.
The prevailing view on here in the run up to the last GE was that this was a good one to lose. Indeed, some within the Labour party were so desperate to leave Office and the problems of their economic legacy behind that they ran so fast out the door there was never any chance of it hitting them on the behookie. That assumption that the decisions this Government would have to take would be so toxic that it was nailed on that they would thrown out after one term is beginning to look very premature. And the complacency of a Labour party that opposed every Austerity decision while thinking they could just throw their manifesto together at the last minute, as if it was a given they would be regarded as a far better option after this lot isn't looking so clever. Well excuse the pun, but the fact that the Coalition stepped up to the plate and the economy is now recovering might see a bit of a 'he who dares wins' swing back unfold in the coming months.
For a supposed Northener you seem strangely opposed to development in the North.
As a matter of interest, I have got myself thinking. It is quite common to have Southerners parachuted into safe seats in the North: Luciana Berger, Tristam Hunt, David Miliband, Ed Miliband, Peter Mandelson, Tony Blair etc etc.
Are their any similar cases where able Northerners are parachuted into safe Labour seats in London, or is the traffic only one way?
I think part of the reason that we are so disenchanted with our politicians, and feel that do not represent us, is that they treat us voters as chattels to be traded.
They certainly will not compete as hubs if we only invest in London's infrastructure.
If we want everything in the country to be dominated by London's metropolitan elite, then build there, if we want economic expansion elsewhere then invest in infrastructure elsewhere.
The choice is simple, a second smaller hub now, or no expansion for decades, and jobs created late and only in the overheated overcrowded South East.
There once was a time when the Labour party had some civic pride in its Northern roots, but now only sees safe seats for la belle Luciana to be parachuted into.
With the best will in the world our regional airports could not cut it as serious hubs because not enough high price ticket payers will fly in and out of them. Heathrow is receiving and sending out packed biz class cabins from every part of the world because London is a global city, a major financial centre, a property magnet and a major shopping and tourist destination. Nowhere else in Europe, let alone England, comes close.
We've got a "smaller hub" already if that's what you want to describe it as. But it's irrelevant to the London-Schipol-CdG-Frankfurt competition
Barry Gardiner (Brent North) is Scottish Fiona MacTaggart sort of (Slough) was born of a Scottish family and schooled in Cheltenham John McDonnell sort of (Hayes) born in Liverpool but brought up in Yarmouth Glenda Jackson (Hampstead & Kilburn) born and bred in Liverpool Frank Dobson (Holborn) Born and bred in York Jeremy Crobyn (Islington North) born and bred in Shropshire Andy Love (Edmonton) is Scottish Jim Fitzpatrick (Poplar) is Scottish Stelloa Creasey (Walthamstow) born in Sutton Coldfield John Cryer (Leyton) went to school in Keighley Stephen Timms (East Ham) born in Oldham but schooled in Hampshire Teresa Pearce (Erith & Thamesmead) born in Southport but schooled in London Nick Raynsford (Greenwich) born and bred in Northamptonshire Joan Ruddock (Lewisham Deptford) is Welsh Kate Hoey (Vauxhall) hails from Northern Ireland
Beyond that there are numerous other London seats that are held by people who do not hail from London or the North such as Margaret Hodge who lived abroad until going to the LSE or Jon Cruddas who hails from the West country. Its as hard to find a Labour MP who is a Londoner in London as it is to find one who is not a Londoner.
Outside London in the South there are no other northerners but then Labour only have 10 seats. Even so Norwich born Ben Bradshaw ended up in Exeter and the infamous Twitter Queen Kerry McCarthy who was brought up in Luton ended up in Bristol. The others tends to have a closer relationship with their constituencies
PS I had no idea how rich MacTaggart and Hodge were until I checked their bio's
FPT. "Mike: Isn't the article saying that countries with growing populations are better placed to grow and take advantage of the opportunities that there will be?
So that could mean increased fertility rates and/or immigration. It doesn't mean only immigration.
Though I accept that given that women are generally having fewer babies immigration - of the right sort, with the right support and with the consent of the public (which were not matters which Labour were keen on at all) - is probably the sensible way to go.
Labour's issue is not the policy itself (necessarily) but its deception about what was going on and its failure to get public support for what it was doing and why, especially from its own supporters, plus its failure to ameliorate or deal with the negative consequences of immigration for particular communities or areas. "
@Cyclefree, excellent post, and that last paragraph really does nail the main weakness of the current Labour party and its Leadership in all policy areas, as it did the last Labour Government on this issue in particular.
FPT "IIRC the Tories were genuinely expecting to poll 35-40% in both the 2004 and 2009 Euro elections and were a bit taken aback to only get 26.7% and 27.7% respectively. In 2009 in particular they thought they'd do much better. It wasn't because of UKIP doing well because their vote increased by just 0.4% from 16.1% to 16.5%."
@AndyJS The 2009 Euro elections were held in the immediate aftermath of the Westminster expenses scandal, and this definitely had an electoral impact on all the parties involved at the time.
I do wonder if that palpable electorate anger towards our politicians over the expenses scandal didn't continue to seep into the GE result, thus denying the Conservatives an overall majority. The lethal combination of the anger generated towards bankers over the Banking collapse, and our politicians over the expenses scandal really did cause immense damage at a time when austerity and very tough cuts were going to impact on the electorate. Although turn out increased at the last GE on the back of a very unpopular Government, did the expenses scandal prevent it from being higher because of a 'plague on all your houses' group who stayed at home?
Anecdotally. I am hearing some real anger on the issue of an MP's pay rise in light of the current austerity drive effecting the electorate, the generous figure being suggested is just fuelling this. Really do think that Cameron has to go big on the fact that the Libdems reneged on their Coalition agreement to see a drop in the number of MP's. Especially after the Conservatives honoured their part of the bargain by delivering an expensive PR Referendum that the electorate didn't ask for, and only the Libdems wanted.
On the issue of the EU Referendum, lots of discussion of how this a problem for the Conservatives as if the current position of both the Libdems or the Labour party isn't an issue. We are about to see a Scottish Referendum on Independence next year, this follows the successful Referendum on Devolution at the end of the 90's. The idea of our Government re-negotiating powers back from the EU is popular among our predominantly Eurosceptic electorate, as is our very expensive membership of the EU. At the moment, the Conservatives are the only party at Westminster offering our English colleagues in the Union a Referendum on a very expensive issue that effects their daily lives. A point so often missed here when it comes to any debate on the EU.
The prevailing view on here in the run up to the last GE was that this was a good one to lose, indeed, some within the Labour party were so desperate to leave Office and the problems of their economic legacy behind that they ran so far there was no chance of the door slamming them in the behookie. That assumption that the decisions this Government would have to take would be so toxic that it was nailed on that they would thrown out after one term is beginning to look very premature. And the complacency of a Labour party that opposed every Austerity decision while thinking they could just throw their manifesto together at the last minute, as if it was a given they would be regarded as a far better option after this lot isn't looking so clever.
Reducing the number of MPs was the wrong solution and would have only increased the democratic deficit in England whilst leaving 600 MPs to trough away exactly as they had done before (or even more lavishly if IPSA gets its way) whereas a simple 10% cut in the budget for the Houses of Parliament would have fulfilled the economic efficiency criteria without damaging democracy in this country and ensuring all MP's and indeed Peers were all in it together with the rest of us. As for MPs' pay the simple solution would be to link it to average income/ earnings by fixing their salary at say 2.5 times average annual income. Then if politicians manage to get the economy going and earnings rise they get a pay rise too or vice versa. Without question that fulfils the 'All in it together' criteria and provides motivation for MPs to act in the best interest of the electorate rather than act out of self interest and / or vested interest.
As for the referendum its little more than a cheap Blairite triangulation aimed at conning/ coercing naive secessionists (if there is such a thing which is doubtful) into voting for a Europhile party. From the responses I've seen online its not a particulary successful triangulation because basically far too many people just don't trust Cameron or the Tories to keep their word over the EU (indeed it's the second rule of politics). Furthermore, if the EU is that expensive (as Sceptics claim) why is the leader of the Conservative Party so dedicated to remaining a member?
It was indeed a good election to lose. However Osborne has reasonably successfully managed to hold off the inevitable economic reckoning by avoiding the tough decisions and borrowing as if its going out of fashion in such a way as to be able to hand it back to Labour to wrestle with unsuccessfully for another five years. Basically its a bit like playing the economic version of russian roulette. In 2015 it will be Labour's turn to pull the trigger (no doubt as tentatively as Osborne did) and see if it blows their political party to bits. As Heywood is reported to have said this crisis is going to take 20 years to unravel. Moving on putting aside the electoral imbalance and the mass migration of Libdems to Labour or the unpopularity of certain Tory policies (Aid, Energy) or indeed your unwise underestimation of Labour (given their policy work has been ongoing for some time and not unlike the Tories in 2007) Labour will win in 2015 simply because they are better at politics than Cameron and Osborne are.
Comments
Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook
And the HS2 spur can speed the new arrivals from China to all points north and south.
@labourpress: Tomorrow's Times headline seriously misleading. "Revelation" of seats taken into special measures date back to 1995 under Tony Blair.
We have a congestion charge on the ground in London, why not also in the air.
The hinterland of Manchester is vast, and most of us prefer to avoid Heathrow, because of the congestion there both on the roads nearby and in the air. When there is fog at Christmas we see misery at Heathrow, and normal flying at Manchester, simply because there is spare capacity.
On your recent mid-East trip did you fly from Manchester, or did you have the long trip to Heathrow added to your jouney?
If you could have flown from Manchester then would you have done so?
What is it that you have against infrastructure development in the North?
And the HS2 spur can speed the new arrivals from China to all points north and south.
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/business/business-news/emirates-manchester-passenger-numbers-surges-4722524
Its getting there, slowly. This is another article, where Emirates are talking about a second daily A380 service from Manchester to Dubai.
That's blatantly obvious.
It will create jobs, people will have money and they won't have anything to whinge about.
Keep the people poor, and they'll keep on voting Labour.
London's loss is Manchester's gain, and a big step to closing the North /South divide.
If there was a new town built nearby in addition, with housing and export zone, what is not to like?
On a vaguely related theme - I'm just finishing the astonishingly good "Vietnam - an oral history". Christian Appy has collected views on the Vietnam war from all sides with scrupulous neutrality - American hawks, American peaceniks, US soldiers, ARVN veterans, NVA and NLF veterans, seinor commanders like Rostow, Haig and Westmoreland and their Vietnamese counterparts. I grew up when it was raging and my view has basically been that the good guys won, but the book overwhelms partisan feeling with a sense of collective tragedy.
My favourite is an obscure (to me) Vietnamese writer called Nguyen Qui Duc, who followed his family to the US when the Southern regime crumbled. He writes:
"So much of my life has been coloured by having to leave my homeland. When I go to Vietnam I am not seen as Vietnamese and it hurts. And I could never be what other people are as American. The older I grow the more I think I don't belong anywhere. Nomads in the old days travelled around looking for food, for shelter; modern-day nomads, we travel around looking for ourselves."
He's written quite a bit, apparently:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nguyen_Qui_Duc
- I want to read it.
Event tonight at no11 for Asians expelled from Uganda 40 years ago.They've made huge contribution to UK eco & soc.Uganda's loss was our gain
Except for Yasmin Alibhai Brown ;-)
But my point was about Morsi's options, in terms of the best outcome for cementing a democratic tradition in Egypt.
FWIW I think the army intervening would be a huge mistake and worryingly reminiscent of Algeria in '91. Let's hope it doesn't happen.
The choice is simple, no development, or a second hub, and the demand in Manchester is there as Gerry Manders link suggests.
With a proper lowering of the air passenger duty for flights from there, there would be a lot of airlines switching flights to Manchester, not only on cost basis, but also because they cannot get the flying slots that they want.
It is greener flying from Manchester also, as lots of fuel is wasted in holding patterns at London.
tim, you should really not be so London centric.
Unless Labour breaks the influence of the unions, it will become “the party of the graveyard,” he said.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10155975/David-Blunkett-Labour-vote-rigging-report-must-be-published.html
Could this be the 'nasty party' gaff of 2015? Red Zombie Party anyone? Dead Miliband or even Dead Balls? Yvette 'Grim Reaper' Cooper perhaps. As for Andy 'The Undertaker' Burnham well I don't fancy his roll much!
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/3880/anger_as_tory_meps_banned_from_campaigning_and_party_events
Ban everything. Don't do anything. Don't campaign. And you won't have any problem.
Build in the South East if you want to increase the North South divide, build in Manchester if you want to reduce it.
The BBC have moved there, who knows the Guardian may even revive if it regained its Manchester roots (provided there were enough flights to Tuscany)
And in New Labour Blairite mantra being under special measures meant being in control.
It will be interesting to see the list of CLPs under special measurers...other than the usual suspects like Tower Hamlets, Slough, Stoke Central, Birmingham Ladywood and Sparkbrook, etc.
5 Mins to Brum, half an hour to Euston / Manchester / Liverpool / Leeds.
The Chinese, who presumably tim want's to attract to the UK, wouldn't waste their time bodging another cobbled on expansion to their equivalent of Heathrow.
They'd construct a brand new hub, with 21st century transport links and room for expansion on a better located site, and pull the old airport down.
They might even build one from scratch on a man made island, forward thinking that they are.
But I would prefer to fly direct.
If there is spare capacity at Manchester and Birmingham, it makes sense to use it, via discounts on air passenger duty.
Or do you think that Northeners should be encouraged not to travel?
Also, I think Emirates is twice daily.
If we want everything in the country to be dominated by London's metropolitan elite, then build there, if we want economic expansion elsewhere then invest in infrastructure elsewhere.
The choice is simple, a second smaller hub now, or no expansion for decades, and jobs created late and only in the overheated overcrowded South East.
There once was a time when the Labour party had some civic pride in its Northern roots, but now only sees safe seats for la belle Luciana to be parachuted into.
As a matter of interest, I have got myself thinking. It is quite common to have Southerners parachuted into safe seats in the North: Luciana Berger, Tristam Hunt, David Miliband, Ed Miliband, Peter Mandelson, Tony Blair etc etc.
Are their any similar cases where able Northerners are parachuted into safe Labour seats in London, or is the traffic only one way?
I think part of the reason that we are so disenchanted with our politicians, and feel that do not represent us, is that they treat us voters as chattels to be traded.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_blair
@AndyJS The 2009 Euro elections were held in the immediate aftermath of the Westminster expenses scandal, and this definitely had an electoral impact on all the parties involved at the time.
I do wonder if that palpable electorate anger towards our politicians over the expenses scandal didn't continue to seep into the GE result, thus denying the Conservatives an overall majority. The lethal combination of the anger generated towards bankers over the Banking collapse, and our politicians over the expenses scandal really did cause immense damage at a time when austerity and very tough cuts were going to impact on the electorate. Although turn out increased at the last GE on the back of a very unpopular Government, did the expenses scandal prevent it from being higher because of a 'plague on all your houses' group who stayed at home?
Anecdotally. I am hearing some real anger on the issue of an MP's pay rise in light of the current austerity drive effecting the electorate, the generous figure being suggested is just fuelling this. Really do think that Cameron has to go big on the fact that the Libdems reneged on their Coalition agreement to see a drop in the number of MP's. Especially after the Conservatives honoured their part of the bargain by delivering an expensive PR Referendum that the electorate didn't ask for, and only the Libdems wanted.
On the issue of the EU Referendum, lots of discussion of how this a problem for the Conservatives as if the current position of both the Libdems or the Labour party isn't an issue. We are about to see a Scottish Referendum on Independence next year, this follows the successful Referendum on Devolution at the end of the 90's. The idea of our Government re-negotiating powers back from the EU is popular among our predominantly Eurosceptic electorate, as is our very expensive membership of the EU. At the moment, the Conservatives are the only party at Westminster offering our English colleagues in the Union a Referendum on a very expensive issue that effects their daily lives. A point so often missed here when it comes to any debate on the EU.
The prevailing view on here in the run up to the last GE was that this was a good one to lose. Indeed, some within the Labour party were so desperate to leave Office and the problems of their economic legacy behind that they ran so fast out the door there was never any chance of it hitting them on the behookie. That assumption that the decisions this Government would have to take would be so toxic that it was nailed on that they would thrown out after one term is beginning to look very premature. And the complacency of a Labour party that opposed every Austerity decision while thinking they could just throw their manifesto together at the last minute, as if it was a given they would be regarded as a far better option after this lot isn't looking so clever. Well excuse the pun, but the fact that the Coalition stepped up to the plate and the economy is now recovering might see a bit of a 'he who dares wins' swing back unfold in the coming months.
Fiona MacTaggart sort of (Slough) was born of a Scottish family and schooled in Cheltenham
John McDonnell sort of (Hayes) born in Liverpool but brought up in Yarmouth
Glenda Jackson (Hampstead & Kilburn) born and bred in Liverpool
Frank Dobson (Holborn) Born and bred in York
Jeremy Crobyn (Islington North) born and bred in Shropshire
Andy Love (Edmonton) is Scottish
Jim Fitzpatrick (Poplar) is Scottish
Stelloa Creasey (Walthamstow) born in Sutton Coldfield
John Cryer (Leyton) went to school in Keighley
Stephen Timms (East Ham) born in Oldham but schooled in Hampshire
Teresa Pearce (Erith & Thamesmead) born in Southport but schooled in London
Nick Raynsford (Greenwich) born and bred in Northamptonshire
Joan Ruddock (Lewisham Deptford) is Welsh
Kate Hoey (Vauxhall) hails from Northern Ireland
Beyond that there are numerous other London seats that are held by people who do not hail from London or the North such as Margaret Hodge who lived abroad until going to the LSE or Jon Cruddas who hails from the West country. Its as hard to find a Labour MP who is a Londoner in London as it is to find one who is not a Londoner.
Outside London in the South there are no other northerners but then Labour only have 10 seats. Even so Norwich born Ben Bradshaw ended up in Exeter and the infamous Twitter Queen Kerry McCarthy who was brought up in Luton ended up in Bristol. The others tends to have a closer relationship with their constituencies
PS I had no idea how rich MacTaggart and Hodge were until I checked their bio's
So that could mean increased fertility rates and/or immigration. It doesn't mean only immigration.
Though I accept that given that women are generally having fewer babies immigration - of the right sort, with the right support and with the consent of the public (which were not matters which Labour were keen on at all) - is probably the sensible way to go.
Labour's issue is not the policy itself (necessarily) but its deception about what was going on and its failure to get public support for what it was doing and why, especially from its own supporters, plus its failure to ameliorate or deal with the negative consequences of immigration for particular communities or areas. "
@Cyclefree, excellent post, and that last paragraph really does nail the main weakness of the current Labour party and its Leadership in all policy areas, as it did the last Labour Government on this issue in particular.
As for the referendum its little more than a cheap Blairite triangulation aimed at conning/ coercing naive secessionists (if there is such a thing which is doubtful) into voting for a Europhile party. From the responses I've seen online its not a particulary successful triangulation because basically far too many people just don't trust Cameron or the Tories to keep their word over the EU (indeed it's the second rule of politics). Furthermore, if the EU is that expensive (as Sceptics claim) why is the leader of the Conservative Party so dedicated to remaining a member?
It was indeed a good election to lose. However Osborne has reasonably successfully managed to hold off the inevitable economic reckoning by avoiding the tough decisions and borrowing as if its going out of fashion in such a way as to be able to hand it back to Labour to wrestle with unsuccessfully for another five years. Basically its a bit like playing the economic version of russian roulette. In 2015 it will be Labour's turn to pull the trigger (no doubt as tentatively as Osborne did) and see if it blows their political party to bits. As Heywood is reported to have said this crisis is going to take 20 years to unravel. Moving on putting aside the electoral imbalance and the mass migration of Libdems to Labour or the unpopularity of certain Tory policies (Aid, Energy) or indeed your unwise underestimation of Labour (given their policy work has been ongoing for some time and not unlike the Tories in 2007) Labour will win in 2015 simply because they are better at politics than Cameron and Osborne are.