The complexity of the act of self harming that is Brexit is certainly beyond me.
Referring to experts I draw attention to a recent article in the Economist (February 11 to 17, 2017, page 19ff) that discusses the possible size of a Brexit exit charge. It could be humongous.
With respect, you do your argument no favours at all by using cartoon words like "humongous" to convey that a sum is very large. In adultspeak the claim is unofficially estimated by Brussels as Eur 40-60 bn. Our net contribution is Eur 10 bn. a year, so Brussels claims it will be looking for 4-6 years worth of contributions - and that is its opening bid. It will come down.
The complexity of the act of self harming that is Brexit is certainly beyond me.
Referring to experts I draw attention to a recent article in the Economist (February 11 to 17, 2017, page 19ff) that discusses the possible size of a Brexit exit charge. It could be humongous.
This really is the dumbest argument the Europhiles have come up with. Even taking the highest figure, what they are actually arguing is that because we might be liable for the equivalent of 4 years gross payments, we should instead commit ourselves to making those gross payments every year for ever more.
With arguments like that it is no wonder the Eurofanatics lost.
Making the payments and getting the benefits vs. making the payments and getting shafted....
The complexity of the act of self harming that is Brexit is certainly beyond me.
Referring to experts I draw attention to a recent article in the Economist (February 11 to 17, 2017, page 19ff) that discusses the possible size of a Brexit exit charge. It could be humongous.
The complexity of the act of self harming that is Brexit is certainly beyond me.
Referring to experts I draw attention to a recent article in the Economist (February 11 to 17, 2017, page 19ff) that discusses the possible size of a Brexit exit charge. It could be humongous.
"Jeremy Corbyn has warned that two crunch by-elections are “on a knife-edge” and hit out at the media after a new poll gave the Tories a huge lead.
"The Labour leader addressed the weekly Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) meeting with a plea to work for every vote in the Copeland and Stoke Central by-elections on Thursday.
"But as former Shadow Cabinet minister Lisa Nandy warned that Labour’s membership was “increasingly unrepresentative of the country as a whole”, MPs also challenged him over an ICM/Guardian poll giving the Conservatives an 18-point lead.
"The survey found that the Tories were on 44%, up two points, while Labour were on 26%, down one. UKIP were on 13% and the Liberal Democrats on 8%.
"When challenged over the poll by former Shadow Chancellor Chris Leslie, Corbyn blamed the “problems we have had with the media”, but said that “we do a lot better on social media”, one source told HuffPost UK."
Translation: Our mates are liking us a lot on Twitter, so everything's great.
The complexity of the act of self harming that is Brexit is certainly beyond me.
Referring to experts I draw attention to a recent article in the Economist (February 11 to 17, 2017, page 19ff) that discusses the possible size of a Brexit exit charge. It could be humongous.
With respect, you do your argument no favours at all by using cartoon words like "humongous" to convey that a sum is very large. In adultspeak the claim is unofficially estimated by Brussels as Eur 40-60 bn. Our net contribution is Eur 10 bn. a year, so Brussels claims it will be looking for 4-6 years worth of contributions - and that is its opening bid. It will come down.
In this I have no argument, only instinct, but will try to be open minded.
The complexity of the act of self harming that is Brexit is certainly beyond me.
Referring to experts I draw attention to a recent article in the Economist (February 11 to 17, 2017, page 19ff) that discusses the possible size of a Brexit exit charge. It could be humongous.
With respect, you do your argument no favours at all by using cartoon words like "humongous" to convey that a sum is very large. In adultspeak the claim is unofficially estimated by Brussels as Eur 40-60 bn. Our net contribution is Eur 10 bn. a year, so Brussels claims it will be looking for 4-6 years worth of contributions - and that is its opening bid. It will come down.
In this I have no argument, only instinct, but will try to be open minded.
The complexity of the act of self harming that is Brexit is certainly beyond me.
Referring to experts I draw attention to a recent article in the Economist (February 11 to 17, 2017, page 19ff) that discusses the possible size of a Brexit exit charge. It could be humongous.
Its matched by the repayment we are due on our share of the value of assets owned by the EU.
We'll see.
Or we just walk away and go WTO.
Just walking away may involve repercussions. It needs calculation, in so far as calculation can be applied to hysterical situations.
If they are not going to be reasonable about several tens of billions of pounds of assets, they are not going to be reasonable about terms of any subsequent deal, so it is time to cut our losses.
The complexity of the act of self harming that is Brexit is certainly beyond me.
Referring to experts I draw attention to a recent article in the Economist (February 11 to 17, 2017, page 19ff) that discusses the possible size of a Brexit exit charge. It could be humongous.
With respect, you do your argument no favours at all by using cartoon words like "humongous" to convey that a sum is very large. In adultspeak the claim is unofficially estimated by Brussels as Eur 40-60 bn. Our net contribution is Eur 10 bn. a year, so Brussels claims it will be looking for 4-6 years worth of contributions - and that is its opening bid. It will come down.
In this I have no argument, only instinct, but will try to be open minded.
LOLOLOLOLOL
Indeed. I think It's much easier for instance to try to derive the spectral representation of the quantum phase operator.
What is the red effect on the right trying to be, other than a subliminal "I am crap at graphic design" message? Are we actually looking at a burning cross?
The complexity of the act of self harming that is Brexit is certainly beyond me.
Referring to experts I draw attention to a recent article in the Economist (February 11 to 17, 2017, page 19ff) that discusses the possible size of a Brexit exit charge. It could be humongous.
This really is the dumbest argument the Europhiles have come up with. Even taking the highest figure, what they are actually arguing is that because we might be liable for the equivalent of 4 years gross payments, we should instead commit ourselves to making those gross payments every year for ever more.
With arguments like that it is no wonder the Eurofanatics lost.
Making the payments and getting the benefits vs. making the payments and getting shafted....
Net rather than gross it is 6 years.
So make 6 years of net payments for no benefit or make decades of net payment for no benefit.
Logic dies not seem to be a strong point for Remainers.
The speech by Blair was not one of his finest moments, and as far as I can see has made virtually no impact outside of political circles. It all goes back to the problem of the way the question in the referendum was posed. All these risks and costs he is talking about now were made clear to people by the Remain campaign in the run up to the referendum. And still people voted to leave the EU. People were ready to risk economic instability and the break up of the UK in pursuit of Brexit and were unconcerned about the destabalisation of the whole western liberal international order which is probably a consequence of Brexit. The car crash has already happened and its too late to do anything now, and not even desirable because an establishment overturn of the referendum would only embolden and empower the forces behind Brexit until you end up with a completely polarised society. The people voted for shit so they have to eat shit and will have to eat shit for years to come. The Labour strategy is - in the end - the right one in that they need to attack the Tory free market Brexit and not the principle of Brexit itself. They just need a leader who is competent and able to communicate this message, which is not Jeremy Corbyn.
Scotland + SE England + SW England + Eastern England = c.260 seats. Labour currently holds 13 of them. Not moving in the appropriate direction to make gains.
@SkyNewsBreak: President Donald Trump has appointed General H.R. McMaster as his National Security Adviser following the resignation of Michael Flynn
That man is an absolute legend.
The Battle of 73 Easting was magnificent.
Even if a tad one sided.
It demonstrated beyond any doubt that the threat of a Soviet invasion of western Europe had been seriously overstated for years. The difference in the quality of the kit was bordering on the embarrassing. I am sure it was a pretty terrifying battle to be in but sitting in an M1A or even a Challenger would have made it a lot more comforting.
The ship has sailed. The EU won't want such a grudging member to return.
that;s the bit the remainers dont get
they think they will be welcomed back in to the fold instead of the cold reception reserved for perfidious Albion.
We can't remain now, it would be a national humiliation. What we can get, though, is a workable deal that leaves us in a kind of nether world of blue passports, pounds and ounces, and the ECJ as the forum for settling disputes relating to new "international agreements". After lots of posturing that's probably where we'll end up. The majority will be fine, die hard Leavers and Remainers will be furious.
Agree we can't go back. Ideally we'll get a deal that doesn't impact the economy too badly. But there is no sort of deal we want or could get that would keep us in.
We are already compliant with all the requirements for free trade with the single market. Much of the hard graft of the Canadian trade agreement was about standards and agreements for compliance and equivalence. It would be insane for us not to have an agreement at least as good as Canada's.
The speech by Blair was not one of his finest moments, and as far as I can see has made virtually no impact outside of political circles. It all goes back to the problem of the way the question in the referendum was posed. All these risks and costs he is talking about now were made clear to people by the Remain campaign in the run up to the referendum. And still people voted to leave the EU. People were ready to risk economic instability and the break up of the UK in pursuit of Brexit and were unconcerned about the destabalisation of the whole western liberal international order which is probably a consequence of Brexit. The car crash has already happened and its too late to do anything now, and not even desirable because an establishment overturn of the referendum would only embolden and empower the forces behind Brexit until you end up with a completely polarised society. The people voted for shit so they have to eat shit and will have to eat shit for years to come. The Labour strategy is - in the end - the right one in that they need to attack the Tory free market Brexit and not the principle of Brexit itself. They just need a leader who is competent and able to communicate this message, which is not Jeremy Corbyn.
@SkyNewsBreak: President Donald Trump has appointed General H.R. McMaster as his National Security Adviser following the resignation of Michael Flynn
That man is an absolute legend.
The Battle of 73 Easting was magnificent.
Even if a tad one sided.
It demonstrated beyond any doubt that the threat of a Soviet invasion of western Europe had been seriously overstated for years. The difference in the quality of the kit was bordering on the embarrassing. I am sure it was a pretty terrifying battle to be in but sitting in an M1A or even a Challenger would have made it a lot more comforting.
If I had been an Iraqi. I would have kept myself about 100 yards away from my tank.
Milo disinvited by CPAC. Silenced by the free-speech hating, panty-wetting snowflake liberals in the Republican Party?
It would take a heart of...
Milo: "But I understand that my usual blend of British sarcasm, provocation and gallows humor might have come across as flippancy, a lack of care for other victims or, worse, ‘advocacy.’”
What Labour needs to do is have a plan to win again in Loughborough. I cannot see it yet.
She's asking the right questions though: "With five times more members in Islington than a town like Wigan, there is a risk that Labour’s perspective will be skewed away from the needs and aspirations of people in towns across the country."
@SkyNewsBreak: President Donald Trump has appointed General H.R. McMaster as his National Security Adviser following the resignation of Michael Flynn
That man is an absolute legend.
The Battle of 73 Easting was magnificent.
Even if a tad one sided.
It demonstrated beyond any doubt that the threat of a Soviet invasion of western Europe had been seriously overstated for years. The difference in the quality of the kit was bordering on the embarrassing. I am sure it was a pretty terrifying battle to be in but sitting in an M1A or even a Challenger would have made it a lot more comforting.
It didn't feel that way to the chaps who would have been sitting at the bottom of foxholes on the North German plain in the 1970s and early 1980s. As the saying went at the time quantity has a quality all of its own.
The received wisdom, passed down from on high, was that out kit was terrifically superior, and it probably was on a one to one comparison. If a push came to a shove it wasn't going to be a one for one fight though. If memory serves, in tanks it was going to be something like 1:7. Were our Chieftains, because it was mostly Chieftains in those days, seven times better than the best of the Russian tanks backed up a very large superiority in artillery? Our infantry was for sure very much better trained and equipped than their Soviet counterparts, but the correlation of Forces was awful and no one doubted that the Sovs artillery worked just fine.
I don't know what would have happened if the Sovs had come across the IGB in those days. Would NATO have held them back and actually won? Dunno, thank God it was never put to the test.
What Labour needs to do is have a plan to win again in Loughborough. I cannot see it yet.
She's asking the right questions though: "With five times more members in Islington than a town like Wigan, there is a risk that Labour’s perspective will be skewed away from the needs and aspirations of people in towns across the country."
Aren't there more Lab members in London than the rest of the country put together? Ivstr reading this somewhere.
@SkyNewsBreak: President Donald Trump has appointed General H.R. McMaster as his National Security Adviser following the resignation of Michael Flynn
That man is an absolute legend.
The Battle of 73 Easting was magnificent.
I may be getting my Gulf War engagements mixed up but it think it is 73Eastings that was extensively wargamed post-war and the conclusion was that it was a perfect storm factors that led to the crushing allied victory - whilst the key component of comparative gun quality between the Iraqi and American tanks was a given and the largest factor there was all kind of things like the exact reduced visibility of the sandstorm (either an increased or decreased range would have hurt the Americans), the non-performance of the Iraqi pickets, the psychological effect of the weeks allied air strikes and the exact initial angle of engagement. Any one of those factors changing meant that the Americans would have taken significant casualties.
Where does Snell get his coats? The one he was wearing during clips for the sunday pol shows was just plain weird and today's campaign photos are not much better.
Scotland + SE England + SW England + Eastern England = c.260 seats. Labour currently holds 13 of them. Not moving in the appropriate direction to make gains.
Looked at more positively they don't have a lot to lose in these areas. If they do better in the Cities (and there is some indications of that, particularly in London) the damage might not be quite as severe as it really ought to be. I think getting rid of Labour and growing a replacement opposition is going to prove much more difficult than some seem to be assuming.
Oh for goodness sake (this being a family blog). How much more of this nonsense do we have to take? It's over, it's decided, get over it and work to make the best of the inevitable.
@SkyNewsBreak: President Donald Trump has appointed General H.R. McMaster as his National Security Adviser following the resignation of Michael Flynn
That man is an absolute legend.
The Battle of 73 Easting was magnificent.
Even if a tad one sided.
It demonstrated beyond any doubt that the threat of a Soviet invasion of western Europe had been seriously overstated for years. The difference in the quality of the kit was bordering on the embarrassing. I am sure it was a pretty terrifying battle to be in but sitting in an M1A or even a Challenger would have made it a lot more comforting.
Fighting in Western Europe would have been a very different proposition to fighting in the desert.
American military wargames in the 80s, which should have been designed to simulate fighting defensive war in Europe, were heavily compromised to the extent that they were a better representation of fighting an offensive action in the desert. So it was bloody lucky that is what they ended up fighting.
In the desert the allies had unimpeded air superiority and nice clear 2 mile shots with their wicked cool guns on their MBTs, Western Europe would have been a grossly urban, heavily vegetated arena with a competitive air theatre.
I can thoroughly recommend "How to Make War" by James F Dunnigan. Even if he is a bit of a wanker.
@SkyNewsBreak: President Donald Trump has appointed General H.R. McMaster as his National Security Adviser following the resignation of Michael Flynn
That man is an absolute legend.
The Battle of 73 Easting was magnificent.
Even if a tad one sided.
It demonstrated beyond any doubt that the threat of a Soviet invasion of western Europe had been seriously overstated for years. The difference in the quality of the kit was bordering on the embarrassing. I am sure it was a pretty terrifying battle to be in but sitting in an M1A or even a Challenger would have made it a lot more comforting.
If I had been an Iraqi. I would have kept myself about 100 yards away from my tank.
That is exactly what happened. Many of the tanks destroyed were unoccupied.
@SkyNewsBreak: President Donald Trump has appointed General H.R. McMaster as his National Security Adviser following the resignation of Michael Flynn
That man is an absolute legend.
The Battle of 73 Easting was magnificent.
Even if a tad one sided.
It demonstrated beyond any doubt that the threat of a Soviet invasion of western Europe had been seriously overstated for years. The difference in the quality of the kit was bordering on the embarrassing. I am sure it was a pretty terrifying battle to be in but sitting in an M1A or even a Challenger would have made it a lot more comforting.
It didn't feel that way to the chaps who would have been sitting at the bottom of foxholes on the North German plain in the 1970s and early 1980s. As the saying went at the time quantity has a quality all of its own.
The received wisdom, passed down from on high, was that out kit was terrifically superior, and it probably was on a one to one comparison. If a push came to a shove it wasn't going to be a one for one fight though. If memory serves, in tanks it was going to be something like 1:7. Were our Chieftains, because it was mostly Chieftains in those days, seven times better than the best of the Russian tanks backed up a very large superiority in artillery? Our infantry was for sure very much better trained and equipped than their Soviet counterparts, but the correlation of Forces was awful and no one doubted that the Sovs artillery worked just fine.
I don't know what would have happened if the Sovs had come across the IGB in those days. Would NATO have held them back and actually won? Dunno, thank God it was never put to the test.
Amen to that. My father served in Germany from 70-73. I remember him telling me that he was at a NATO conference which was all about how long NATO could hold up the Russians before the politicians would be forced to go nuclear. The British, Americans, Dutch etc all said which positions they would be dropping back to as the Soviets advanced. The Germans said nothing until someone thought to ask them their plans. Their general said: "We're going to Berlin." After the Gulf war that did not sound quite so ridiculous.
What Labour needs to do is have a plan to win again in Loughborough. I cannot see it yet.
She's asking the right questions though: "With five times more members in Islington than a town like Wigan, there is a risk that Labour’s perspective will be skewed away from the needs and aspirations of people in towns across the country."
Aren't there more Lab members in London than the rest of the country put together? Ivstr reading this somewhere.
Though remember, while the party in London and suburbs is bigger than the rUK Labour party, the rUK Labour party is still bigger than Tories and kippers in the whole UK. rUK Labour is still a big party.
@SkyNewsBreak: President Donald Trump has appointed General H.R. McMaster as his National Security Adviser following the resignation of Michael Flynn
That man is an absolute legend.
The Battle of 73 Easting was magnificent.
I may be getting my Gulf War engagements mixed up but it think it is 73Eastings that was extensively wargamed post-war and the conclusion was that it was a perfect storm factors that led to the crushing allied victory - whilst the key component of comparative gun quality between the Iraqi and American tanks was a given and the largest factor there was all kind of things like the exact reduced visibility of the sandstorm (either an increased or decreased range would have hurt the Americans), the non-performance of the Iraqi pickets, the psychological effect of the weeks allied air strikes and the exact initial angle of engagement. Any one of those factors changing meant that the Americans would have taken significant casualties.
Interesting thing war.
What made the British and American v Iraqi tank battles so one sided were the following
The Challenger and Abrams M1 tanks were superior to the Iraqi tanks because
1) They were better protected
2) Had a longer firing distance
3) Had GPS, which was brilliant for desert warfare
4) Had better trained troops
5) Had better air support (aircraft and attack helicopter)
6) Iraqis used tanks as effectively self propelled howitzers
7) Also we had better night vision equipment.
8) The Iraqis were shellshocked, i) from weeks of bombing ii) Half an hour before the main ground war offensive the Anglo-American artillery line fired 11,000 artillery rounds and 600,00 RPGs at the Iraqis
At 73 Easting all those advantages clicked into place for a perfect storm as were The Battle of Medina Ridge and The Battle of Norfolk
The ship has sailed. The EU won't want such a grudging member to return.
that;s the bit the remainers dont get
they think they will be welcomed back in to the fold instead of the cold reception reserved for perfidious Albion.
We can't remain now, it would be a national humiliation. What we can get, though, is a workable deal that leaves us in a kind of nether world of blue passports, pounds and ounces, and the ECJ as the forum for settling disputes relating to new "international agreements". After lots of posturing that's probably where we'll end up. The majority will be fine, die hard Leavers and Remainers will be furious.
Agree we can't go back. Ideally we'll get a deal that doesn't impact the economy too badly. But there is no sort of deal we want or could get that would keep us in.
We are already compliant with all the requirements for free trade with the single market. Much of the hard graft of the Canadian trade agreement was about standards and agreements for compliance and equivalence. It would be insane for us not to have an agreement at least as good as Canada's.
Of course. Today we could get equivalence (for financial services if that's what you mean). But next week or year the EU's regulatory environment will have changed and to maintain equivalence we will have to conform to that new environment.
So it will be the much not believed 'government by fax'.
Is that an improvement on where we are today? A reclamation of sovereignty?
"Jeremy Corbyn has warned that two crunch by-elections are “on a knife-edge” and hit out at the media after a new poll gave the Tories a huge lead.
"The Labour leader addressed the weekly Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) meeting with a plea to work for every vote in the Copeland and Stoke Central by-elections on Thursday.
"But as former Shadow Cabinet minister Lisa Nandy warned that Labour’s membership was “increasingly unrepresentative of the country as a whole”, MPs also challenged him over an ICM/Guardian poll giving the Conservatives an 18-point lead.
"The survey found that the Tories were on 44%, up two points, while Labour were on 26%, down one. UKIP were on 13% and the Liberal Democrats on 8%.
"When challenged over the poll by former Shadow Chancellor Chris Leslie, Corbyn blamed the “problems we have had with the media”, but said that “we do a lot better on social media”, one source told HuffPost UK."
Translation: Our mates are liking us a lot on Twitter, so everything's great.
LOL: "“we do a lot better on social media”
The students are clicking on their way to the latest YouTube from PewDiePie, but they won't get around to voting on the day.
@SkyNewsBreak: President Donald Trump has appointed General H.R. McMaster as his National Security Adviser following the resignation of Michael Flynn
That man is an absolute legend.
The Battle of 73 Easting was magnificent.
Even if a tad one sided.
It demonstrated beyond any doubt that the threat of a Soviet invasion of western Europe had been seriously overstated for years. The difference in the quality of the kit was bordering on the embarrassing. I am sure it was a pretty terrifying battle to be in but sitting in an M1A or even a Challenger would have made it a lot more comforting.
Fighting in Western Europe would have been a very different proposition to fighting in the desert.
American military wargames in the 80s, which should have been designed to simulate fighting defensive war in Europe, were heavily compromised to the extent that they were a better representation of fighting an offensive action in the desert. So it was bloody lucky that is what they ended up fighting.
In the desert the allies had unimpeded air superiority and nice clear 2 mile shots with their wicked cool guns on their MBTs, Western Europe would have been a grossly urban, heavily vegetated arena with a competitive air theatre.
I can thoroughly recommend "How to Make War" by James F Dunnigan. Even if he is a bit of a wanker.
I can remember discussions in the early-mid seventies when the effects of the urbanisation of Western Germany over thirty years with regard to a Soviet invasion were brought to the fore. The brass-hats did not want to know, the very concept of city-fighting was too horrible for them. I think the Bundeswehr high command had a similar head in the sand attitude, but the Septics actually thought about it before dumping it on the too-difficult shelf.
What Labour needs to do is have a plan to win again in Loughborough. I cannot see it yet.
She's asking the right questions though: "With five times more members in Islington than a town like Wigan, there is a risk that Labour’s perspective will be skewed away from the needs and aspirations of people in towns across the country."
Aren't there more Lab members in London than the rest of the country put together? Ivstr reading this somewhere.
Though remember, while the party in London and suburbs is bigger than the rUK Labour party, the rUK Labour party is still bigger than Tories and kippers in the whole UK. rUK Labour is still a big party.
Are you talking about the Corbyn fanatics who at the core are destroying labour
Scotland + SE England + SW England + Eastern England = c.260 seats. Labour currently holds 13 of them. Not moving in the appropriate direction to make gains.
Looked at more positively they don't have a lot to lose in these areas. If they do better in the Cities (and there is some indications of that, particularly in London) the damage might not be quite as severe as it really ought to be. I think getting rid of Labour and growing a replacement opposition is going to prove much more difficult than some seem to be assuming.
They should be worried about Wales and the North East, which have seen huge falls in Labour support, having been Labour strongholds. Wales has reached a tipping point, where the Tories are close to overhauling Labour. The North East could reach that tipping point in 10 years' time.
"Like many 52 per centers I believe last year’s referendum victory for Leave was in spite a mountain of mendacity, epitomised by that the joint press conference promising a punishment budget as a result of the CERTAIN financial meltdown and resulting recession"
We can all play that game Don
You arguments and ideas would have a much better chance of gaining resonance and traction if you you and other Remainers stopped bleating about the campaign.
BOTH sides played hard and fast with the truth - what did anyone expect when politicians can promise the earth with no requirement to justify their argument
If one good thing comes out of this, lets hope it is the requirement that politicians have to produce statements and documents to the same standards as the rest of us
The Budget-signed of by the cabinet in the same way a firms Company accounts are by Company Directors.
Election manifestos-same rules as the Advertising Standards Agency.
I cant make sweeping unfounded statements about my competitors or my products-why should politicians be allowed to ???
She does seem to have clicked though. It is why I am more interested in Copeland than Stoke. Copeland is just about Labours most rural seat. It is a far more interesting contest than the battle between Tweedledum and Tweedledumber.
Scotland + SE England + SW England + Eastern England = c.260 seats. Labour currently holds 13 of them. Not moving in the appropriate direction to make gains.
Looked at more positively they don't have a lot to lose in these areas. If they do better in the Cities (and there is some indications of that, particularly in London) the damage might not be quite as severe as it really ought to be. I think getting rid of Labour and growing a replacement opposition is going to prove much more difficult than some seem to be assuming.
They should be worried about Wales and the North East, which have seen huge falls in Labour support, having been Labour strongholds. Wales has reached a tipping point, where the Tories are close to overhauling Labour. The North East could reach that tipping point in 10 years' time.
Certainly while Labour remains dominated by the hard left and the Tories keep an anti immigration agenda that is the case especially in rural and market towns in Wales and the North East but at the same time London and the big cities of the North West like Liverpool and Manchester will become more strongly Labour and the LDs will also start to make further progress in the South East
What Labour needs to do is have a plan to win again in Loughborough. I cannot see it yet.
She's asking the right questions though: "With five times more members in Islington than a town like Wigan, there is a risk that Labour’s perspective will be skewed away from the needs and aspirations of people in towns across the country."
Aren't there more Lab members in London than the rest of the country put together? Ivstr reading this somewhere.
Though remember, while the party in London and suburbs is bigger than the rUK Labour party, the rUK Labour party is still bigger than Tories and kippers in the whole UK. rUK Labour is still a big party.
Are you talking about the Corbyn fanatics who at the core are destroying labour
190,000 voted against Corbyn last September. That's bigger than the membership of any UK party, apart from Corbyn Labour.
Scotland + SE England + SW England + Eastern England = c.260 seats. Labour currently holds 13 of them. Not moving in the appropriate direction to make gains.
Looked at more positively they don't have a lot to lose in these areas. If they do better in the Cities (and there is some indications of that, particularly in London) the damage might not be quite as severe as it really ought to be. I think getting rid of Labour and growing a replacement opposition is going to prove much more difficult than some seem to be assuming.
They should be worried about Wales and the North East, which have seen huge falls in Labour support, having been Labour strongholds. Wales has reached a tipping point, where the Tories are close to overhauling Labour. The North East could reach that tipping point in 10 years' time.
I think at the next election it is the east and west midlands that they will need to worry about. They have a lot more to lose there.
A non-political query for the PB brains trust. A friend of a friend has been invited to help at an event of
www.prisonersmaintaininginnocence.org.uk
Naturally everyone is sympathetic to the problems of people who are sent to prison when genuinely innocent, and their maintaining innocence may be taken as an indication that they've not yet faced up to their alleged crimes. There may not be many such cases but it must be horrible if it happens. As I understand it, this group is keen to raise the profile of the issue, and no harm in that.
The mutual friend has asked me whether the organisation and its organisers have a good reputation - she thought I might know of them as an ex-Justice Committee member. However, I've never heard of them. Their website looks harmless though brief. Does anyone know anything about them, good or otherwise?
Scotland + SE England + SW England + Eastern England = c.260 seats. Labour currently holds 13 of them. Not moving in the appropriate direction to make gains.
Looked at more positively they don't have a lot to lose in these areas. If they do better in the Cities (and there is some indications of that, particularly in London) the damage might not be quite as severe as it really ought to be. I think getting rid of Labour and growing a replacement opposition is going to prove much more difficult than some seem to be assuming.
They should be worried about Wales and the North East, which have seen huge falls in Labour support, having been Labour strongholds. Wales has reached a tipping point, where the Tories are close to overhauling Labour. The North East could reach that tipping point in 10 years' time.
Certainly while Labour remains dominated by the hard left and the Tories keep an anti immigration agenda that is the case but at the same time London and the big cities of the North West like Liverpool and Manchester will become more strongly Labour and the LDs will also start to make further progress in the South East
Extra votes for Labour in big cities are wasted votes.
There is Brexit role for Remainers, which is to help produce an outcome which is worse than what we had before, but better than it would otherwise be. The problem is that Remainers don't see why they should deal with problems that they think others caused; while Leavers don't accept the consequences of their earlier decision and are therefore incapable of dealing with those consequences.
Scotland + SE England + SW England + Eastern England = c.260 seats. Labour currently holds 13 of them. Not moving in the appropriate direction to make gains.
Looked at more positively they don't have a lot to lose in these areas. If they do better in the Cities (and there is some indications of that, particularly in London) the damage might not be quite as severe as it really ought to be. I think getting rid of Labour and growing a replacement opposition is going to prove much more difficult than some seem to be assuming.
They should be worried about Wales and the North East, which have seen huge falls in Labour support, having been Labour strongholds. Wales has reached a tipping point, where the Tories are close to overhauling Labour. The North East could reach that tipping point in 10 years' time.
Certainly while Labour remains dominated by the hard left and the Tories keep an anti immigration agenda that is the case but at the same time London and the big cities of the North West like Liverpool and Manchester will become more strongly Labour and the LDs will also start to make further progress in the South East
Extra votes for Labour in big cities are wasted votes.
They are not enough to win but they are enough to ensure they remain the official opposition, especially as Stoke and Copeland are likely to confirm UKIP's attempts to enter the Labour working class heartlands are going nowhere and it is in fact May's Tories who are the main challengers to Labour there. They will remain in that position, neither dead nor challenging for power unless either the economy collapses post Brexit or the centre retakes hold of the Labour leadership or an SDP Mark 2 is formed by the LDs and the Blairites and a few Remainer Tories
What Labour needs to do is have a plan to win again in Loughborough. I cannot see it yet.
She's asking the right questions though: "With five times more members in Islington than a town like Wigan, there is a risk that Labour’s perspective will be skewed away from the needs and aspirations of people in towns across the country."
Aren't there more Lab members in London than the rest of the country put together? Ivstr reading this somewhere.
Though remember, while the party in London and suburbs is bigger than the rUK Labour party, the rUK Labour party is still bigger than Tories and kippers in the whole UK. rUK Labour is still a big party.
This is, however, entirely counter-productive if said members simply drag Labour away from the ground where most voters are standing. If Labour had 2 million members, but they also just so happened to be the only 2 million people who voted Labour, then it would be even further from power.
Anyway, the point is - of course - that Labour's priorities are driven by the majority in the London & Home Counties wing of the party, who promulgate an agenda focused on human rights activism and niche foreign policy issues, and who are far more interested in filling in online petitions and feeling self-righteous than they are in the slog of trying to get into Government.
And why would these people want a Labour Government? Firstly this would end up with them shouting and swearing at their own side like they had to over Iraq, and protest is so much more fun with the pantomime villains of the Tory Party in charge. And secondly, Conservative rule will be much more amenable to house price inflation and modest taxes - i.e. the things that serve their personal economic interests - than tax rises for the well-off to fund public services, a programme of redistribution, and horrid council estates for oiks plonked awkwardly on the outskirts of various exclusive villages and suburbs.
Labour is now a campaign movement for a small minority of enraged left-liberals, with an ailing political party bolted on one side. This may change, but I wouldn't put any money on it.
Scotland + SE England + SW England + Eastern England = c.260 seats. Labour currently holds 13 of them. Not moving in the appropriate direction to make gains.
Looked at more positively they don't have a lot to lose in these areas. If they do better in the Cities (and there is some indications of that, particularly in London) the damage might not be quite as severe as it really ought to be. I think getting rid of Labour and growing a replacement opposition is going to prove much more difficult than some seem to be assuming.
They should be worried about Wales and the North East, which have seen huge falls in Labour support, having been Labour strongholds. Wales has reached a tipping point, where the Tories are close to overhauling Labour. The North East could reach that tipping point in 10 years' time.
I think at the next election it is the east and west midlands that they will need to worry about. They have a lot more to lose there.
East and West Midlands are a bit like Ohio, going from ultra-marginal to quite firmly Right.
Brind: "The fact is that if Tony Blair’s dream of beating Brexit is to be realised it will Labour MPs who will do the hard graft of persuading Leave voters to think again."
By the time Labour is once again a coherent force in British politics, i.e. post Corbyn, we'll be long gone from the EU.
Scotland + SE England + SW England + Eastern England = c.260 seats. Labour currently holds 13 of them. Not moving in the appropriate direction to make gains.
Looked at more positively they don't have a lot to lose in these areas. If they do better in the Cities (and there is some indications of that, particularly in London) the damage might not be quite as severe as it really ought to be. I think getting rid of Labour and growing a replacement opposition is going to prove much more difficult than some seem to be assuming.
They should be worried about Wales and the North East, which have seen huge falls in Labour support, having been Labour strongholds. Wales has reached a tipping point, where the Tories are close to overhauling Labour. The North East could reach that tipping point in 10 years' time.
I think at the next election it is the east and west midlands that they will need to worry about. They have a lot more to lose there.
Yep, it will be absolute carnage in the Midlands if Corbyn is leader. His and McDonnell's IRA support will be on every leaflet and in and around Birmingham especially it will cost Labour huge numbers of votes. If you could design a party leader designed to repel the average Midlands voter you'd end up with someone who looked very like Jeremy Corbyn. If you tried a little less hard you'd end up with Ed Miliband or Gordon Brown.
A non-political query for the PB brains trust. A friend of a friend has been invited to help at an event of
www.prisonersmaintaininginnocence.org.uk
Naturally everyone is sympathetic to the problems of people who are sent to prison when genuinely innocent, and their maintaining innocence may be taken as an indication that they've not yet faced up to their alleged crimes. There may not be many such cases but it must be horrible if it happens. As I understand it, this group is keen to raise the profile of the issue, and no harm in that.
The mutual friend has asked me whether the organisation and its organisers have a good reputation - she thought I might know of them as an ex-Justice Committee member. However, I've never heard of them. Their website looks harmless though brief. Does anyone know anything about them, good or otherwise?
"Progressing Prisoners Maintaining Innocence (PPMI) is a working network composed of prison chaplains and visitors, support groups, campaigning organisations, prison lawyers, investigative journalists, academics and those involved in the education and personal development of young people. PPMI advocates particular changes in the processed of the Criminal Justice system. The members of the Group are volunteers who are familiar with the legal requirements placed on the Prison Service."
Scotland + SE England + SW England + Eastern England = c.260 seats. Labour currently holds 13 of them. Not moving in the appropriate direction to make gains.
Looked at more positively they don't have a lot to lose in these areas. If they do better in the Cities (and there is some indications of that, particularly in London) the damage might not be quite as severe as it really ought to be. I think getting rid of Labour and growing a replacement opposition is going to prove much more difficult than some seem to be assuming.
They should be worried about Wales and the North East, which have seen huge falls in Labour support, having been Labour strongholds. Wales has reached a tipping point, where the Tories are close to overhauling Labour. The North East could reach that tipping point in 10 years' time.
I think at the next election it is the east and west midlands that they will need to worry about. They have a lot more to lose there.
East and West Midlands are a bit like Ohio, going from ultra-marginal to quite firmly Right.
Some parts, like Nuneaton and Kettering, others like Warwick and Leamington and Broxtowe are still pretty marginal
What Labour needs to do is have a plan to win again in Loughborough. I cannot see it yet.
She's asking the right questions though: "With five times more members in Islington than a town like Wigan, there is a risk that Labour’s perspective will be skewed away from the needs and aspirations of people in towns across the country."
Aren't there more Lab members in London than the rest of the country put together? Ivstr reading this somewhere.
Though remember, while the party in London and suburbs is bigger than the rUK Labour party, the rUK Labour party is still bigger than Tories and kippers in the whole UK. rUK Labour is still a big party.
Which is precisely why I am not so confident as many Tories are about the next election.
What Labour needs to do is have a plan to win again in Loughborough. I cannot see it yet.
She's asking the right questions though: "With five times more members in Islington than a town like Wigan, there is a risk that Labour’s perspective will be skewed away from the needs and aspirations of people in towns across the country."
Aren't there more Lab members in London than the rest of the country put together? Ivstr reading this somewhere.
Though remember, while the party in London and suburbs is bigger than the rUK Labour party, the rUK Labour party is still bigger than Tories and kippers in the whole UK. rUK Labour is still a big party.
This is, however, entirely counter-productive if said members simply drag Labour away from the ground where most voters are standing. If Labour had 2 million members, but they also just so happened to be the only 2 million people who voted Labour, then it would be even further from power.
Anyway, the point is - of course - that Labour's priorities are driven by the majority in the London & Home Counties wing of the party, who promulgate an agenda focused on human rights activism and niche foreign policy issues, and who are far more interested in filling in online petitions and feeling self-righteous than they are in the slog of trying to get into Government.
And why would these people want a Labour Government? Firstly this would end up with them shouting and swearing at their own side like they had to over Iraq, and protest is so much more fun with the pantomime villains of the Tory Party in charge. And secondly, Conservative rule will be much more amenable to house price inflation and modest taxes - i.e. the things that serve their personal economic interests - than tax rises for the well-off to fund public services, a programme of redistribution, and horrid council estates for oiks plonked awkwardly on the outskirts of various exclusive villages and suburbs.
Labour is now a campaign movement for a small minority of enraged left-liberals, with an ailing political party bolted on one side. This may change, but I wouldn't put any money on it.
Yet this is where I see some hope for Labour. Corbyn has not attempted to parachute in his Londoncentric acolytes into Northern safeseats. Both Snell and Troughton were local people picked by local parties.
If this policy continues, the PLP will become one representing the provinces much more than the Metropolis.
There is Brexit role for Remainers, which is to help produce an outcome which is worse than what we had before, but better than it would otherwise be. The problem is that Remainers don't see why they should deal with problems that they think others caused; while Leavers don't accept the consequences of their earlier decision and are therefore incapable of dealing with those consequences.
We will deal with the consequences as and when they appear rather than sitting around claiming the sky is falling when it quite clearly is not.
Many years ago when such things were still fresh in people's minds, there used to be a popular comment along the lines of whether or not you would want a chap beside you in the trenches. Most Remainers would very clearly fail that test.
What Labour needs to do is have a plan to win again in Loughborough. I cannot see it yet.
She's asking the right questions though: "With five times more members in Islington than a town like Wigan, there is a risk that Labour’s perspective will be skewed away from the needs and aspirations of people in towns across the country."
Aren't there more Lab members in London than the rest of the country put together? Ivstr reading this somewhere.
Though remember, while the party in London and suburbs is bigger than the rUK Labour party, the rUK Labour party is still bigger than Tories and kippers in the whole UK. rUK Labour is still a big party.
Which is precisely why I am not so confident as many Tories are about the next election.
The only times Labour have won in the last forty years have been by pretending to be Tory.
How many Labour/Green/SNP/Plaid lefties think Blair was anything other than a Tory?
What Labour needs to do is have a plan to win again in Loughborough. I cannot see it yet.
She's asking the right questions though: "With five times more members in Islington than a town like Wigan, there is a risk that Labour’s perspective will be skewed away from the needs and aspirations of people in towns across the country."
Aren't there more Lab members in London than the rest of the country put together? Ivstr reading this somewhere.
Though remember, while the party in London and suburbs is bigger than the rUK Labour party, the rUK Labour party is still bigger than Tories and kippers in the whole UK. rUK Labour is still a big party.
Which is precisely why I am not so confident as many Tories are about the next election.
Soon Labour will have almost as many members as voters, though its membership has started to dip a little after Corbyn backed Article 50
What Labour needs to do is have a plan to win again in Loughborough. I cannot see it yet.
If the Labour party were sane, Nandy would be its next leader.
Even as a Tory, I'd have to agree. She certainly appears to me to be a far stronger candidate in just about every respect than the surprisingly much-touted Ms Long-Bailey. Yet at 16/1 vs 12/1 she's well behind her in the current betting odds, although both have shortened considerably over recent weeks.
What Labour needs to do is have a plan to win again in Loughborough. I cannot see it yet.
She's asking the right questions though: "With five times more members in Islington than a town like Wigan, there is a risk that Labour’s perspective will be skewed away from the needs and aspirations of people in towns across the country."
Aren't there more Lab members in London than the rest of the country put together? Ivstr reading this somewhere.
Though remember, while the party in London and suburbs is bigger than the rUK Labour party, the rUK Labour party is still bigger than Tories and kippers in the whole UK. rUK Labour is still a big party.
... Anyway, the point is - of course - that Labour's priorities are driven by the majority in the London & Home Counties wing of the party, who promulgate an agenda focused on human rights activism and niche foreign policy issues, and who are far more interested in filling in online petitions and feeling self-righteous than they are in the slog of trying to get into Government.
And why would these people want a Labour Government? Firstly this would end up with them shouting and swearing at their own side like they had to over Iraq, and protest is so much more fun with the pantomime villains of the Tory Party in charge. And secondly, Conservative rule will be much more amenable to house price inflation and modest taxes - i.e. the things that serve their personal economic interests - than tax rises for the well-off to fund public services, a programme of redistribution, and horrid council estates for oiks plonked awkwardly on the outskirts of various exclusive villages and suburbs.
Labour is now a campaign movement for a small minority of enraged left-liberals, with an ailing political party bolted on one side. This may change, but I wouldn't put any money on it.
Yet this is where I see some hope for Labour. Corbyn has not attempted to parachute in his Londoncentric acolytes into Northern safeseats. Both Snell and Troughton were local people picked by local parties.
If this policy continues, the PLP will become one representing the provinces much more than the Metropolis.
If this policy continues then the candidates will be diverse; but in a Corbyn continues the PLP will be very metropolitan. They'll be trounced by Tories in the provinces.
On the Midlands, I think people generalise too easily - for instance, Broxtowe is in political terms (only) roughly a third like Islington (big Momentum branch, stacks of Morning Stars in Sainsbury), half like Surrey (big issue is saving the green belt from housing) and a sixth like Stoke (but former coal-mining), and all three are quite different in feel from central Nottingham, of which they are could technically be called suburbs. Birmingham could be on another planet and I've never met anyone who thought of the two in the same breath.
there used to be a popular comment along the lines of whether or not you would want a chap beside you in the trenches. Most Remainers would very clearly fail that test.
Twitter Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 2h2 hours ago Lab sources: "everybody" who broke whip- including 3 whips themselves - hv been sent disciplinary letter from Chief Whip over Article50 vote
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 2h2 hours ago Also at PLP, Corbyn told by Lab MP Neil Coyne that the one real problem on the doorstep 'is Jeremy Corbyn'.
What Labour needs to do is have a plan to win again in Loughborough. I cannot see it yet.
She's asking the right questions though: "With five times more members in Islington than a town like Wigan, there is a risk that Labour’s perspective will be skewed away from the needs and aspirations of people in towns across the country."
Aren't there more Lab members in London than the rest of the country put together? Ivstr reading this somewhere.
Though remember, while the party in London and suburbs is bigger than the rUK Labour party, the rUK Labour party is still bigger than Tories and kippers in the whole UK. rUK Labour is still a big party.
Which is precisely why I am not so confident as many Tories are about the next election.
Soon Labour will have almost as many members as voters, though its membership has started to dip a little after Corbyn backed Article 50
My weathervane luvvy mate Corbynista has quietened down very much since that. Thank heavens for small mercies.
On the Midlands, I think people generalise too easily - for instance, Broxtowe is in political terms (only) roughly a third like Islington (big Momentum branch, stacks of Morning Stars in Sainsbury), half like Surrey (big issue is saving the green belt from housing) and a sixth like Stoke (but former coal-mining), and all three are quite different in feel from central Nottingham, of which they are could technically be called suburbs. Birmingham could be on another planet and I've never met anyone who thought of the two in the same breath.
Broxtowe, or at least part of it, is a university town/suburb. There does seem to be a pattern whereby uni towns are Corbyn/morning star hotspots.
The fact is that if Tony Blair’s dream of beating Brexit is to be realised it will Labour MPs who will do the hard graft of persuading Leave voters to think again.
To be fair, Labour MPs know a thing or two about giving away power.
What Labour needs to do is have a plan to win again in Loughborough. I cannot see it yet.
She's asking the right questions though: "With five times more members in Islington than a town like Wigan, there is a risk that Labour’s perspective will be skewed away from the needs and aspirations of people in towns across the country."
Aren't there more Lab members in London than the rest of the country put together? Ivstr reading this somewhere.
Though remember, while the party in London and suburbs is bigger than the rUK Labour party, the rUK Labour party is still bigger than Tories and kippers in the whole UK. rUK Labour is still a big party.
Which is precisely why I am not so confident as many Tories are about the next election.
Soon Labour will have almost as many members as voters, though its membership has started to dip a little after Corbyn backed Article 50
My weathervane luvvy mate Corbynista has quietened down very much since that. Thank heavens for small mercies.
I suspect when the history books are written this will be the moment the scales fell from the Corbyn worshipers. Although I have no idea why - Corbyn is a Bennite and Benn famously campaigned to get out of EU/EC.
The fact is that if Tony Blair’s dream of beating Brexit is to be realised it will Labour MPs who will do the hard graft of persuading Leave voters to think again.
To be fair, Labour MPs know a thing or two about giving away power.
What Labour needs to do is have a plan to win again in Loughborough. I cannot see it yet.
She's asking the right questions though: "With five times more members in Islington than a town like Wigan, there is a risk that Labour’s perspective will be skewed away from the needs and aspirations of people in towns across the country."
Aren't there more Lab members in London than the rest of the country put together? Ivstr reading this somewhere.
Though remember, while the party in London and suburbs is bigger than the rUK Labour party, the rUK Labour party is still bigger than Tories and kippers in the whole UK. rUK Labour is still a big party.
... Anyway, the point is - of course - that Labour's priorities are driven by the majority in the London & Home Counties wing of the party, who promulgate an agenda focused on human rights activism and niche foreign policy issues, and who are far more interested in filling in online petitions and feeling self-righteous than they are in the slog of trying to get into Government.
And why would these people want a Labour Government? Firstly this would
Labour is now a campaign movement for a small minority of enraged left-liberals, with an ailing political party bolted on one side. This may change, but I wouldn't put any money on it.
Yet this is where I see some hope for Labour. Corbyn has not attempted to parachute in his Londoncentric acolytes into Northern safeseats. Both Snell and Troughton were local people picked by local parties.
If this policy continues, the PLP will become one representing the provinces much more than the Metropolis.
If this policy continues then the candidates will be diverse; but in a Corbyn continues the PLP will be very metropolitan. They'll be trounced by Tories in the provinces.
That is the opposite of what I think. The new MPs, and those chosen by local parties at reselection will be chosen by non-metropolitan members, and as SO points out the majority of those are old school Labour. Snell is a bit of a loose cannon, but Troughton is no flighty metropolitan. Of course a policy of localism carries risk of major talent being overlooked, but I think that risk is low.
What Labour needs to do is have a plan to win again in Loughborough. I cannot see it yet.
She's asking the right questions though: "With five times more members in Islington than a town like Wigan, there is a risk that Labour’s perspective will be skewed away from the needs and aspirations of people in towns across the country."
Aren't there more Lab members in London than the rest of the country put together? Ivstr reading this somewhere.
...
... Anyway, the point is - of course - that Labour's priorities are driven by the majority in the London & Home Counties wing of the party, who promulgate an agenda focused on human rights activism and niche foreign policy issues, and who are far more interested in filling in online petitions and feeling self-righteous than they are in the slog of trying to get into Government.
And why would these people want a Labour Government? Firstly this would
Labour is now a campaign movement for a small minority of enraged left-liberals, with an ailing political party bolted on one side. This may change, but I wouldn't put any money on it.
Yet this is where I see some hope for Labour. Corbyn has not attempted to parachute in his Londoncentric acolytes into Northern safeseats. Both Snell and Troughton were local people picked by local parties.
If this policy continues, the PLP will become one representing the provinces much more than the Metropolis.
If this policy continues then the candidates will be diverse; but in a Corbyn continues the PLP will be very metropolitan. They'll be trounced by Tories in the provinces.
That is the opposite of what I think. The new MPs, and those chosen by local parties at reselection will be chosen by non-metropolitan members, and as SO points out the majority of those are old school Labour. Snell is a bit of a loose cannon, but Troughton is no flighty metropolitan. Of course a policy of localism carries risk of major talent being overlooked, but I think that risk is low.
Not sure you're understanding me Dr Fox. In a general election campaign, when the media focus is on leaders at Westminster, voters won't care as much about local candidates as they might in by elections. In the provinces Labour will lose to Tories, big time - because Corbyn scares the horses.
What Labour needs to do is have a plan to win again in Loughborough. I cannot see it yet.
She's asking the right questions though: "With five times more members in Islington than a town like Wigan, there is a risk that Labour’s perspective will be skewed away from the needs and aspirations of people in towns across the country."
Aren't there more Lab members in London than the rest of the country put together? Ivstr reading this somewhere.
Though remember, while the party in London and suburbs is bigger than the rUK Labour party, the rUK Labour party is still bigger than Tories and kippers in the whole UK. rUK Labour is still a big party.
Which is precisely why I am not so confident as many Tories are about the next election.
Soon Labour will have almost as many members as voters, though its membership has started to dip a little after Corbyn backed Article 50
My weathervane luvvy mate Corbynista has quietened down very much since that. Thank heavens for small mercies.
I suspect when the history books are written this will be the moment the scales fell from the Corbyn worshipers. Although I have no idea why - Corbyn is a Bennite and Benn famously campaigned to get out of EU/EC.
Had they bothered to look at his record before voting for him, they'd have seen that he was anti-EU.
What Labour needs to do is have a plan to win again in Loughborough. I cannot see it yet.
She's asking the right questions though: "With five times more members in Islington than a town like Wigan, there is a risk that Labour’s perspective will be skewed away from the needs and aspirations of people in towns across the country."
Aren't there more Lab members in London than the rest of the country put together? Ivstr reading this somewhere.
Though remember, while the party in London and suburbs is bigger than the rUK Labour party, the rUK Labour party is still bigger than Tories and kippers in the whole UK. rUK Labour is still a big party.
... Anyway,
And why would these people want a Labour Government? Firstly this would
Labour is now a campaign movement for a small minority of enraged left-liberals, with an ailing political party bolted on one side. This may change, but I wouldn't put any money on it.
Yet this is where I see some hope for Labour. Corbyn has not attempted to parachute in his Londoncentric acolytes into Northern safeseats. Both Snell and Troughton were local people picked by local parties.
If this policy continues, the PLP will become one representing the provinces much more than the Metropolis.
If this policy continues then the candidates will be diverse; but in a Corbyn continues the PLP will be very metropolitan. They'll be trounced by Tories in the provinces.
That is the opposite of what I think. The new MPs, and those chosen by local parties at reselection will be chosen by non-metropolitan members, and as SO points out the majority of those are old school Labour. Snell is a bit of a loose cannon, but Troughton is no flighty metropolitan. Of course a policy of localism carries risk of major talent being overlooked, but I think that risk is low.
Troughton is probably going to lose on Thursday, though she is at least giving the Tories a figh, local candidates at parliamentary level only add about 500-1000 votes at best beyond the national poll rating
Comments
...with the EU, right?
Making the payments and getting the benefits vs. making the payments and getting shafted....
Thanks for the reminder of why I cancelled my Economist subscription.
"Jeremy Corbyn has warned that two crunch by-elections are “on a knife-edge” and hit out at the media after a new poll gave the Tories a huge lead.
"The Labour leader addressed the weekly Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) meeting with a plea to work for every vote in the Copeland and Stoke Central by-elections on Thursday.
"But as former Shadow Cabinet minister Lisa Nandy warned that Labour’s membership was “increasingly unrepresentative of the country as a whole”, MPs also challenged him over an ICM/Guardian poll giving the Conservatives an 18-point lead.
"The survey found that the Tories were on 44%, up two points, while Labour were on 26%, down one. UKIP were on 13% and the Liberal Democrats on 8%.
"When challenged over the poll by former Shadow Chancellor Chris Leslie, Corbyn blamed the “problems we have had with the media”, but said that “we do a lot better on social media”, one source told HuffPost UK."
Translation: Our mates are liking us a lot on Twitter, so everything's great.
The Battle of 73 Easting was magnificent.
Kernow4Corbyn @kernow4corbyn 9h
@thetwerkinggirl I already complained about this. Unbelievable!
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/lisa-nandy/towns-and-cities_b_14872382.html?ncid=engmodushpmg00000006
What Labour needs to do is have a plan to win again in Loughborough. I cannot see it yet.
So make 6 years of net payments for no benefit or make decades of net payment for no benefit.
Logic dies not seem to be a strong point for Remainers.
Scotland + SE England + SW England + Eastern England = c.260 seats. Labour currently holds 13 of them. Not moving in the appropriate direction to make gains.
Milo: "But I understand that my usual blend of British sarcasm, provocation and gallows humor might have come across as flippancy, a lack of care for other victims or, worse, ‘advocacy.’”
The received wisdom, passed down from on high, was that out kit was terrifically superior, and it probably was on a one to one comparison. If a push came to a shove it wasn't going to be a one for one fight though. If memory serves, in tanks it was going to be something like 1:7. Were our Chieftains, because it was mostly Chieftains in those days, seven times better than the best of the Russian tanks backed up a very large superiority in artillery? Our infantry was for sure very much better trained and equipped than their Soviet counterparts, but the correlation of Forces was awful and no one doubted that the Sovs artillery worked just fine.
I don't know what would have happened if the Sovs had come across the IGB in those days. Would NATO have held them back and actually won? Dunno, thank God it was never put to the test.
Interesting thing war.
American military wargames in the 80s, which should have been designed to simulate fighting defensive war in Europe, were heavily compromised to the extent that they were a better representation of fighting an offensive action in the desert. So it was bloody lucky that is what they ended up fighting.
In the desert the allies had unimpeded air superiority and nice clear 2 mile shots with their wicked cool guns on their MBTs, Western Europe would have been a grossly urban, heavily vegetated arena with a competitive air theatre.
I can thoroughly recommend "How to Make War" by James F Dunnigan. Even if he is a bit of a wanker.
The British, Americans, Dutch etc all said which positions they would be dropping back to as the Soviets advanced. The Germans said nothing until someone thought to ask them their plans. Their general said: "We're going to Berlin." After the Gulf war that did not sound quite so ridiculous.
The Challenger and Abrams M1 tanks were superior to the Iraqi tanks because
1) They were better protected
2) Had a longer firing distance
3) Had GPS, which was brilliant for desert warfare
4) Had better trained troops
5) Had better air support (aircraft and attack helicopter)
6) Iraqis used tanks as effectively self propelled howitzers
7) Also we had better night vision equipment.
8) The Iraqis were shellshocked, i) from weeks of bombing ii) Half an hour before the main ground war offensive the Anglo-American artillery line fired 11,000 artillery rounds and 600,00 RPGs at the Iraqis
At 73 Easting all those advantages clicked into place for a perfect storm as were The Battle of Medina Ridge and The Battle of Norfolk
So it will be the much not believed 'government by fax'.
Is that an improvement on where we are today? A reclamation of sovereignty?
The students are clicking on their way to the latest YouTube from PewDiePie, but they won't get around to voting on the day.
We can all play that game Don
You arguments and ideas would have a much better chance of gaining resonance and traction if you you and other Remainers stopped bleating about the campaign.
BOTH sides played hard and fast with the truth - what did anyone expect when politicians can promise the earth with no requirement to justify their argument
If one good thing comes out of this, lets hope it is the requirement that politicians have to produce statements and documents to the same standards as the rest of us
The Budget-signed of by the cabinet in the same way a firms Company accounts are by Company Directors.
Election manifestos-same rules as the Advertising Standards Agency.
I cant make sweeping unfounded statements about my competitors or my products-why should politicians be allowed to ???
http://www.conservativehome.com/video/2017/02/watch-lawson-says-no-brexit-deal-is-better-than-a-bad-brexit-deal.html
http://www.conservativehome.com/video/2017/02/watch-hague-tells-peers-that-the-eu-referendum-was-decisive.html
http://www.conservativehome.com/video/2017/02/watch-mandelson-patriotism-not-my-eu-pension-makes-me-a-remainer.html
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/2020-geography-of-labours-next-campaign.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/20/bid-oust-john-bercow-falters-just-five-mps-sign-motion-no-confidence/?WT.mc_id=tmg_share_tw
www.prisonersmaintaininginnocence.org.uk
Naturally everyone is sympathetic to the problems of people who are sent to prison when genuinely innocent, and their maintaining innocence may be taken as an indication that they've not yet faced up to their alleged crimes. There may not be many such cases but it must be horrible if it happens. As I understand it, this group is keen to raise the profile of the issue, and no harm in that.
The mutual friend has asked me whether the organisation and its organisers have a good reputation - she thought I might know of them as an ex-Justice Committee member. However, I've never heard of them. Their website looks harmless though brief. Does anyone know anything about them, good or otherwise?
Anyway, the point is - of course - that Labour's priorities are driven by the majority in the London & Home Counties wing of the party, who promulgate an agenda focused on human rights activism and niche foreign policy issues, and who are far more interested in filling in online petitions and feeling self-righteous than they are in the slog of trying to get into Government.
And why would these people want a Labour Government? Firstly this would end up with them shouting and swearing at their own side like they had to over Iraq, and protest is so much more fun with the pantomime villains of the Tory Party in charge. And secondly, Conservative rule will be much more amenable to house price inflation and modest taxes - i.e. the things that serve their personal economic interests - than tax rises for the well-off to fund public services, a programme of redistribution, and horrid council estates for oiks plonked awkwardly on the outskirts of various exclusive villages and suburbs.
Labour is now a campaign movement for a small minority of enraged left-liberals, with an ailing political party bolted on one side. This may change, but I wouldn't put any money on it.
By the time Labour is once again a coherent force in British politics, i.e. post Corbyn, we'll be long gone from the EU.
https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmjust/1597/1597vw08.htm
Their website seems a bit worryingly lacking on detail of the structure and funding. Is it a charity for example?
If this policy continues, the PLP will become one representing the provinces much more than the Metropolis.
Many years ago when such things were still fresh in people's minds, there used to be a popular comment along the lines of whether or not you would want a chap beside you in the trenches. Most Remainers would very clearly fail that test.
How many Labour/Green/SNP/Plaid lefties think Blair was anything other than a Tory?
On the Midlands, I think people generalise too easily - for instance, Broxtowe is in political terms (only) roughly a third like Islington (big Momentum branch, stacks of Morning Stars in Sainsbury), half like Surrey (big issue is saving the green belt from housing) and a sixth like Stoke (but former coal-mining), and all three are quite different in feel from central Nottingham, of which they are could technically be called suburbs. Birmingham could be on another planet and I've never met anyone who thought of the two in the same breath.
Ask Boris how happy he was in a trench with Gove?
Nuttal with Farage?
Any EU citizen with Gisela Stuart?
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 2h2 hours ago
Lab sources: "everybody" who broke whip- including 3 whips themselves - hv been sent disciplinary letter from Chief Whip over Article50 vote
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 2h2 hours ago
Also at PLP, Corbyn told by Lab MP Neil Coyne that the one real problem on the doorstep 'is Jeremy Corbyn'.
To be fair, Labour MPs know a thing or two about giving away power.
https://twitter.com/thehill/status/833794651937181701
Is there any way they have a chance?