Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Smith vs Corbyn debate showed a Labour Party talking to

135

Comments

  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 93,627
    PlatoSaid said:

    Ian Jones
    How Cameron shared out the gongs. Almost a half have gone to political colleagues and advisers. https://t.co/LrqMKp1u7R

    It's his resignation honours - if ever there was a reasonable time to be a bit partisan and reward friends and allies, it is this set.

    And I reiterate that apart from peerages, the rest don't really matter - gongs for politicos have long occurred, so if the meaningfulness of other gongs for the deserving is undermined by such it happened a long time ago.

    EIther we scrap the system, or stop complaining each time this happens.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,511
    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    tpfkar said:

    I feel quite sorry for Owen Smith - after weeks of dithering from the MPs, he's the only one (A Eagle aside) to have shown the slightest bit of sp

    Either way, the road seems long and painful for Labour from here.

    This nails the essence of the problem (or half of it). Smith is not a potential PM; his appeal is not that he will lead Labour into government (yes, he's saying that but he has to given his position); it's that he'll arrest the decline. But is that really enough? Perhaps he would resign later if elected and allow himself to be a super-stalking-horse, so that a genuinely PM-able candidate could be chosen. Such self-sacrifice is not usually a characteristic of the kind of people who become party leaders though.

    And the potential PMs within Labour ranks didn't stand because they knew they'd lose again. For as long as Labour won't choose someone that the country would choose, they are in a very deep hole.
    Disagree. Smith has potential as PM. This is early days for him. IMO he is better than Ed.
    He was worse than corbyn last night. He was truly terrible.
    Disagree, whilst the debate was awful, he was good. Deserves respect for being the only one standing up to the braying mob.
    Agreed. A debate to become Labour leader isn't going to be the same as a debate to become PM. I don't think he'd be very good, compares unfavourably to Ed, but he is an improvement on Corbyn. Hopefully Smith is just a way to remove Corbyn and he stands down next summer and opens up the race proper, with no hard left candidate being given the nominations. Unfortunately he has to win first, and at this point in time it seems unlikely.
    If Smith wins he will have a mandate from members and not stand down after all Howard replaced IDS and fought an election with little chance of being PM
    But Howard did at least have the skills and ability to do the job, even if he didn't have the usual characteristics of an election winner (never mind of one who had to overturn an existing 160+ majority). He was a former Home Secretary, had 7 years' experience in cabinet and was a good parliamentary performer - way better than IDS, if not quite in Hague's class. Smith is only comparable in that he would be seeking to regroup his party after a disastrous predecessor, though even IDS wasn't as disastrous as Corbyn is for Labour.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 93,627
    edited August 2016
    runnymede said:

    felix said:

    john_zims said:

    @Indigo

    john_zims

    Or are you saying that Smith is pretending to be far left ?


    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1522032/No-welcome-in-these-valleys-for-Labour.html

    Owen Smith, the new Labour candidate, is, as his name might suggest, male, and a son of the valleys. But the boyo bit ends there.
    A former BBC journalist, he was a special adviser to former Welsh Secretary Paul Murphy and is now a political lobbyist for American pharmaceutical giant Pfizer. About as New Labour as you can get.
    Would he describe himself as a socialist?
    "I am a democratic socialist, yes."
    And Mr Blair, is he a socialist?
    "Yes."
    Mr Smith, 36, believes the Law movement is no more than a political spasm. "Their campaign is about the past and reminding people about the past. We are looking to the future." Trying not to sound like a New Labour clone, Mr Smith dips his toe in a puddle of controversy. "The invasion of Iraq was a mistake," he offers. "The world would have been a safer place if we hadn't done it."
    Any other areas of difference with Mr Blair?
    "No, I don't think so."


    Thanks for the confirmation,so he's a Blairite pretending to be a left wing nutjob,how sad is that.

    The fact that 'blairite' is a term of abuse sums up the problems in the Labour party. I detest the man but he was a winner.
    Isn't it a massive failure for Blair's legacy that to be even associated with his name is a total negative? To reverse your point, for many ex Labour voters (including me), he was a winner but I detest the man and his policies.
    Isn't it his personal behaviour, especially since leaving office, that has made his legacy so toxic?

    Looks like Cameron is aiming to go the same way btw
    That's quick - he hasn't had time to even signal how his post office legacy will go, not least because he hasn't even left the commons yet! I think we're getting a bit hysterical.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    There are only really four conceivable unity candidates for Labour, and Owen Smith isn't any of them. The four are: Margaret Beckett, Alan Johnson, Tom Watson and Ed Miliband.

    Despite her age, Labour should seriously consider drafting in Margaret Beckett.
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,200
    On topic, I don't think Smith needed the strategy for Tories yet. His main policy commitment was putting corporation tax and inheritance tax back up to pay for more spending, which shouldn't go down too badly with the general election electorate. He's positioned as the centrist candidate, so he has a bit more room to do left-wing things than Corbyn does.
  • Options
    john_zims said:

    ....
    Thanks for the confirmation,so he's a Blairite pretending to be a left wing nutjob,how sad is that.

    Principles? He has other ones if you do not like these ones today.
    :smile:
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,759
    edited August 2016
    runnymede said:

    felix said:

    john_zims said:

    @Indigo

    john_zims

    Or are you saying that Smith is pretending to be far left ?


    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1522032/No-welcome-in-these-valleys-for-Labour.html

    Owen Smith, the new Labour candidate, is, as his name might suggest, male, and a son of the valleys. But the boyo bit ends there.
    A former BBC journalist, he was a special adviser to former Welsh Secretary Paul Murphy and is now a political lobbyist for American pharmaceutical giant Pfizer. About as New Labour as you can get.
    Would he describe himself as a socialist?
    "I am a democratic socialist, yes."
    And Mr Blair, is he a socialist?
    "Yes."
    Mr Smith, 36, believes the Law movement is no more than a political spasm. "Their campaign is about the past and reminding people about the past. We are looking to the future." Trying not to sound like a New Labour clone, Mr Smith dips his toe in a puddle of controversy. "The invasion of Iraq was a mistake," he offers. "The world would have been a safer place if we hadn't done it."
    Any other areas of difference with Mr Blair?
    "No, I don't think so."


    Thanks for the confirmation,so he's a Blairite pretending to be a left wing nutjob,how sad is that.

    The fact that 'blairite' is a term of abuse sums up the problems in the Labour party. I detest the man but he was a winner.
    Isn't it a massive failure for Blair's legacy that to be even associated with his name is a total negative? To reverse your point, for many ex Labour voters (including me), he was a winner but I detest the man and his policies.
    Isn't it his personal behaviour, especially since leaving office, that has made his legacy so toxic?

    Looks like Cameron is aiming to go the same way btw
    It doesn't help, but I was sceptical in '97 and Iraq just killed Labour for me.

    The whole 'but he was a winner' thing resembles Maxwells's sons being told 'but he made millions, look at his legacy!'

  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,097
    edited August 2016

    There are only really four conceivable unity candidates for Labour, and Owen Smith isn't any of them. The four are: Margaret Beckett, Alan Johnson, Tom Watson and Ed Miliband.

    Despite her age, Labour should seriously consider drafting in Margaret Beckett.

    Ma Beckett is not the person. Really not.
    Tom Watson is now hated by the Corbyn crowd.
    Alan is seen as a Blairite.

    Of your four, it's Ed. But Smith isn't doing that badly. The main problem he has is going 0-60 on recognition.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    perdix said:

    MaxPB said:

    It's amazing how incompetent Corbyn is. Right now the Tories could be having a massive problem with sleaze and cash for honours, but by putting forwards Chakrabati for a peerage he has completely undermined the argument and now it is just another case of "a pox on all your houses". Owen Smith has an opportunity here to show Jez up as a huge hypocrite and win over a lot of people. He must take the chance and attack this appointment.

    Please enumerate the Tories' "sleaze and cash for honours".

    They mean the perfectly ordinary set of honours for friends and allies of political persons (more so than usual if only because of the reason for the set of honours being more an explicitly political occasion than usual).

    The Tories do not have a massive problem with sleaze and cash for honours right now. If now signifies such, we already had that problem as part of the system.
    Surely that was the point? That Corbyn and Labour ought to be attacking the Conservatives over the honours list but instead it is left to the right-wing press.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3724567/Dave-s-two-fingers-voters-brazen-contempt-public-opinion-Cameron-showers-honours-chums-cronies-second-raters.html

    My point is there's not as much to be gained attacking the Tories over things as people are pretending, because it was so ordinary. Sure, without Chakribarti they could attack the whole concept of the honours system, I would guess Corbyn is not a fan of it, but despite the fevered dreams of someon left and right, I don't see why this set of appointments would make for a particularly telling attack on the Tories, due to how unexceptional it is.
    That is probably also the Corbynite view. For those who view the honours system as inherently corrupt, or if (like me) you just don't care about it, then this is just business as usual. The reason for attacking Cameron's list is to make an impact on those voters who do care, and who value its integrity.
  • Options
    runnymede said:

    felix said:

    john_zims said:

    @Indigo

    john_zims

    Or are you saying that Smith is pretending to be far left ?


    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1522032/No-welcome-in-these-valleys-for-Labour.html

    Owen Smith, the new Labour candidate, is, as his name might suggest, male, and a son of the valleys. But the boyo bit ends there.
    A former BBC journalist, he was a special adviser to former Welsh Secretary Paul Murphy and is now a political lobbyist for American pharmaceutical giant Pfizer. About as New Labour as you can get.
    Would he describe himself as a socialist?
    "I am a democratic socialist, yes."
    And Mr Blair, is he a socialist?
    "Yes."
    Mr Smith, 36, believes the Law movement is no more than a political spasm. "Their campaign is about the past and reminding people about the past. We are looking to the future." Trying not to sound like a New Labour clone, Mr Smith dips his toe in a puddle of controversy. "The invasion of Iraq was a mistake," he offers. "The world would have been a safer place if we hadn't done it."
    Any other areas of difference with Mr Blair?
    "No, I don't think so."


    Thanks for the confirmation,so he's a Blairite pretending to be a left wing nutjob,how sad is that.

    The fact that 'blairite' is a term of abuse sums up the problems in the Labour party. I detest the man but he was a winner.
    Isn't it a massive failure for Blair's legacy that to be even associated with his name is a total negative? To reverse your point, for many ex Labour voters (including me), he was a winner but I detest the man and his policies.
    Isn't it his personal behaviour, especially since leaving office, that has made his legacy so toxic?

    Looks like Cameron is aiming to go the same way btw
    Cameron's Losers List is probably as bad as it gets. What is clear is how much in common Cameron has with Blair. Believed his own publicity and delusional about his power with the voters. He even convinced himself that he led the same sex marriage change when it was never in the manifesto and was proposed by a Lib Dem minister. Yet that was the one big change that Cameron viewed his premiership as achieving.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,759

    There are only really four conceivable unity candidates for Labour, and Owen Smith isn't any of them. The four are: Margaret Beckett, Alan Johnson, Tom Watson and Ed Miliband.

    Despite her age, Labour should seriously consider drafting in Margaret Beckett.

    Ma Beckett might have to do some explaining over her nominating Jez moment.

    'It is one of the worst political mistakes I have ever made.'
  • Options
    kle4 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    Ian Jones
    How Cameron shared out the gongs. Almost a half have gone to political colleagues and advisers. https://t.co/LrqMKp1u7R

    It's his resignation honours - if ever there was a reasonable time to be a bit partisan and reward friends and allies, it is this set.

    And I reiterate that apart from peerages, the rest don't really matter - gongs for politicos have long occurred, so if the meaningfulness of other gongs for the deserving is undermined by such it happened a long time ago.
    EIther we scrap the system, or stop complaining each time this happens.
    Cameron may have delivered the last resignation honours list because it is so bad. 13 peers! All remainers.....
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,667
    Jonathan said:

    There are only really four conceivable unity candidates for Labour, and Owen Smith isn't any of them. The four are: Margaret Beckett, Alan Johnson, Tom Watson and Ed Miliband.

    Despite her age, Labour should seriously consider drafting in Margaret Beckett.

    Ma Beckett is not the person. Really not.
    Tom Watson is now hated by the Corbyn crowd.
    Alan is seen as a Blairite.

    Of your four, it's Ed. But Smith isn't doing that badly. The main problem he has is going 0-60 on recognition.
    Is that your book talking?

    Is there any evidence Ed Miliband has matured into anything of a better politician since he gave David Cameron an overall majority last year? I personally can't see how Brand Miliband represents anything other than Loser, with either brother, but then, I ain't grasping at straws...
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,686
    I'm finding it harder and harder to believe that RBS will ever be profitable again.
  • Options
    TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    edited August 2016
    I expect May is waiting for the Labour result to press the "go" button.
    That's fne by me, a lefty.
    Excising is called for.
  • Options
    john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @TCPoliticalBetting

    john_zims....

    Thanks for the confirmation,so he's a Blairite pretending to be a left wing nutjob,how sad is that.'

    'Principles? He has other ones if you do not like these ones today.'


    Truly a man for all seasons, a Tony Benn weathercock.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,686
    Toms said:

    I expect May is waiting for the Labour result to press the "go" button.
    That's fne by me, a lefty.

    She won't go to the people until A50 has been served. Could be some time next year though. We need a new mandate to pass our agreement with the EU or something along those lines. Beating Corbyn this year is the same as beating him next year.
  • Options

    There are only really four conceivable unity candidates for Labour, and Owen Smith isn't any of them. The four are: Margaret Beckett, Alan Johnson, Tom Watson and Ed Miliband.

    Despite her age, Labour should seriously consider drafting in Margaret Beckett.

    The unity Labour candidate has not been born yet.
  • Options
    TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,397
    kle4 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    Ian Jones
    How Cameron shared out the gongs. Almost a half have gone to political colleagues and advisers. https://t.co/LrqMKp1u7R

    It's his resignation honours - if ever there was a reasonable time to be a bit partisan and reward friends and allies, it is this set.

    And I reiterate that apart from peerages, the rest don't really matter - gongs for politicos have long occurred, so if the meaningfulness of other gongs for the deserving is undermined by such it happened a long time ago.

    EIther we scrap the system, or stop complaining each time this happens.
    It is a very British form of corruption, a form of corruption that gets you some letters after your name, and a visit to the Queen. Not much more than that.
  • Options
    DanSmithDanSmith Posts: 1,215
    The problem with Smith coming in and losing is that the membership will just go "we should have stuck with Corbyn" and vote in another hard left candidate to replace Smith.

    Corbyn has to lead Labour to defeat (no matter how bad) at the next election. He needs to own it, the membership need to own it.

    The PLP are insane if they think Smith running on an identical platform to Corbyn is a good idea.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 115,921
    edited August 2016
    I hope you're all happy, some in the legal profession are being hit hard by Brexit

    Addleshaw Goddard and Gowling WLG have both frozen pay, blaming Brexit.

    This week Addleshaw Goddard staff learned that their August salary reviews were being postponed until the autumn. Like BLP, the firm pointed the finger at the vote to leave the EU.

    A spokesman told RollOnFriday, "like many other businesses in the UK we have seen Brexit have an impact on activity levels in the short period since the Referendum". A peed-off inside source told RollOnFriday that the decision comes "despite a large increase in PEP over the last year", when profit per equity partner jumped a huge 39% from £491,000 to £682,000.


    http://www.rollonfriday.com/TheNews/EuropeNews/tabid/58/Id/4701/fromTab/36/currentIndex/2/Default.aspx
  • Options
    BudG said:

    Maggie wil be looking down this morning with a self satisfied smug smile on her face.

    She has been quoted as saying that her greatest achivement was New Labour and Tony Blair and as she looks down and views the results of the most ham-fisted Laurel and Hardy-esque coup, orchestrated by the remnants of the New Labour MP's, she must feel that she is on the verge of witnessing her greatest ambition - the total destruction of Labour and all it stood for, as a political force.

    And Cameron's only legacy is destroying the Lib Dem threat for a generation.
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    MaxPB said:

    I'm finding it harder and harder to believe that RBS will ever be profitable again.

    In which case should it not be wound up?
  • Options
    runnymederunnymede Posts: 2,536

    kle4 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    Ian Jones
    How Cameron shared out the gongs. Almost a half have gone to political colleagues and advisers. https://t.co/LrqMKp1u7R

    It's his resignation honours - if ever there was a reasonable time to be a bit partisan and reward friends and allies, it is this set.

    And I reiterate that apart from peerages, the rest don't really matter - gongs for politicos have long occurred, so if the meaningfulness of other gongs for the deserving is undermined by such it happened a long time ago.

    EIther we scrap the system, or stop complaining each time this happens.
    It is a very British form of corruption, a form of corruption that gets you some letters after your name, and a visit to the Queen. Not much more than that.
    The solution is really simple - remove the power of patronage from the prime minister and put it in an independent committee appointed by HMQ.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,686

    kle4 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    Ian Jones
    How Cameron shared out the gongs. Almost a half have gone to political colleagues and advisers. https://t.co/LrqMKp1u7R

    It's his resignation honours - if ever there was a reasonable time to be a bit partisan and reward friends and allies, it is this set.

    And I reiterate that apart from peerages, the rest don't really matter - gongs for politicos have long occurred, so if the meaningfulness of other gongs for the deserving is undermined by such it happened a long time ago.

    EIther we scrap the system, or stop complaining each time this happens.
    It is a very British form of corruption, a form of corruption that gets you some letters after your name, and a visit to the Queen. Not much more than that.
    Those letters help get non-executive directorships and the BA Centurion card as outlined by Charles yesterday. If only I'd donated a few million to the Tories!
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269
    MaxPB said:

    It's amazing how incompetent Corbyn is. Right now the Tories could be having a massive problem with sleaze and cash for honours, but by putting forwards Chakrabati for a peerage he has completely undermined the argument and now it is just another case of "a pox on all your houses". Owen Smith has an opportunity here to show Jez up as a huge hypocrite and win over a lot of people. He must take the chance and attack this appointment.

    Corbyn is not just incompetent. IMO he is malign. The Chakrabati report on anti-Semitism and the whole way this issue has been dealt with by him is an example of this. All it was ever intended to do was to allow Corbyn to maintain his unjustified air of ineffable moral self-righteousness, regardless of his rather grubbier actions and sayings. Chakrabati got her 30 pieces of silver and betrayed such principles as she ever had.

    Not that these were ever very great, frankly. This is a woman who when at the LSE thought it OK for that organization to receive money from the Ghadaffi family and who has described Moazzem Begg of Cage and a supporter of the Taliban as a wonderful advocate for human rights. So an idiot with no judgment and no moral conscience. Ideal for today's Labour party, then.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,686

    I hope you're all happy, some in the legal profession are being hit hard by Brexit

    Addleshaw Goddard and Gowling WLG have both frozen pay, blaming Brexit.

    This week Addleshaw Goddard staff learned that their August salary reviews were being postponed until the autumn. Like BLP, the firm pointed the finger at the vote to leave the EU.

    A spokesman told RollOnFriday, "like many other businesses in the UK we have seen Brexit have an impact on activity levels in the short period since the Referendum". A peed-off inside source told RollOnFriday that the decision comes "despite a large increase in PEP over the last year", when profit per equity partner jumped a huge 39% from £491,000 to £682,000.


    http://www.rollonfriday.com/TheNews/EuropeNews/tabid/58/Id/4701/fromTab/36/currentIndex/2/Default.aspx

    LOL! Thankfully lawyers get less sympathy than bankers. :wink:
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    OllyT said:

    JackW said:

    JackW said:
    Jack,

    Any idea how these would give in EV? Based on UNS imperfect as it is.

    Looks like you are going to remain TOTY
    Firstly we have to attach a health warning to post convention polling combined with Trump having a bad hair week. That said a 10 point Clinton win would be a landslide in the EC in the range of 396/142 - with Clinton adding to Obama 12 with North Carolina, Georgia, Indiana, Missouri, Arizona and Nebraska CD2.

    South Carolina, Utah and Texas would remain Trump but around 5 point margins.

    http://www.270towin.com/
    Thanks. I am on a Clinton landslide. I can only see Trump going downhill from here. Possibly the worst Republican performance in decades.
    I have a sneaking feeling he will pull out at the last minute rather than be humiliated in November if thats the way it's looking. I can see him coming up with some ludicrous self-aggrandising reason like serious threats on his life or some such rubbish

    Dems have similar problem to Tories, they each need Trump and Corbyn respectively to still do well enough to stay on rather than implode completely.

    I think the Tories are safe till 2020 with Corbyn but the GOP could yet snatch victory from a seemingly hopeless situation. Out of interest, does your bet on Clinton landslide become void if the candidate changes?
    It is with Ladbrokes and covers changes of candidates. Shadsy seems to have the best EV book. The difficulty is that it is in 20 EV bands and EV can be a bit lumpy.
  • Options
    TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    I see that Trump is taking on the US military.
    That's not wise for his sake.
    Joe McCarthy found that out.
  • Options
    Shameful Shami, a peerage for this.

    The Jewish charity CST reacts:
    “Shami Chakrabarti peerage is shameless kick in the teeth for all who put hope in her now wholly compromised Inquiry into Labour antisemitism”
  • Options
    TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,397
    runnymede said:

    kle4 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    Ian Jones
    How Cameron shared out the gongs. Almost a half have gone to political colleagues and advisers. https://t.co/LrqMKp1u7R

    It's his resignation honours - if ever there was a reasonable time to be a bit partisan and reward friends and allies, it is this set.

    And I reiterate that apart from peerages, the rest don't really matter - gongs for politicos have long occurred, so if the meaningfulness of other gongs for the deserving is undermined by such it happened a long time ago.

    EIther we scrap the system, or stop complaining each time this happens.
    It is a very British form of corruption, a form of corruption that gets you some letters after your name, and a visit to the Queen. Not much more than that.
    The solution is really simple - remove the power of patronage from the prime minister and put it in an independent committee appointed by HMQ.
    I can see the point with the HOL, but for MBEs or whatever? I just don't see the point. Yes, in an ideal world, we might avoid it. But this isn't a an ideal world, and buying them off with some meaningless drivel seem infinitely preferable to the inevitable alternatives (plush government positions, backhanders, contracts, etc.)
  • Options
    runnymederunnymede Posts: 2,536
    MaxPB said:

    I hope you're all happy, some in the legal profession are being hit hard by Brexit

    Addleshaw Goddard and Gowling WLG have both frozen pay, blaming Brexit.

    This week Addleshaw Goddard staff learned that their August salary reviews were being postponed until the autumn. Like BLP, the firm pointed the finger at the vote to leave the EU.

    A spokesman told RollOnFriday, "like many other businesses in the UK we have seen Brexit have an impact on activity levels in the short period since the Referendum". A peed-off inside source told RollOnFriday that the decision comes "despite a large increase in PEP over the last year", when profit per equity partner jumped a huge 39% from £491,000 to £682,000.


    http://www.rollonfriday.com/TheNews/EuropeNews/tabid/58/Id/4701/fromTab/36/currentIndex/2/Default.aspx

    LOL! Thankfully lawyers get less sympathy than bankers. :wink:
    Remain-supporting bosses to use Brexit as an excuse to screw their staff even more and appropriate an even larger share of GDP to themselves.

    'Heads we win, tails you lose'.

    Nice.

  • Options
    john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @kle4

    'EIther we scrap the system, or stop complaining each time this happens.'


    Rewarding time serving public sector workers for doing their jobs should scrapped..
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,686

    MaxPB said:

    I'm finding it harder and harder to believe that RBS will ever be profitable again.

    In which case should it not be wound up?
    I think it needs to be massively restructured. Carve out a new bad bank and have NRAM take it over, sell the good bank on so it can get on with the business of being a bank. Hopefully the new government can get to grips with it, neither the current or former management have been able to and ultimately the largest shareholder needs to ensure its interests are protected.
  • Options
    TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,397
    edited August 2016
    [deleted, for the record]
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,097
    DanSmith said:

    The problem with Smith coming in and losing is that the membership will just go "we should have stuck with Corbyn" and vote in another hard left candidate to replace Smith.

    Corbyn has to lead Labour to defeat (no matter how bad) at the next election. He needs to own it, the membership need to own it.

    We can't afford that luxury. The Brexit crisis has given the govt the opportunity to reshape our constitution and wider political landscape. Leaving Corbyn alone to lose badly in 2020 potentially comes at a very high price. That is why the PLP had to act.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Cyclefree said:

    MaxPB said:

    It's amazing how incompetent Corbyn is. Right now the Tories could be having a massive problem with sleaze and cash for honours, but by putting forwards Chakrabati for a peerage he has completely undermined the argument and now it is just another case of "a pox on all your houses". Owen Smith has an opportunity here to show Jez up as a huge hypocrite and win over a lot of people. He must take the chance and attack this appointment.

    Corbyn is not just incompetent. IMO he is malign. The Chakrabati report on anti-Semitism and the whole way this issue has been dealt with by him is an example of this. All it was ever intended to do was to allow Corbyn to maintain his unjustified air of ineffable moral self-righteousness, regardless of his rather grubbier actions and sayings. Chakrabati got her 30 pieces of silver and betrayed such principles as she ever had.

    Not that these were ever very great, frankly. This is a woman who when at the LSE thought it OK for that organization to receive money from the Ghadaffi family and who has described Moazzem Begg of Cage and a supporter of the Taliban as a wonderful advocate for human rights. So an idiot with no judgment and no moral conscience. Ideal for today's Labour party, then.
    Shami is a great advocate for civil liberties and human rights. One aspect of this is that everyone should have these even people like Begg.

    You may not agree with her views, and much of the time I do not, but I am glad to have a passionate counterpoint to the authoritarian tendencies that dominate our public life.
  • Options
    Myths corrected.

    Vincenzo Scarpetta @LondonerVince
    Are you satisfied with Merkel's refugee policy? 65% of Germans aren't, up from 58% in April. (@infratestdimap poll)
  • Options
    runnymederunnymede Posts: 2,536
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    I'm finding it harder and harder to believe that RBS will ever be profitable again.

    In which case should it not be wound up?
    I think it needs to be massively restructured. Carve out a new bad bank and have NRAM take it over, sell the good bank on so it can get on with the business of being a bank. Hopefully the new government can get to grips with it, neither the current or former management have been able to and ultimately the largest shareholder needs to ensure its interests are protected.
    That should have happened several years ago. The government has been asleep on this.
  • Options
    Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664

    I hope you're all happy, some in the legal profession are being hit hard by Brexit

    Addleshaw Goddard and Gowling WLG have both frozen pay, blaming Brexit.

    This week Addleshaw Goddard staff learned that their August salary reviews were being postponed until the autumn. Like BLP, the firm pointed the finger at the vote to leave the EU.

    A spokesman told RollOnFriday, "like many other businesses in the UK we have seen Brexit have an impact on activity levels in the short period since the Referendum". A peed-off inside source told RollOnFriday that the decision comes "despite a large increase in PEP over the last year", when profit per equity partner jumped a huge 39% from £491,000 to £682,000.


    http://www.rollonfriday.com/TheNews/EuropeNews/tabid/58/Id/4701/fromTab/36/currentIndex/2/Default.aspx

    And I don't see the sterling price of Versace shirts going anywhere but North. Oh, the humanity.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,511
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    tpfkar said:

    I feel quite sorry for Owen Smith - after weeks of dithering from the MPs, he's the only one (A Eagle aside) to have shown the slightest bit of spine when bigger beasts should have stepped up. He's doing his best with what's become a tribal mob, and given that he's supposed to have 170 MPs behind him, most seem to have gone AWOL. Seems like a decent bloke and as bemused as everyone outside Labour at the cult of Corbyn.

    Either way, the road seems long and painful for Labour from here.

    This nails the essence of the problem (or half of it). Smith is not a potential PM; his appeal is not that he will lead Labour into government (yes, he's saying that but he has to given his position); it's that he'll arrest the decline. But is that really enough? Perhaps he would resign later if elected and allow himself to be a super-stalking-horse, so that a genuinely PM-able candidate could be chosen. Such self-sacrifice is not usually a characteristic of the kind of people who become party leaders though.

    And the potential PMs within Labour ranks didn't stand because they knew they'd lose again. For as long as Labour won't choose someone that the country would choose, they are in a very deep hole.
    Disagree. Smith has potential as PM. This is early days for him. IMO he is better than Ed.
    No, but he might have potential as a Leader of the Opposition, which would be a step in the right direction. His magic money tree policies alone will make him unelectable.

    Unsure re the comparison with Ed - though of course the country decisively rejected him.
    Don't think we know anything about the policies Smith would go to the country with. In 2005 Cameron was pledged to match Labour spending. It's too early and too hypothetical.

    I will say that Labour should be aiming for a more left wing platform than Blair circa 2006. Blair circa 1997 is quite radical.
    Smith has set out a set of 20 'key' policies so we have a pretty good idea of what he's about, which is tax, borrow, spend and control.

    Cameron pledged to match Labour's original plans through to 2010 if there was an early election; I don't think he made that pledge as part of his 2005 leadership bid (though I stand to be corrected on that).
  • Options
    Delusional stuff. Headless inquiry expected to have no delays!!!

    Sun Politics ✔ @SunPolitics
    .@AmberRudd_MP says child sex abuse inquiry must 'continue without delay'
    http://thesun.uk/6019B0Yst
  • Options
    DanSmithDanSmith Posts: 1,215
    Jonathan said:

    DanSmith said:

    The problem with Smith coming in and losing is that the membership will just go "we should have stuck with Corbyn" and vote in another hard left candidate to replace Smith.

    Corbyn has to lead Labour to defeat (no matter how bad) at the next election. He needs to own it, the membership need to own it.

    We can't afford that luxury. The Brexit crisis has given the govt the opportunity to reshape our constitution and wider political landscape. Leaving Corbyn alone to lose badly in 2020 potentially comes at a very high price. That is why the PLP had to act.
    Smith is not the answer though. The membership does not want the answer.
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    runnymede said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    I'm finding it harder and harder to believe that RBS will ever be profitable again.

    In which case should it not be wound up?
    I think it needs to be massively restructured. Carve out a new bad bank and have NRAM take it over, sell the good bank on so it can get on with the business of being a bank. Hopefully the new government can get to grips with it, neither the current or former management have been able to and ultimately the largest shareholder needs to ensure its interests are protected.
    That should have happened several years ago. The government has been asleep on this.
    Which department would have the remit? Is it the Treasury? Is this another case of the "near perfect chancellor" not getting on with his day job?
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,511

    There are only really four conceivable unity candidates for Labour, and Owen Smith isn't any of them. The four are: Margaret Beckett, Alan Johnson, Tom Watson and Ed Miliband.

    Despite her age, Labour should seriously consider drafting in Margaret Beckett.

    What if Labour doesn't want unity? She'd be stuck like John Major was post-1993 but without the reflected credence of office.
  • Options
    TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    edited August 2016
    Just musing,
    my understanding is that the EU referendum was advisory only, that Parliament is the final arbiter on all things legal, and that judges interpret.
    Along with the royal family, is this another charming facet of the ancient evolved "unwritten constitution"?
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,097
    DanSmith said:

    Jonathan said:

    DanSmith said:

    The problem with Smith coming in and losing is that the membership will just go "we should have stuck with Corbyn" and vote in another hard left candidate to replace Smith.

    Corbyn has to lead Labour to defeat (no matter how bad) at the next election. He needs to own it, the membership need to own it.

    We can't afford that luxury. The Brexit crisis has given the govt the opportunity to reshape our constitution and wider political landscape. Leaving Corbyn alone to lose badly in 2020 potentially comes at a very high price. That is why the PLP had to act.
    Smith is not the answer though. The membership does not want the answer.
    Smith is the only answer there is.
  • Options
    Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664

    runnymede said:

    felix said:

    john_zims said:

    @Indigo

    john_zims

    Or are you saying that Smith is pretending to be far left ?


    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1522032/No-welcome-in-these-valleys-for-Labour.html

    Owen Smith, the new Labour candidate, is, as his name might suggest, male, and a son of the valleys. But the boyo bit ends there.
    A former BBC journalist, he was a special adviser to former Welsh Secretary Paul Murphy and is now a political lobbyist for American pharmaceutical giant Pfizer. About as New Labour as you can get.
    Would he describe himself as a socialist?
    "I am a democratic socialist, yes."
    And Mr Blair, is he a socialist?
    "Yes."
    Mr Smith, 36, believes the Law movement is no more than a political spasm. "Their campaign is about the past and reminding people about the past. We are looking to the future." Trying not to sound like a New Labour clone, Mr Smith dips his toe in a puddle of controversy. "The invasion of Iraq was a mistake," he offers. "The world would have been a safer place if we hadn't done it."
    Any other areas of difference with Mr Blair?
    "No, I don't think so."


    Thanks for the confirmation,so he's a Blairite pretending to be a left wing nutjob,how sad is that.

    The fact that 'blairite' is a term of abuse sums up the problems in the Labour party. I detest the man but he was a winner.
    Isn't it a massive failure for Blair's legacy that to be even associated with his name is a total negative? To reverse your point, for many ex Labour voters (including me), he was a winner but I detest the man and his policies.
    Isn't it his personal behaviour, especially since leaving office, that has made his legacy so toxic?

    Looks like Cameron is aiming to go the same way btw
    Cameron's Losers List is probably as bad as it gets. What is clear is how much in common Cameron has with Blair. Believed his own publicity and delusional about his power with the voters. He even convinced himself that he led the same sex marriage change when it was never in the manifesto and was proposed by a Lib Dem minister. Yet that was the one big change that Cameron viewed his premiership as achieving.
    I remain baffled about all that. It was the thinnest bit of fine-tuning, given that civil partnerships were already a thing. There is also a compelling case to be made that it caused Brexit: because although Brexit was by no means caused by 17,000,000 bigots, the margin was such that the bigot vote was critical. It is possible that gay marriage pumped up the ukip (and non-ukip but anti-gm) froth levels just enough to get them over the finishing line. A world record unintended consequence.
  • Options
    TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited August 2016

    Cyclefree said:

    MaxPB said:

    It's amazing how incompetent Corbyn is. Right now the Tories could be having a massive problem with sleaze and cash for honours, but by putting forwards Chakrabati for a peerage he has completely undermined the argument and now it is just another case of "a pox on all your houses". Owen Smith has an opportunity here to show Jez up as a huge hypocrite and win over a lot of people. He must take the chance and attack this appointment.

    Corbyn is not just incompetent. IMO he is malign. The Chakrabati report on anti-Semitism and the whole way this issue has been dealt with by him is an example of this. All it was ever intended to do was to allow Corbyn to maintain his unjustified air of ineffable moral self-righteousness, regardless of his rather grubbier actions and sayings. Chakrabati got her 30 pieces of silver and betrayed such principles as she ever had.

    Not that these were ever very great, frankly. This is a woman who when at the LSE thought it OK for that organization to receive money from the Ghadaffi family and who has described Moazzem Begg of Cage and a supporter of the Taliban as a wonderful advocate for human rights. So an idiot with no judgment and no moral conscience. Ideal for today's Labour party, then.
    Shami is a great advocate for civil liberties and human rights. One aspect of this is that everyone should have these even people like Begg.
    You may not agree with her views, and much of the time I do not, but I am glad to have a passionate counterpoint to the authoritarian tendencies that dominate our public life.
    Q: What kind of woman do you think she is?
    A: We’ve already established that. Now we’re just haggling over the price.
    attrib GBS
  • Options
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    I'm finding it harder and harder to believe that RBS will ever be profitable again.

    In which case should it not be wound up?
    I think it needs to be massively restructured. Carve out a new bad bank and have NRAM take it over, sell the good bank on so it can get on with the business of being a bank. Hopefully the new government can get to grips with it, neither the current or former management have been able to and ultimately the largest shareholder needs to ensure its interests are protected.
    In the past some 'bad banks' have turned out to be quite profitable if the bad loans are bought at market price at the time.

    Lloyds Bank did the right thing in the 1990s by hanging on to its third world loans rather than selling them at the low market price at the time. Over the years the market price recovered and the interest plus eventual sale price meant very large write backs of bad debt provisions (euphemistically called impairments nowadays).

    RBS impairment provisions may turn out to be too high and selling bad loans at current market prices could be the wrong decision.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,686

    runnymede said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    I'm finding it harder and harder to believe that RBS will ever be profitable again.

    In which case should it not be wound up?
    I think it needs to be massively restructured. Carve out a new bad bank and have NRAM take it over, sell the good bank on so it can get on with the business of being a bank. Hopefully the new government can get to grips with it, neither the current or former management have been able to and ultimately the largest shareholder needs to ensure its interests are protected.
    That should have happened several years ago. The government has been asleep on this.
    Which department would have the remit? Is it the Treasury? Is this another case of the "near perfect chancellor" not getting on with his day job?
    We already have NRAM, UKAR and UKFI. The structures to resolve bad banks already exist in this country, someone just needs to have the balls to force RBS to go into a resolution and split off the bad bank.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269

    Cyclefree said:

    MaxPB said:

    It's amazing how incompetent Corbyn is. Right now the Tories could be having a massive problem with sleaze and cash for honours, but by putting forwards Chakrabati for a peerage he has completely undermined the argument and now it is just another case of "a pox on all your houses". Owen Smith has an opportunity here to show Jez up as a huge hypocrite and win over a lot of people. He must take the chance and attack this appointment.

    Corbyn is not just incompetent. IMO he is malign. The Chakrabati report on anti-Semitism and the whole way this issue has been dealt with by him is an example of this. All it was ever intended to do was to allow Corbyn to maintain his unjustified air of ineffable moral self-righteousness, regardless of his rather grubbier actions and sayings. Chakrabati got her 30 pieces of silver and betrayed such principles as she ever had.

    Not that these were ever very great, frankly. This is a woman who when at the LSE thought it OK for that organization to receive money from the Ghadaffi family and who has described Moazzem Begg of Cage and a supporter of the Taliban as a wonderful advocate for human rights. So an idiot with no judgment and no moral conscience. Ideal for today's Labour party, then.
    Shami is a great advocate for civil liberties and human rights. One aspect of this is that everyone should have these even people like Begg.

    You may not agree with her views, and much of the time I do not, but I am glad to have a passionate counterpoint to the authoritarian tendencies that dominate our public life.
    She is not a great advocate for civil liberties and human rights I'm afraid. When Geert Wilders was banned from entering the UK, a ban which was overturned by the courts, she did not speak up for his right to free speech as, say, the American Civil Liberties Union has done for the rights of Nazis and others. Begg is entitled to his civil rights as a resident in the UK. But my criticism of her is of her description of him as an advocate of human rights when, plainly - and based on what he has said and done - he is no such thing. That shows a total lack of judgment on her part, which - IMO - makes her unfit to be in Parliament or to run an organization such as Liberty.

    I very strongly believe in civil liberties and it is one of - if not the principal - reason why I turned against Labour under Blair. But she is like too many on the Left: she has no real solid understanding of the liberal principles she claims to espouse and thus finds herself abandoning or watering down those principles when they would involve criticism of people or causes she favours. It is what happens when principles are adopted and discarded like a coat based on whether they suit the particular face you want to present to the world on that day.

  • Options
    TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited August 2016

    runnymede said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    I'm finding it harder and harder to believe that RBS will ever be profitable again.

    In which case should it not be wound up?
    I think it needs to be massively restructured. Carve out a new bad bank and have NRAM take it over, sell the good bank on so it can get on with the business of being a bank. Hopefully the new government can get to grips with it, neither the current or former management have been able to and ultimately the largest shareholder needs to ensure its interests are protected.
    That should have happened several years ago. The government has been asleep on this.
    Which department would have the remit? Is it the Treasury? Is this another case of the "near perfect chancellor" not getting on with his day job?
    Looks that way. Part time chancellor spending too little time on his main job. Instead he led negotiations with the EU....
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,686

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    I'm finding it harder and harder to believe that RBS will ever be profitable again.

    In which case should it not be wound up?
    I think it needs to be massively restructured. Carve out a new bad bank and have NRAM take it over, sell the good bank on so it can get on with the business of being a bank. Hopefully the new government can get to grips with it, neither the current or former management have been able to and ultimately the largest shareholder needs to ensure its interests are protected.
    In the past some 'bad banks' have turned out to be quite profitable if the bad loans are bought at market price at the time.

    Lloyds Bank did the right thing in the 1990s by hanging on to its third world loans rather than selling them at the low market price at the time. Over the years the market price recovered and the interest plus eventual sale price meant very large write backs of bad debt provisions (euphemistically called impairments nowadays).

    RBS impairment provisions may turn out to be too high and selling bad loans at current market prices could be the wrong decision.
    If the market was going to turn for RBS and their outsized bad loan book, it would already have done so. Its been 8 years since the first provisions were made.
  • Options
    Ishmael_X said:

    runnymede said:

    felix said:

    john_zims said:

    @Indigo

    john_zims

    Or are you saying that Smith is pretending to be far left ?


    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1522032/No-welcome-in-these-valleys-for-Labour.html

    Owen Smith, the new Labour candidate, is, as his name might suggest, male, and a son of the valleys. But the boyo bit ends there.
    A former BBC journalist, he was a special adviser to former Welsh Secretary Paul Murphy and is now a political lobbyist for Amer....
    And Mr Blair, is he a socialist?
    "Yes."
    Mr Smith, 36, ....
    Any other areas of difference with Mr Blair?
    "No, I don't think so."


    Thanks for the confirmation,so he's a Blairite pretending to be a left wing nutjob,how sad is that.

    The fact that 'blairite' is a term of abuse sums up the problems in the Labour party. I detest the man but he was a winner.
    Isn't it a massive failure for Blair's legacy that to be even associated with his name is a total negative? To reverse your point, for many ex Labour voters (including me), he was a winner but I detest the man and his policies.
    Isn't it his personal behaviour, especially since leaving office, that has made his legacy so toxic?

    Looks like Cameron is aiming to go the same way btw
    Cameron's Losers List is probably as bad as it gets. What is clear is how much in common Cameron has with Blair. Believed his own publicity and delusional about his power with the voters. He even convinced himself that he led the same sex marriage change when it was never in the manifesto and was proposed by a Lib Dem minister. Yet that was the one big change that Cameron viewed his premiership as achieving.
    I remain baffled about all that. It was the thinnest bit of fine-tuning, given that civil partnerships were already a thing. There is also a compelling case to be made that it caused Brexit: because although Brexit was by no means caused by 17,000,000 bigots, the margin was such that the bigot vote was critical. It is possible that gay marriage pumped up the ukip (and non-ukip but anti-gm) froth levels just enough to get them over the finishing line. A world record unintended consequence.
    It lost about 50,000 Conservative members and has defenestrated the party in many areas. Luckily Miliband and the Lib Dems were not up to the job at GE2015.
    We could have had a Lib Dem private members bill and no party fall out. Just another act of internal political stupidity by Cameron and Osborne. I support same sex marriage.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    I predicted Clinton would have a lead of +5 by one week after the convention, I see RCP have it as almost +7.

    Shows what I know.

    I'm sure Trump will be pivoting any moment now.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    MaxPB said:

    It's amazing how incompetent Corbyn is. Right now the Tories could be having a massive problem with sleaze and cash for honours, but by putting forwards Chakrabati for a peerage he has completely undermined the argument and now it is just another case of "a pox on all your houses". Owen Smith has an opportunity here to show Jez up as a huge hypocrite and win over a lot of people. He must take the chance and attack this appointment.

    Corbyn is not just incompetent. IMO he is malign. The Chakrabati report on anti-Semitism and the whole way this issue has been dealt with by him is an example of this. All it was ever intended to do was to allow Corbyn to maintain his unjustified air of ineffable moral self-righteousness, regardless of his rather grubbier actions and sayings. Chakrabati got her 30 pieces of silver and betrayed such principles as she ever had.

    Not that these were ever very great, frankly. This is a woman who when at the LSE thought it OK for that organization to receive money from the Ghadaffi family and who has described Moazzem Begg of Cage and a supporter of the Taliban as a wonderful advocate for human rights. So an idiot with no judgment and no moral conscience. Ideal for today's Labour party, then.
    Shami is a great advocate for civil liberties and human rights. One aspect of this is that everyone should have these even people like Begg.

    You may not agree with her views, and much of the time I do not, but I am glad to have a passionate counterpoint to the authoritarian tendencies that dominate our public life.
    ...But she is like too many on the Left: she has no real solid understanding of the liberal principles she claims to espouse and thus finds herself abandoning or watering down those principles when they would involve criticism of people or causes she favours. It is what happens when principles are adopted and discarded like a coat based on whether they suit the particular face you want to present to the world on that day.

    Quite. The fair weather advocate.
  • Options
    runnymederunnymede Posts: 2,536

    She is not a great advocate for civil liberties and human rights I'm afraid. When Geert Wilders was banned from entering the UK, a ban which was overturned by the courts, she did not speak up for his right to free speech as, say, the American Civil Liberties Union has done for the rights of Nazis and others. Begg is entitled to his civil rights as a resident in the UK. But my criticism of her is of her description of him as an advocate of human rights when, plainly - and based on what he has said and done - he is no such thing. That shows a total lack of judgment on her part, which - IMO - makes her unfit to be in Parliament or to run an organization such as Liberty.

    I very strongly believe in civil liberties and it is one of - if not the principal - reason why I turned against Labour under Blair. But she is like too many on the Left: she has no real solid understanding of the liberal principles she claims to espouse and thus finds herself abandoning or watering down those principles when they would involve criticism of people or causes she favours. It is what happens when principles are adopted and discarded like a coat based on whether they suit the particular face you want to present to the world on that day.
    ---------------------

    ---------------------

    Spot on. For the likes of Chakrabati it's always about the 'rights' of supposedly oppressed pet groups, never about 'liberty' in the correct and broader sense.

    Sometimes these things will overlap eg 90 day detention, often they won't.
  • Options
    David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    edited August 2016
    DanSmith said:

    Jonathan said:

    DanSmith said:

    The problem with Smith coming in and losing is that the membership will just go "we should have stuck with Corbyn" and vote in another hard left candidate to replace Smith.

    Corbyn has to lead Labour to defeat (no matter how bad) at the next election. He needs to own it, the membership need to own it.

    We can't afford that luxury. The Brexit crisis has given the govt the opportunity to reshape our constitution and wider political landscape. Leaving Corbyn alone to lose badly in 2020 potentially comes at a very high price. That is why the PLP had to act.
    Smith is not the answer though. The membership does not want the answer.
    What is the question?

    Obtaining power is not sufficient. Ruling parties need to want to put effect to their convictions. To do this you need to have convictions.
  • Options
    perdixperdix Posts: 1,806

    Delusional stuff. Headless inquiry expected to have no delays!!!

    Sun Politics ✔ @SunPolitics
    .@AmberRudd_MP says child sex abuse inquiry must 'continue without delay'
    http://thesun.uk/6019B0Yst

    I believe that their are teams of people working on cases even when a chairman is not around.

  • Options
    perdix said:

    Delusional stuff. Headless inquiry expected to have no delays!!!
    Sun Politics ✔ @SunPolitics
    .@AmberRudd_MP says child sex abuse inquiry must 'continue without delay'
    http://thesun.uk/6019B0Yst

    I believe that their are teams of people working on cases even when a chairman is not around.
    All work will not stop, but there will inevitably be delays. To believe otherwise is just plain foolish.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,511
    I've just been accused of being a Corbynite on Twitter. First time for everything.
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098

    runnymede said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    I'm finding it harder and harder to believe that RBS will ever be profitable again.

    In which case should it not be wound up?
    I think it needs to be massively restructured. Carve out a new bad bank and have NRAM take it over, sell the good bank on so it can get on with the business of being a bank. Hopefully the new government can get to grips with it, neither the current or former management have been able to and ultimately the largest shareholder needs to ensure its interests are protected.
    That should have happened several years ago. The government has been asleep on this.
    Which department would have the remit? Is it the Treasury? Is this another case of the "near perfect chancellor" not getting on with his day job?
    Looks that way. Part time chancellor spending too little time on his main job. Instead he led negotiations with the EU....
    I have high hopes for Hammond as chancellor of the exchequer. For the first time in nearly twenty years we may actually have a chancellor who actually wants to just get on with his job and not spend his time plotting to become PM or trying to run domestic policy or galloping around the country getting himself photographed in a reflective jacket and hard hat. If Hammond is vaguely competent with numbers and applies himself wholly to the business of money the I think he might do us very well.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,411
    MaxPB said:

    I hope you're all happy, some in the legal profession are being hit hard by Brexit

    Addleshaw Goddard and Gowling WLG have both frozen pay, blaming Brexit.

    This week Addleshaw Goddard staff learned that their August salary reviews were being postponed until the autumn. Like BLP, the firm pointed the finger at the vote to leave the EU.

    A spokesman told RollOnFriday, "like many other businesses in the UK we have seen Brexit have an impact on activity levels in the short period since the Referendum". A peed-off inside source told RollOnFriday that the decision comes "despite a large increase in PEP over the last year", when profit per equity partner jumped a huge 39% from £491,000 to £682,000.


    http://www.rollonfriday.com/TheNews/EuropeNews/tabid/58/Id/4701/fromTab/36/currentIndex/2/Default.aspx

    LOL! Thankfully lawyers get less sympathy than bankers. :wink:
    The funny thing is, I bet that many of them find it as hard to manage on £500,000 a year as many people do on £25,000 a year.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269
    SeanT said:

    The exciting thing for a rightwinger, like me, is what exactly the Tories might do, with 15 years in untroubled power. We really COULD become a kind of western Hong Kong meets Switzerland, with lashings of Singapore. Dump the homeless into lakes, reduce taxes to maybe 2%, force the unemployed to sell their hair.

    Superb.

    At the end of a week rendered more than usually frustrating by having to deal with my employer's utterly useless IT, this really made me laugh out loud.

    Thank you. :)

  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Given it's Friday, this did make me smile. I don't play Pokemon, but now think I get the gist

    The revenge of #PokemonGO https://t.co/3vTziuciZd
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,411
    Ishmael_X said:

    runnymede said:

    felix said:

    john_zims said:

    @Indigo

    john_zims

    Or are you saying that Smith is pretending to be far left ?


    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1522032/No-welcome-in-these-valleys-for-Labour.html

    Owen Smith, the new Labour candidate, is, as his name might suggest, male, and a son of the valleys. But the boyo bit ends there.
    A former BBC journalist, he was a special adviser to former Welsh Secretary Paul Murphy and is now a political lobbyist for American pharmaceutical giant Pfizer. About as New Labour as you can get.
    Would he describe himself as a socialist?
    "I am a democratic socialist, yes."
    And Mr
    "No, I don't think so."


    Thanks for the confirmation,so he's a Blairite pretending to be a left wing nutjob,how sad is that.

    The fact that 'blairite' is a term of abuse sums up the problems in the Labour party. I detest the man but he was a winner.
    Isn't it a massive failure for Blair's legacy that to be even associated with his name is a total negative? To reverse your point, for many ex Labour voters (including me), he was a winner but I detest the man and his policies.
    Isn't it his personal behaviour, especially since leaving office, that has made his legacy so toxic?

    Looks like Cameron is aiming to go the same way btw
    Cameron's Losers List is probably as bad as it gets. What is clear is how much in common Cameron has with Blair. Believed his own publicity and delusional about his power with the voters. He even convinced himself that he led the same sex marriage change when it was never in the manifesto and was proposed by a Lib Dem minister. Yet that was the one big change that Cameron viewed his premiership as achieving.
    I remain baffled about all that. It was the thinnest bit of fine-tuning, given that civil partnerships were already a thing. There is also a compelling case to be made that it caused Brexit: because although Brexit was by no means caused by 17,000,000 bigots, the margin was such that the bigot vote was critical. It is possible that gay marriage pumped up the ukip (and non-ukip but anti-gm) froth levels just enough to get them over the finishing line. A world record unintended consequence.
    I don't think the Brexit vote was push-back over gay marriage. Rather, I think that gay marriage gave UKIP a shot in the arm at a crucial time (Winter 2012), and that was one of the factors that led Cameron to promise a Referendum on EU membership, to keep potential defectors to UKIP on board.

    It's a case of "for want of a nail, the battle was lost."
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,097

    DanSmith said:

    Jonathan said:

    DanSmith said:

    The problem with Smith coming in and losing is that the membership will just go "we should have stuck with Corbyn" and vote in another hard left candidate to replace Smith.

    Corbyn has to lead Labour to defeat (no matter how bad) at the next election. He needs to own it, the membership need to own it.

    We can't afford that luxury. The Brexit crisis has given the govt the opportunity to reshape our constitution and wider political landscape. Leaving Corbyn alone to lose badly in 2020 potentially comes at a very high price. That is why the PLP had to act.
    Smith is not the answer though. The membership does not want the answer.
    What is the question?

    Obtaining power is not sufficient. Ruling parties need to want to put effect to their convictions. To do this you need to have convictions.
    Labour has principles and convictions coming out of its ears.

    What it desperately lacks is ideas about how to put these principles to work today and the competence to communicate and execute a plan.
  • Options

    runnymede said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    I'm finding it harder and harder to believe that RBS will ever be profitable again.

    In which case should it not be wound up?
    I think it needs to be massively restructured. Carve out a new bad bank and have NRAM take it over, sell the good bank on so it can get on with the business of being a bank. Hopefully the new government can get to grips with it, neither the current or former management have been able to and ultimately the largest shareholder needs to ensure its interests are protected.
    That should have happened several years ago. The government has been asleep on this.
    Which department would have the remit? Is it the Treasury? Is this another case of the "near perfect chancellor" not getting on with his day job?
    Looks that way. Part time chancellor spending too little time on his main job. Instead he led negotiations with the EU....
    I have high hopes for Hammond as chancellor of the exchequer. For the first time in nearly twenty years we may actually have a chancellor who actually wants to just get on with his job and not spend his time plotting to become PM or trying to run domestic policy or galloping around the country getting himself photographed in a reflective jacket and hard hat. If Hammond is vaguely competent with numbers and applies himself wholly to the business of money the I think he might do us very well.
    Hammond looks the part but these days when he opens his mouth he has clearly been captured by the civil service and lacks any sign of his own views or common sense. The Governor of BoE makes changes, he supports them (fine) but the Governor hands over the matter to the Govt to take the next steps and Hammond just says that the Governor has more tools. No sign of Leadership from Hammond. Is he unaware that he has changed jobs?
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133

    perdix said:

    Delusional stuff. Headless inquiry expected to have no delays!!!
    Sun Politics ✔ @SunPolitics
    .@AmberRudd_MP says child sex abuse inquiry must 'continue without delay'
    http://thesun.uk/6019B0Yst

    I believe that their are teams of people working on cases even when a chairman is not around.
    All work will not stop, but there will inevitably be delays. To believe otherwise is just plain foolish.
    There is, I think, a difference between "without delay" and "without delays". The former to me just means "as quickly as possible".
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,783
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    I'm finding it harder and harder to believe that RBS will ever be profitable again.

    In which case should it not be wound up?
    I think it needs to be massively restructured. Carve out a new bad bank and have NRAM take it over, sell the good bank on so it can get on with the business of being a bank. Hopefully the new government can get to grips with it, neither the current or former management have been able to and ultimately the largest shareholder needs to ensure its interests are protected.
    In the past some 'bad banks' have turned out to be quite profitable if the bad loans are bought at market price at the time.

    Lloyds Bank did the right thing in the 1990s by hanging on to its third world loans rather than selling them at the low market price at the time. Over the years the market price recovered and the interest plus eventual sale price meant very large write backs of bad debt provisions (euphemistically called impairments nowadays).

    RBS impairment provisions may turn out to be too high and selling bad loans at current market prices could be the wrong decision.
    If the market was going to turn for RBS and their outsized bad loan book, it would already have done so. Its been 8 years since the first provisions were made.
    Ultimately, it's the bad loans you don't know about that kill you. I think everyone knows about RBS's bad loans.
  • Options
    Sean_F said:

    Ishmael_X said:

    runnymede said:

    felix said:

    john_zims said:

    @Indigo

    john_zims

    Or are you saying that Smith is pretending to be far left ?


    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1522032/No-welcome-in-these-valleys-for-Labour.html

    Owen Smith, the new Labour candidate, is, as his name might suggest, male, and a son of the valleys. But the boyo bit ends there.
    A former BBC journalist, ..............
    Would he describe himself as a socialist?
    "I am a democratic socialist, yes."
    And Mr
    "No, I don't think so."


    Thanks for the confirmation,so he's a Blairite pretending to be a left wing nutjob,how sad is that.

    The fact that 'blairite' is a term of abuse sums up the problems in the Labour party. I detest the man but he was a winner.
    Isn't it a massive failure for Blair's legacy that to be even associated with his name is a total negative? To reverse your point, for many ex Labour voters (including me), he was a winner but I detest the man and his policies.
    Isn't it his personal behaviour, especially since leaving office, that has made his legacy so toxic?

    Looks like Cameron is aiming to go the same way btw
    Cameron's Losers List is probably as bad as it gets. What is clear is how much in common Cameron has with Blair. Believed his own publicity and delusional about his power with the voters. He even convinced himself that he led the same sex marriage change when it was never in the manifesto and was proposed by a Lib Dem minister. Yet that was the one big change that Cameron viewed his premiership as achieving.
    I remain baffled about all that. It was the thinnest bit of fine-tuning, given that civil partnerships were already a thing. There is also a compelling case to be made that it caused Brexit: because although Brexit was by no means caused by 17,000,000 bigots, the margin was such that the bigot vote was critical. It is possible that gay marriage pumped up the ukip (and non-ukip but anti-gm) froth levels just enough to get them over the finishing line. A world record unintended consequence.
    I don't think the Brexit vote was push-back over gay marriage. Rather, I think that gay marriage gave UKIP a shot in the arm at a crucial time (Winter 2012), and that was one of the factors that led Cameron to promise a Referendum on EU membership, to keep potential defectors to UKIP on board.
    It's a case of "for want of a nail, the battle was lost."
    Interesting thought and that combined with Osborne's omnishambles budget due to his part time approach to planning, helped UKIP at that time.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,411
    felix said:

    MaxPB said:

    Jonathan said:

    The key is that this is a poll of Labour members. Smith is pitching to them, not the electorate. With him in charge Labour could hope to emulate EdM's score last year and perhaps do better in Wales. If the LDs progress slightly, that could mean a hung Parliament. It is the very best Labour could hope for. Under Corbyn, of course, that is impossible. More important, though, is that if Smith wins Labour becomes a party focused on winning elections once again. That is absolutely vital.

    However, Smith is not going to win. Corbyn is. So it's all academic. Labour will lose the next GE massively. That's the way the hard left will be defeated.

    I agree 2020 is lost a divided party will never win but blame for that has been handed to the left on a plate by the PLP.

    The left get 2 goes to win IMO 2020/2025.


    The 2nd once the new PLP more united after deselections is Labours only chance.

    A new new Labour has zero chance of winning with its potential voters anyway IMO
    Bizarre logic. Corbyn can't carry his own party. He's not going to carry the country.

    Once he's deselected the MPs to put his Yes men in place, what next? He will try to deselect the electorate?
    No a radical manifesto will attract more voters once labour has a PLP that gets behind one.

    The current crop see a Tory win as preferable to a Corbyn win as per SO and maybe you?
    I seriously doubt the first sentence is true. Especially in the face of cold, hard pragmatism from May and the Conservatives.
    Agree - i'm sure BJO and his ilk are sincere in their beliefs and hopes but the voters for that platform are simply not there - Blair recognised this and won handsomely three times. There is really little else to say.
    The voters are there for a left-wing economic programme. They aren't there for everything else that Corbyn (or Smith) represent.
  • Options
    john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @ThreeQuidder

    'Remind you of anyone?

    http://newsthump.com/2016/08/05/48-of-brits-secretly-hoping-the-economy-will-turn-to-shit'


    Must have been an incredible disappointment that interest rates went down instead of up as we were told by numerous experts.

  • Options
    DromedaryDromedary Posts: 1,194
    OllyT said:

    I have a sneaking feeling he (Trump) will pull out at the last minute rather than be humiliated in November if thats the way it's looking. I can see him coming up with some ludicrous self-aggrandising reason like serious threats on his life or some such rubbish

    His stated reason could be very crazy. As a candidate he is protected by the Secret Service, so perhaps they have been infiltrated by Hillary agents who want to assassinate the People's Favourite Who Has Successfully Arranged for the Building of Many Tall Structures, before they establish full-scale sharia law?

    I'm exaggerating, but I'm encountering complete whackjobs who support Trump, not in political places but in general-purpose online hangouts.

    Might the Kremlin "troll army" have some kind of a role here?

    I'm expecting him to withdraw sooner rather than later. There are ways and means. A letter signed by 500 members of the American Medical Association, maybe? Nutter. Our learned friends probably hope he withdraws later rather than sooner :)

  • Options
    DanSmith said:
    I think if I was trying to get to Heathrow I would have been tempted to go all Alf Garnet.
  • Options

    There are only really four conceivable unity candidates for Labour, and Owen Smith isn't any of them. The four are: Margaret Beckett, Alan Johnson, Tom Watson and Ed Miliband.

    Despite her age, Labour should seriously consider drafting in Margaret Beckett.

    I think Kinnock Senior?
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 21,191
    john_zims said:

    @ThreeQuidder

    'Remind you of anyone?

    http://newsthump.com/2016/08/05/48-of-brits-secretly-hoping-the-economy-will-turn-to-shit'


    Must have been an incredible disappointment that interest rates went down instead of up as we were told by numerous experts.

    About two months before the referendum I invested £15,000 in a flexible ISA, thinking that rates were going to go UP if we left!

    Thanks George...
  • Options
    GIN1138 said:

    john_zims said:

    @ThreeQuidder

    'Remind you of anyone?

    http://newsthump.com/2016/08/05/48-of-brits-secretly-hoping-the-economy-will-turn-to-shit'


    Must have been an incredible disappointment that interest rates went down instead of up as we were told by numerous experts.

    About two months before the referendum I invested £15,000 in a flexible ISA, thinking that rates were going to go UP if we left!

    Thanks George...
    They will soon enough when worrying about the value of the pound replaces their current worrying about imaginary Brexit dooms.
  • Options
    "Baroness Manzoor becomes the second Lib Dem to quit in recent weeks, following in the steps of Baroness Nicholson of Winterbourne."

    https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/liberal-democrats/news/77894/liberal-democrat-frontbencher-quits-party
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 48,149
    Jonathan said:

    DanSmith said:

    Jonathan said:

    DanSmith said:

    The problem with Smith coming in and losing is that the membership will just go "we should have stuck with Corbyn" and vote in another hard left candidate to replace Smith.

    Corbyn has to lead Labour to defeat (no matter how bad) at the next election. He needs to own it, the membership need to own it.

    We can't afford that luxury. The Brexit crisis has given the govt the opportunity to reshape our constitution and wider political landscape. Leaving Corbyn alone to lose badly in 2020 potentially comes at a very high price. That is why the PLP had to act.
    Smith is not the answer though. The membership does not want the answer.
    Smith is the only answer there is.
    For Labour there are only questions.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,411

    DanSmith said:
    I think if I was trying to get to Heathrow I would have been tempted to go all Alf Garnet.
    Anyone who thinks that Mark Duggan was a martyr is off with the fairies.

    This country has never had Jim Crow laws, nor have black people been kept here as slaves. The number of black people who die at the hands of the police is tiny. The US civil rights experience is completely irrelevant to the UK.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383

    DanSmith said:
    I think if I was trying to get to Heathrow I would have been tempted to go all Alf Garnet.
    One person was shot by police in 2015, one so far in 2016 - he was white.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 93,627

    Cyclefree said:

    MaxPB said:

    It's amazing how incompetent Corbyn is. Right now the Tories could be having a massive problem with sleaze and cash for honours, but by putting forwards Chakrabati for a peerage he has completely undermined the argument and now it is just another case of "a pox on all your houses". Owen Smith has an opportunity here to show Jez up as a huge hypocrite and win over a lot of people. He must take the chance and attack this appointment.

    Corbyn is not just incompetent. IMO he is malign. The Chakrabati report on anti-Semitism and the whole way this issue has been dealt with by him is an example of this. All it was ever intended to do was to allow Corbyn to maintain his unjustified air of ineffable moral self-righteousness, regardless of his rather grubbier actions and sayings. Chakrabati got her 30 pieces of silver and betrayed such principles as she ever had.

    Not that these were ever very great, frankly. This is a woman who when at the LSE thought it OK for that organization to receive money from the Ghadaffi family and who has described Moazzem Begg of Cage and a supporter of the Taliban as a wonderful advocate for human rights. So an idiot with no judgment and no moral conscience. Ideal for today's Labour party, then.
    Shami is a great advocate for civil liberties and human rights. One aspect of this is that everyone should have these even people like Begg.

    You may not agree with her views, and much of the time I do not, but I am glad to have a passionate counterpoint to the authoritarian tendencies that dominate our public life.
    Precisely because of her being an advocate for civil liberties across all governments, I was a little surprised she has not been offered and accepted a Crossbench peerage before now. Clearly she has no objection to being made part of the establishment, but given her working background appearing more apolitical would seem more in keeping, and I'd think the government would like to offer prominent human rights campaigners peerages, as it probably seems like a good idea.
  • Options

    Ishmael_X said:

    I remain baffled about all that. It was the thinnest bit of fine-tuning, given that civil partnerships were already a thing. There is also a compelling case to be made that it caused Brexit: because although Brexit was by no means caused by 17,000,000 bigots, the margin was such that the bigot vote was critical. It is possible that gay marriage pumped up the ukip (and non-ukip but anti-gm) froth levels just enough to get them over the finishing line. A world record unintended consequence.

    It lost about 50,000 Conservative members and has defenestrated the party in many areas. Luckily Miliband and the Lib Dems were not up to the job at GE2015.
    We could have had a Lib Dem private members bill and no party fall out. Just another act of internal political stupidity by Cameron and Osborne. I support same sex marriage.
    I don't get this at all. It was a free vote, that is enough for an issue of conscience. If it was a whipped vote I'd get the condemnation.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 21,191

    GIN1138 said:

    john_zims said:

    @ThreeQuidder

    'Remind you of anyone?

    http://newsthump.com/2016/08/05/48-of-brits-secretly-hoping-the-economy-will-turn-to-shit'


    Must have been an incredible disappointment that interest rates went down instead of up as we were told by numerous experts.

    About two months before the referendum I invested £15,000 in a flexible ISA, thinking that rates were going to go UP if we left!

    Thanks George...
    They will soon enough when worrying about the value of the pound replaces their current worrying about imaginary Brexit dooms.
    I'll hang in there. :smiley:
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,057
    edited August 2016
    PlatoSaid said:

    DanSmith said:
    I think if I was trying to get to Heathrow I would have been tempted to go all Alf Garnet.
    One person was shot by police in 2015, one so far in 2016 - he was white.
    Wasn't the guy shot by the plod part of an armed team trying to break out a Turkish mafia boss? Not exactly an unarmed black guy pottering along in his car and pulled over for a tail light being faulty.

    And of course lets not forget the case of wee angelic Mark Duggan.....
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 93,627

    Ishmael_X said:

    runnymede said:

    felix said:

    john_zims said:

    @Indigo

    john_zims

    Or are you saying that Smith is pretending to be far left ?


    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1522032/No-welcome-in-these-valleys-for-Labour.html

    Owen Smith, the new Labour candidate, is, as his name might suggest, male, and a son of the valleys. But the boyo bit ends there.
    A former BBC journalist, he was a special adviser to former Welsh Secretary Paul Murphy and is now a political lobbyist for Amer....
    And Mr Blair, is he a socialist?
    "Yes."
    Mr Smith, 36, ....
    Any other areas of difference with Mr Blair?
    "No, I don't think so."


    Thanks for the confirmation,so he's a Blairite pretending to be a left wing nutjob,how sad is that.

    The fact that 'blairite' is a term of abuse sums up the problems in the Labour party. I detest the man but he was a winner.
    Isn't it a massive failure for Blair's legacy that to be even associated with his name is a total negative? To reverse your point, for many ex Labour voters (including me), he was a winner but I detest the man and his policies.
    Isn't it his personal behaviour, especially since leaving office, that has made his legacy so toxic?

    Looks like Cameron is aiming to go the same way btw
    Cameron's Losers List is probably as bad as it gets. What is clear is how much in common Cameron has with Blair. Believed his own publicity and delusional about his power with the voters. He even convinced himself that he led the same sex marriage change when it was never in the manifesto and was proposed by a Lib Dg.
    I remain baffled about all that. It was the thinnest bit of fine-tuning, given that civil partnerships were already a thing. There is also a compelling case to be made that it caused Brexit: because although Brexit was by no means caused by 17,000,000 bigots, the margin was such that the bigot vote was critical. It is possible that gay marriage pumped up the ukip (and non-ukip but anti-gm) froth levels just enough to get them over the finishing line. A world record unintended consequence.
    It lost about 50,000 Conservative members and has defenestrated the party in many areas. Luckily Miliband and the Lib Dems were not up to the job at GE2015.
    We could have had a Lib Dem private members bill and no party fall out. Just another act of internal political stupidity by Cameron and Osborne. I support same sex marriage.
    Given the entirely predictable internal political trouble it caused, I can only assume Cameron thought it the right thing to do and that was the price and it was worth paying in order to take or seen to take a lead on it.
  • Options

    Ishmael_X said:

    I remain baffled about all that. It was the thinnest bit of fine-tuning, given that civil partnerships were already a thing. There is also a compelling case to be made that it caused Brexit: because although Brexit was by no means caused by 17,000,000 bigots, the margin was such that the bigot vote was critical. It is possible that gay marriage pumped up the ukip (and non-ukip but anti-gm) froth levels just enough to get them over the finishing line. A world record unintended consequence.

    It lost about 50,000 Conservative members and has defenestrated the party in many areas. Luckily Miliband and the Lib Dems were not up to the job at GE2015.
    We could have had a Lib Dem private members bill and no party fall out. Just another act of internal political stupidity by Cameron and Osborne. I support same sex marriage.
    I don't get this at all. It was a free vote, that is enough for an issue of conscience. If it was a whipped vote I'd get the condemnation.
    The Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill was introduced by the Government and publicly backed by Govt ministers and Cameron.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,667
    Ishmael_X said:


    I remain baffled about all that. It was the thinnest bit of fine-tuning, given that civil partnerships were already a thing. There is also a compelling case to be made that it caused Brexit: because although Brexit was by no means caused by 17,000,000 bigots, the margin was such that the bigot vote was critical. It is possible that gay marriage pumped up the ukip (and non-ukip but anti-gm) froth levels just enough to get them over the finishing line. A world record unintended consequence.

    If it was really the thinnest bit of fine tuning, then WTF didn't Blair go the whole hog and have Labour get all the credit for gay marriage?

    My gay friends believe it finally delivered equality regardless of sexual orientation. Fine tuning? Yeah, right....

    And the extent of dissatisfaction it caused in the Tory party? Massively over-hyped. I found precisely one voter who raised it on the door-step. And it didn't stop her continuing to vote Tory to keep out Ed Miliband.
  • Options
    Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,014

    The key is that this is a poll of Labour members. Smith is pitching to them, not the electorate. With him in charge Labour could hope to emulate EdM's score last year and perhaps do better in Wales. If the LDs progress slightly, that could mean a hung Parliament. It is the very best Labour could hope for. Under Corbyn, of course, that is impossible. More important, though, is that if Smith wins Labour becomes a party focused on winning elections once again. That is absolutely vital.

    However, Smith is not going to win. Corbyn is. So it's all academic. Labour will lose the next GE massively. That's the way the hard left will be defeated.

    @SouthamObserver - I've been enjoying your exploration of Corbyn as an extra-parliamentary politician, but there is one aspect I've not seen in terms of above the line contributions. I am assuming there is some strategic intelligence within the Corbyn camp, whether it is drawn upon or not by the leadership, that has an idea how being a mass movement of protest works in causing changes comparable in size and (subjectively) preferable in nature to those deliverable through parliamentary social democratic compromise, even in the teeth of ongoing Tory government. Such ideas such be at based and adapted in a detailed way to the context of modern Britain, and not just be based on the agitation chapters of the Penguin Classic Communist / Marxist set texts.

    After all, some of the victories of the last years have been heavily extra-parliamentary in the winning, on gay rights, on the much more hostile environment for foreign interventions, and it has to be remembered the way all shades of Labour politicians often cleave to many forms of political correctness, helpful or not, is a comfort blanket from 80s extra-parliamentary campaigns.

    I know you are rooting for a Smith win, but I'd like you to put yourself in the Corbyn strategist's shoes for at least one of your contributions and answer the question 'How is this all meant to work in the Corbynista's world?'
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,411
    PlatoSaid said:

    DanSmith said:
    I think if I was trying to get to Heathrow I would have been tempted to go all Alf Garnet.
    One person was shot by police in 2015, one so far in 2016 - he was white.
    Deaths at police hands are extremely rare in this country, regardless of ethnic origin.
  • Options
    TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,397

    PlatoSaid said:

    DanSmith said:
    I think if I was trying to get to Heathrow I would have been tempted to go all Alf Garnet.
    One person was shot by police in 2015, one so far in 2016 - he was white.
    Wasn't the guy shot by the plod part of an armed team trying to break out a Turkish mafia boss? Not exactly an unarmed black guy pottering along in his car and pulled over for a tail light being faulty.
    More deaths in custody (and death whilst bing pursued) , which is a significant problem. But evidently a different problem from the States.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 93,627

    PlatoSaid said:

    DanSmith said:
    I think if I was trying to get to Heathrow I would have been tempted to go all Alf Garnet.
    One person was shot by police in 2015, one so far in 2016 - he was white.
    Wasn't the guy shot by the plod part of an armed team trying to break out a Turkish mafia boss? Not exactly an unarmed black guy pottering along in his car and pulled over for a tail light being faulty.
    More deaths in custody (and death whilst bing pursued) , which is a significant problem. But evidently a different problem from the States.
    That requires a little too much nuanced thinking for people who want to be angry and be as cool as the angry protestors in other places who have a lot more reason to be angry.

This discussion has been closed.