Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Team Corbyn’s aim is not to win the election but to keep contr

SystemSystem Posts: 11,685
edited May 2017 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Team Corbyn’s aim is not to win the election but to keep control of the LAB party

I broadly agree with the above analysis of what Team Corbyn’s basic objective is not to win the election but to do enough to keep their man leader. If LAB achieves a GB vote share of 31.2%, which is what the party did in 2015, then they hope the blame for the defeat can be put on the collapse of UKIP not their man.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,115
    First like Corbyn in another leadership election.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,283
    edited May 2017
    Second
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Corbyn will not win any more elections.
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    "Their fundamental aim is a Marxist transformation of Labour Party. Andy they couldn't care less if that means perpetual Tory rule in the meantime"

    What the f8ck does 'in the meantime' mean in this context? If they transform Labour into a Marxit Party, the meantime is until the end of days.
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034

    First like Corbyn in another leadership election.


    I am first in the parallel universe of this thread in Vanilla Forums :)
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Wherever Israel got the information from. the ISIS leadership now need to suspect only a few people.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,283
    It will take Labour another five years to discover that YC is yet another dead end.
  • Options
    ab195ab195 Posts: 477
    Does it chime with the core vote? Is it me, or is there now acres of space for a Tory retail offer to the working poor, who probably don't give a shit who owns their utilities so long as they can afford them?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898
    FPT:
    MTimT said:

    I don't get this. If someone stabs another person during a drink and drug fueled row, what on earth makes a judge think that that person is a good prospect to become a physician? Yes, we all make mistakes and have done foolish things while drunk, but stabbing?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/16/oxford-student-spared-jail-extraordinary-talent/

    Dr @foxinsoxuk mentioned earlier that the medical authorities would take their own view on her suitability to practice medicine, and that it was somewhat unlikely to be in her favour.

    By the way, reading back through the weekend's threads, were some excellent comments from your good self about risk management. As someone who spent the whole weekend dealing with this latest computer virus, add me to the list of those very interested in reading your paper when it's published.
  • Options
    ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 4,980
    The irony is that it's now pretty clear who the actual 'red Tory' was in the 2015 leadership election - it wasn't Liz Kendall.
  • Options
    AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 2,869
    edited May 2017
    MTimT said:

    "Their fundamental aim is a Marxist transformation of Labour Party. Andy they couldn't care less if that means perpetual Tory rule in the meantime"

    What the f8ck does 'in the meantime' mean in this context? If they transform Labour into a Marxit Party, the meantime is until the end of days.

    AIUI, the whole aim of taking over a mainstream political party which has masses of loyal voters is that once they've shaped the party into their own image the voters will then continue (to) vote the party into government when the pendulum swings.

    I hope they aren't correct in that.

    Good evening, everyone
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    MTimT said:

    I don't get this. If someone stabs another person during a drink and drug fueled row, what on earth makes a judge think that that person is a good prospect to become a physician? Yes, we all make mistakes and have done foolish things while drunk, but stabbing?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/16/oxford-student-spared-jail-extraordinary-talent/

    Dr @foxinsoxuk mentioned earlier that the medical authorities would take their own view on her suitability to practice medicine, and that it was somewhat unlikely to be in her favour.

    By the way, reading back through the weekend's threads, were some excellent comments from your good self about risk management. As someone who spent the whole weekend dealing with this latest computer virus, add me to the list of those very interested in reading your paper when it's published.
    Thanks. And will do. Currently prevaricating - my ideas are all up spread across 3 whiteboards in my office, but I am having difficulty hitting the keyboard.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,071
    MTimT said:

    "Their fundamental aim is a Marxist transformation of Labour Party. Andy they couldn't care less if that means perpetual Tory rule in the meantime"

    What the f8ck does 'in the meantime' mean in this context? If they transform Labour into a Marxit Party, the meantime is until the end of days.

    Fringe groups can triumph in the end in British politics - just look at Brexit.

    Their calculation is that if the Labour party sticks to being a hard left party, sooner or later their number will come up and they'll sweep to power.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited May 2017
    Blaming losing the election on the UKIP collapse would be one of the most ridiculous explanations in recent British political history. Most of those people voted Labour in 1997, 2001 and 2005, and Labour can't win without them. Corbyn and McDonnell talk as if they were always Tories before they supported UKIP.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @SamCoatesTimes: Is it just me or has Labour just dropped an embargoed policy announcement for 0001 tonight ON THEIR MANIFESTO DAY???
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    MTimT said:

    "Their fundamental aim is a Marxist transformation of Labour Party. Andy they couldn't care less if that means perpetual Tory rule in the meantime"

    What the f8ck does 'in the meantime' mean in this context? If they transform Labour into a Marxit Party, the meantime is until the end of days.

    Fringe groups can triumph in the end in British politics - just look at Brexit.

    Their calculation is that if the Labour party sticks to being a hard left party, sooner or later their number will come up and they'll sweep to power.
    Vanishingly unlikely. A Far Left party would be contrary to the interests and views of too large a portion of the electorate.

    If Labour disappears down the plughole then it will be replaced. The Corbynites can't just sit on 120, or 90, or 60 seats and wait for an opportunity to take over that won't come. Either a new progressive party will be formed by refugees from Labour, or the Conservatives will split into two factions and become both Government and Opposition at the same time.
  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    MTimT said:

    I don't get this. If someone stabs another person during a drink and drug fueled row, what on earth makes a judge think that that person is a good prospect to become a physician? Yes, we all make mistakes and have done foolish things while drunk, but stabbing?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/16/oxford-student-spared-jail-extraordinary-talent/

    Dr @foxinsoxuk mentioned earlier that the medical authorities would take their own view on her suitability to practice medicine, and that it was somewhat unlikely to be in her favour.

    By the way, reading back through the weekend's threads, were some excellent comments from your good self about risk management. As someone who spent the whole weekend dealing with this latest computer virus, add me to the list of those very interested in reading your paper when it's published.
    There is another and much clearer photo of this stabber, Lavinia, on twitter; and if you look into her eyes: they are dead. If ever there was a person made not to hold a scalpel, it is she.
  • Options
    MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    McDonnell and Corbyn are self-avowed Marxists, they need to be destroyed. Such a pity that the LibDems are too puny and europhilic to take advantage of this historic opportunity to occupy the British left.
  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    surbiton said:

    Wherever Israel got the information from. the ISIS leadership now need to suspect only a few people.

    What info is this, surbiton?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898
    MTimT said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    MTimT said:

    I don't get this. If someone stabs another person during a drink and drug fueled row, what on earth makes a judge think that that person is a good prospect to become a physician? Yes, we all make mistakes and have done foolish things while drunk, but stabbing?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/16/oxford-student-spared-jail-extraordinary-talent/

    Dr @foxinsoxuk mentioned earlier that the medical authorities would take their own view on her suitability to practice medicine, and that it was somewhat unlikely to be in her favour.

    By the way, reading back through the weekend's threads, were some excellent comments from your good self about risk management. As someone who spent the whole weekend dealing with this latest computer virus, add me to the list of those very interested in reading your paper when it's published.
    Thanks. And will do. Currently prevaricating - my ideas are all up spread across 3 whiteboards in my office, but I am having difficulty hitting the keyboard.
    Good luck with it, hopefully the fact that there's a decent sized audience for your work will help things along.

    I've been banging my head against a brick wall in trying to get companies in a variety of sectors thinking about preventative information security. They understand that commercial aviation or nuclear power stations operate in a safety-first environment and culture, but don't see why they should. Hell, far too many say they'd just pay the ransom if they got caught by the latest malware, was only a few hundred dollars... :o
  • Options
    BaskervilleBaskerville Posts: 391
    MTimT said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    MTimT said:

    I don't get this. If someone stabs another person during a drink and drug fueled row, what on earth makes a judge think that that person is a good prospect to become a physician? Yes, we all make mistakes and have done foolish things while drunk, but stabbing?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/16/oxford-student-spared-jail-extraordinary-talent/

    Dr @foxinsoxuk mentioned earlier that the medical authorities would take their own view on her suitability to practice medicine, and that it was somewhat unlikely to be in her favour.

    By the way, reading back through the weekend's threads, were some excellent comments from your good self about risk management. As someone who spent the whole weekend dealing with this latest computer virus, add me to the list of those very interested in reading your paper when it's published.
    Thanks. And will do. Currently prevaricating - my ideas are all up spread across 3 whiteboards in my office, but I am having difficulty hitting the keyboard.
    Ah, the curse of the blank sheet of paper...

    Just write down any old sh*t and then it'll start rolling.
  • Options
    mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    Sandpit said:

    MTimT said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    MTimT said:

    I don't get this. If someone stabs another person during a drink and drug fueled row, what on earth makes a judge think that that person is a good prospect to become a physician? Yes, we all make mistakes and have done foolish things while drunk, but stabbing?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/16/oxford-student-spared-jail-extraordinary-talent/

    Dr @foxinsoxuk mentioned earlier that the medical authorities would take their own view on her suitability to practice medicine, and that it was somewhat unlikely to be in her favour.

    By the way, reading back through the weekend's threads, were some excellent comments from your good self about risk management. As someone who spent the whole weekend dealing with this latest computer virus, add me to the list of those very interested in reading your paper when it's published.
    Thanks. And will do. Currently prevaricating - my ideas are all up spread across 3 whiteboards in my office, but I am having difficulty hitting the keyboard.
    Good luck with it, hopefully the fact that there's a decent sized audience for your work will help things along.

    I've been banging my head against a brick wall in trying to get companies in a variety of sectors thinking about preventative information security. They understand that commercial aviation or nuclear power stations operate in a safety-first environment and culture, but don't see why they should. Hell, far too many say they'd just pay the ransom if they got caught by the latest malware, was only a few hundred dollars... :o
    The difference, at least from a certain perspective, is when an aircraft crashes people die and it's lead news. When a computer system falls over there may be a cost impact but deaths are at best indirect. There's also a view, for better or worse, that many info security experts are doing little more than talking their own book and that charlatans prosper.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,358
    AndyJS said:

    Blaming losing the election on the UKIP collapse would be one of the most ridiculous explanations in recent British political history. Most of those people voted Labour in 1997, 2001 and 2005, and Labour can't win without them. Corbyn and McDonnell talk as if they were always Tories before they supported UKIP.

    These people are fanatics.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,755
    MikeK said:

    surbiton said:

    Wherever Israel got the information from. the ISIS leadership now need to suspect only a few people.

    What info is this, surbiton?
    the Jews the jews they did it all etc.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,969
    surbiton said:

    Wherever Israel got the information from. the ISIS leadership now need to suspect only a few people.

    How do you think it helps ISIS? Surely they must be aware that western powers will be doing whatever they can to infiltrate/stop them.
  • Options
    NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 2,311
    Right I've done a bit of research in light of my comments on the previous thread about university attendance. I've picked a sample as below, and most universities will still be in term but during an exam period. When I was at Uni I headed home as soon as I could because it was no fun hanging around when exams were on. I think anyone banking on a chunk of student support in traditional university seats will be disappointed.

    Bath 2nd June
    http://www.bath.ac.uk/about/organisation/semester-dates/

    Bath Spa 23rd June
    http://www.bath.ac.uk/about/organisation/semester-dates/

    Bristol 2nd June
    http://www.bris.ac.uk/university/dates/

    UWE 19th May
    http://www1.uwe.ac.uk/about/termdates/2016-17termdates.aspx

    Exeter 16th June
    http://www.exeter.ac.uk/staff/policies/calendar/part2/calendar/

    Swansea 16th June
    http://www.swansea.ac.uk/the-university/world-class/semesterandtermdates/

    Cardiff 9th June
    https://www.cardiff.ac.uk/public-information/corporate-information/semester-dates

    Gloucestershire 16th June
    http://www.glos.ac.uk/governance/pages/term-dates.aspx

    Wolverhampton - year round programme
    https://www.wlv.ac.uk/about-us/academic-calendar/

    Birmingham City - 9th June

    Birmingham - 16th June
    http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/undergraduate/courses/termdates.aspx

    Aston - 10th June
    http://www.aston.ac.uk/about/termdates/

    Coventry- 9th June
    http://www.coventry.ac.uk/life-on-campus/the-university/key-information/term-dates/
  • Options
    MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584

    MTimT said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    MTimT said:

    I don't get this. If someone stabs another person during a drink and drug fueled row, what on earth makes a judge think that that person is a good prospect to become a physician? Yes, we all make mistakes and have done foolish things while drunk, but stabbing?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/16/oxford-student-spared-jail-extraordinary-talent/

    Dr @foxinsoxuk mentioned earlier that the medical authorities would take their own view on her suitability to practice medicine, and that it was somewhat unlikely to be in her favour.

    By the way, reading back through the weekend's threads, were some excellent comments from your good self about risk management. As someone who spent the whole weekend dealing with this latest computer virus, add me to the list of those very interested in reading your paper when it's published.
    Thanks. And will do. Currently prevaricating - my ideas are all up spread across 3 whiteboards in my office, but I am having difficulty hitting the keyboard.
    Ah, the curse of the blank sheet of paper...

    Just write down any old sh*t and then it'll start rolling.

    I guess that's how the Labour manifesto came about...

  • Options
    ArtistArtist Posts: 1,882
    To me the manifesto feels like a starting point for a new leader to build upon after the election, rather than a genuine plan for government. It contains a string of populist left wing policies, that will be positively tested with the public and some of which can be properly thought through and costed in the next electoral term. If the new leader retains even half of it, Corbyn will have succeeded in what was his initial aim, of keeping Labour away from the right.
  • Options
    NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 2,311
    Artist said:

    To me the manifesto feels like a starting point for a new leader to build upon after the election, rather than a genuine plan for government. It contains a string of populist left wing policies, that will be positively tested with the public and some of which can be properly thought through and costed in the next electoral term. If the new leader retains even half of it, Corbyn will have succeeded in what was his initial aim, of keeping Labour away from the right.

    It's easy to come up with popular policies though. You just ask a bunch of questions and find out what people think about issues. Don't like train delays - nationalise the railways. Don't like student loans. No tuition fees. It is much more difficult to put these into a credible prospectus for Government. Today's manifesto is not a propectus for government.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    calum said:
    There's some decent ideas in there, but the whole lot together is nuts.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,969
    calum said:

    twitter.com/LabourEoin/status/864553700743938048

    Shortest suicide note in history? :p
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    calum said:
    Labour are proposing a top-down reorganisation of the NHS?
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,969
    Also glad to see FPTP will continue in a Corbyn government!
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,358

    MTimT said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    MTimT said:

    I don't get this. If someone stabs another person during a drink and drug fueled row, what on earth makes a judge think that that person is a good prospect to become a physician? Yes, we all make mistakes and have done foolish things while drunk, but stabbing?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/16/oxford-student-spared-jail-extraordinary-talent/

    Dr @foxinsoxuk mentioned earlier that the medical authorities would take their own view on her suitability to practice medicine, and that it was somewhat unlikely to be in her favour.

    By the way, reading back through the weekend's threads, were some excellent comments from your good self about risk management. As someone who spent the whole weekend dealing with this latest computer virus, add me to the list of those very interested in reading your paper when it's published.
    Thanks. And will do. Currently prevaricating - my ideas are all up spread across 3 whiteboards in my office, but I am having difficulty hitting the keyboard.
    Ah, the curse of the blank sheet of paper...

    Just write down any old sh*t and then it'll start rolling.
    This.

    A blank sheet of paper is simply terrifying.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,071
    Fox is making progress building one empire at least.

    https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/864564863439208449
  • Options
    GarethoftheVale2GarethoftheVale2 Posts: 1,997

    Artist said:

    To me the manifesto feels like a starting point for a new leader to build upon after the election, rather than a genuine plan for government. It contains a string of populist left wing policies, that will be positively tested with the public and some of which can be properly thought through and costed in the next electoral term. If the new leader retains even half of it, Corbyn will have succeeded in what was his initial aim, of keeping Labour away from the right.

    It's easy to come up with popular policies though. You just ask a bunch of questions and find out what people think about issues. Don't like train delays - nationalise the railways. Don't like student loans. No tuition fees. It is much more difficult to put these into a credible prospectus for Government. Today's manifesto is not a propectus for government.
    It will be very interesting to compare and contrast with the Tory manifesto. I'm expecting something much smaller but more thought through. Lots of solid middle of the road stuff with a few curveballs and a little bit of red meat for the right.
  • Options
    NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 2,311
    Pulpstar said:

    calum said:
    There's some decent ideas in there, but the whole lot together is nuts.
    What's the theme? I think Andrew Neil skewered the shadow cabinet member on daily politics. Q1 can you name even one company who will bid for government infrastructure projects whose worker pay scales top to bottom are less than 20:1? Answer Waffle in essence no. Q2. How are you going to deliver large scale government infrastructure projects when no companies can bid for the work?

    It's just not thought through
  • Options
    NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 2,311

    Artist said:

    To me the manifesto feels like a starting point for a new leader to build upon after the election, rather than a genuine plan for government. It contains a string of populist left wing policies, that will be positively tested with the public and some of which can be properly thought through and costed in the next electoral term. If the new leader retains even half of it, Corbyn will have succeeded in what was his initial aim, of keeping Labour away from the right.

    It's easy to come up with popular policies though. You just ask a bunch of questions and find out what people think about issues. Don't like train delays - nationalise the railways. Don't like student loans. No tuition fees. It is much more difficult to put these into a credible prospectus for Government. Today's manifesto is not a propectus for government.
    It will be very interesting to compare and contrast with the Tory manifesto. I'm expecting something much smaller but more thought through. Lots of solid middle of the road stuff with a few curveballs and a little bit of red meat for the right.
    In essence, and by observation, this is policy by committee.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,472
    So I make it two polls tomorrow morning

    https://twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/864566796535377920
  • Options
    mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    edited May 2017
    RobD said:

    calum said:

    twitter.com/LabourEoin/status/864553700743938048

    Shortest suicide note in history? :p
    Concise, perhaps. As with all these things there's some parts which one looks at and thinks, ok. However, the general thrust is different. As Britain would be if it happened.

    Ps top right what's the objection to Shrewsbury other than it being a dull county town with a school for turd polishing and a reasonable flower show?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,780
    It could stave of a challenge - if the vote share is high enough, it is possible it will be enough in enough key places to ensure losses are not too bad, say to around 200 total seats. If that happens, it is bad, but Corbyn really could say he has been hamstrung by MPs who wouldn't back him, and they would be too afraid to challenge him given he did far better than they said he would.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,011
    Having done some phoning tonight in a range of constituencies I can report I got more Tory support in the likes of Coventry North West and Bristol East than Oxford West and Abingdon. Make of that what you will but I think the Tories will make significant gains in working class Labour held marginals but the LDs ground game will see them do better than the polls suggest in their core target seats especially more prosperous Remain areas
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898
    matt said:

    Sandpit said:

    MTimT said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    MTimT said:

    I don't get this. If someone stabs another person during a drink and drug fueled row, what on earth makes a judge think that that person is a good prospect to become a physician? Yes, we all make mistakes and have done foolish things while drunk, but stabbing?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/16/oxford-student-spared-jail-extraordinary-talent/

    Dr @foxinsoxuk mentioned earlier that the medical authorities would take their own view on her suitability to practice medicine, and that it was somewhat unlikely to be in her favour.

    By the way, reading back through the weekend's threads, were some excellent comments from your good self about risk management. As someone who spent the whole weekend dealing with this latest computer virus, add me to the list of those very interested in reading your paper when it's published.
    Thanks. And will do. Currently prevaricating - my ideas are all up spread across 3 whiteboards in my office, but I am having difficulty hitting the keyboard.
    Good luck with it, hopefully the fact that there's a decent sized audience for your work will help things along.

    I've been banging my head against a brick wall in trying to get companies in a variety of sectors thinking about preventative information security. They understand that commercial aviation or nuclear power stations operate in a safety-first environment and culture, but don't see why they should. Hell, far too many say they'd just pay the ransom if they got caught by the latest malware, was only a few hundred dollars... :o
    The difference, at least from a certain perspective, is when an aircraft crashes people die and it's lead news. When a computer system falls over there may be a cost impact but deaths are at best indirect. There's also a view, for better or worse, that many info security experts are doing little more than talking their own book and that charlatans prosper.
    There's certainly more than a few charlatans in IT, for example a lot of the 'security' software vendors' products are a waste of money and promise way more than they can deliver.

    Outside critical and regulated industries (aviation, healthcare, infrastructure) the biggest risk is that an attack specifically targeted at their business leads to a theft of databases, confidential information etc. Think along the lines of what has happened to political parties in the US and France. The fact is that for an SME this sort of data theft is almost always fatal to the business, yet in most cases the directors either think it won't happen to them or think that if it does it will be a minor rather than major incident.
  • Options
    chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    What is the fascination with Yvette Cooper? She's as dull as ditchwater.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,011
    If Corbyn gets 30% I think he survives and Cooper did not have much success beating him.in 2015 either
  • Options
    QuincelQuincel Posts: 3,949
    chestnut said:

    What is the fascination with Yvette Cooper? She's as dull as ditchwater.

    Isn't that enough, after all the exciting disasters for the left-wing over the last 2 years?

    She also shines at PMQs regularly, I believe.
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    MikeK said:

    surbiton said:

    Wherever Israel got the information from. the ISIS leadership now need to suspect only a few people.

    What info is this, surbiton?
    Trump's leaking of the "laptop" explosive came from Israel according to many US media. Of course, the information is so sensitive that apparently Israel did not want it even shared with Allies.

    Whatever, this information is [ presumably, a new kind of explosive that can be triggered ], only a few people in ISIS will have had access to it.

    So, now the ISIS bigwigs can narrow down the suspects.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,780
    Apologies for length of several posts on a topic others probably covered during the day, but if I'm going to read an entire manifesto I am going to ramble on about it afterwards. Section by section. Strap in, or ignore.

    Foreword – I know forwards are supposed to be pablum, and am sure the others will be too, but I find something amusing by opening about the wide range of views and ideas you head as leader, then essentially detail how they all say the same thing about pressures in the work place, job security, rigged systems etc. Wide range of views, but always in the same direction apparently.

    CREATING AN ECONOMY THAT WORKS FOR ALL

    What does ‘ripped apart by globilisation mean’?

    What does ‘tear down the barriers that have held too many people back’ mean in the context of a national transformation fund re infrastructure? Was that phrase meant to be somewhere else in the manifesto?

    Ambitious HS2 plans – is £250 billion enough for all this ambition?

    Promising to eliminate deficit?

    Why is 60% zero carbon energy the very first priority listed in a section on a strategy to deliver prosperity ‘to every corner of our country’ through getting local economies going? Seems like the focus on innovation and r and d in the next bit is more directly in keeping with that intention.

    Overhaul regulation in our financial system, eh? Nice if you can manage it, but doesn’t it usually just end up with different regulation than is no improvement?

    Labour is the party of small businesses – bold pitch

    Britain is a long-established democracy”. Phew, that’s a relief.

    any basic goods and services have been taken out of democratic control through privatisation. This has often led to higher prices and poorerquality, as prices are raised to payout dividends.” ‘Often’, not always or usually, is the wording significant? I’m open to public ownership if it is cost effective, but a curious statement.

    ‘Across the world, countries are taking public utilities back into public ownership’ – Where? You’ve named other countries and their models of governance elsewhere. Is it working?

    Energy stuff seems to be focusing on lefty and green vote, unsurprisingly.
  • Options

    MTimT said:

    "Their fundamental aim is a Marxist transformation of Labour Party. Andy they couldn't care less if that means perpetual Tory rule in the meantime"

    What the f8ck does 'in the meantime' mean in this context? If they transform Labour into a Marxit Party, the meantime is until the end of days.

    Fringe groups can triumph in the end in British politics - just look at Brexit.

    Their calculation is that if the Labour party sticks to being a hard left party, sooner or later their number will come up and they'll sweep to power.
    Vanishingly unlikely. A Far Left party would be contrary to the interests and views of too large a portion of the electorate.

    If Labour disappears down the plughole then it will be replaced. The Corbynites can't just sit on 120, or 90, or 60 seats and wait for an opportunity to take over that won't come. Either a new progressive party will be formed by refugees from Labour, or the Conservatives will split into two factions and become both Government and Opposition at the same time.
    Wouldn't the new, less extreme left of centre successor party just get infiltrated in its turn?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    edited May 2017
    HYUFD said:

    Having done some phoning tonight in a range of constituencies I can report I got more Tory support in the likes of Coventry North West and Bristol East than Oxford West and Abingdon. Make of that what you will but I think the Tories will make significant gains in working class Labour held marginals but the LDs ground game will see them do better than the polls suggest in their core target seats especially more prosperous Remain areas

    Coventry NorthWest @ 1-2 a definite bet. Coventry South is 11-4 for Labour. You'll probably win one bet and not the other, but you may well win both.

    Coverntry Northwest should be 4-11 Tories and Coventry South 2-1 Labour. The odds are the wrong way round.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,780
    NEGOTIATING BREXIT

    Unilateral declaration on EU national rights. Simplistic message about bargaining chips, as well as placing blame entirely on PM, but it’s a line which works to some degree.

    Committing to leaving but also to a transitional deal if needed, rather than no deal, seems like an attractive idea at first glance for many. I’m still not clear what would happen if parliament voted against the final Brexit deal, as they suggest could happen as it commits to a ‘truly meaningful vote’ on it.

    Heavy on protecting workers rights

    Like the Tories they have a self loathing about Westminster, and a devolution fetish.

    Refugee bit felt disingenuous. Refugees are not migrants is correct, but the reverse is also true.

    ‘Will set out prioirities in white paper to lead a national debate’ – cannot we do that with the manifesto to get the ball rolling?

    TOWARDS A NATIONAL EDUCATION SERVICE

    cradle-to-grave learning that is free at the point of use Sounds…way more than is possible under one government. I guess the nHS was set up quick, but even so.

    Extend the 30 free hours to all twoyear-olds, and move towards making some childcare available for oneyear-olds and extending maternity pay to 12 months – more free stuff?! Perhaps it’s because I’m not a parent, but my god this seems a lot. If people believe it can be paid for it should be popular though – wouldn’t be surprised to see it in a tory pledge too.

    We and trust in teachers and support staff professionalism to refocus their workload on what happens in the
    classroom.
    I don’t think this sentence quite works, are there words missing?

    Joined up admisssions policies across local schools? It’s been several years since I was involved, but doesn’t this happen to some degree already?

    Abolishing tuition fees an incredibly bold pledge. Short, simple, but no detail? Is it even remotely viable?

    A FAIR DEAL AT WORK
    Why mention the conservative boast about recovery of employment? Just say the labour market is failing, as it is it makes me think you acknowledge the recovery but are pissy about it.

    Are new Ministries are good idea? (yes that includes the Tories creating new ones). And aren’t none but the MOD called Ministries now? I prefer ministry to department though, so good.

    Much more detailed section than the others, with a full 20 point list on rights at work – feels like this is where the focus of the manifesto work went in.


    How not to undercut workers at home when guaranteeing everything to support foreign workers previously?

    I certainly would like an end to the public sector pay cap. Do I believe it?

    What is blacklisting? I mean, I know, but the document doesn’t say unless I missed it. And if you are promising to ensure it becomes a thing of the past, why do you need to hold a public inquiry into it? You’ve already revealed your conclusion.

    What are the ILO conventions?
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    Fox is making progress building one empire at least.

    https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/864564863439208449

    His empire.
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    chestnut said:

    What is the fascination with Yvette Cooper? She's as dull as ditchwater.

    I think it's because she asked Theresa May a good question at the last PMQs before the dissolution. That, and the moderates think it's time Labour finally elected a woman (and that opting for Diane Abbott next might not necessarily be a good idea.)

    Basically, Labour MPs are searching desperately for some hope of salvation, and of a way forward - any way forward - after what they suspect is coming in less than a months' time. They are just thrashing around desperately and gasping for breath, like so many stranded fish dying upon a lonely shore.
  • Options
    CyanCyan Posts: 1,262
    edited May 2017
    MTimT said:

    I don't get this. If someone stabs another person during a drink and drug fueled row, what on earth makes a judge think that that person is a good prospect to become a physician? Yes, we all make mistakes and have done foolish things while drunk, but stabbing?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/16/oxford-student-spared-jail-extraordinary-talent/

    "Extraordinary" is usually an idiot's word. What is so out of the usual about Ms Woodward in a "won't get out of her head on drugs and stab someone again" kind of sense? So the hell what that she has had her name on some co-authored journal articles? Why is what job she wants in the future of any relevance whatsoever to whether or not she should be handed a custodial sentence?

    How about having ended her drug addiction, shown remorse, had psychiatric treatment, undertaken only to use plastic cutlery? Nope. She's a student medic who went to private school, a member of one of Oxford's nobbiest colleges, and she is so "extraordinary".

    Don't medics usually leave it until after they start working before they get on the smack?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,011
    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:

    Having done some phoning tonight in a range of constituencies I can report I got more Tory support in the likes of Coventry North West and Bristol East than Oxford West and Abingdon. Make of that what you will but I think the Tories will make significant gains in working class Labour held marginals but the LDs ground game will see them do better than the polls suggest in their core target seats especially more prosperous Remain areas

    Coventry NorthWest @ 1-2 a definite bet. Coventry South is 11-4 for Labour. You'll probably win one bet and not the other, but you may well win both.

    Coverntry Northwest should be 4-11 Tories and Coventry South 2-1 Labour. The odds are the wrong way round.
    Yes that looks about the right range
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,071
    surbiton said:

    MikeK said:

    surbiton said:

    Wherever Israel got the information from. the ISIS leadership now need to suspect only a few people.

    What info is this, surbiton?
    Trump's leaking of the "laptop" explosive came from Israel according to many US media. Of course, the information is so sensitive that apparently Israel did not want it even shared with Allies.

    Whatever, this information is [ presumably, a new kind of explosive that can be triggered ], only a few people in ISIS will have had access to it.

    So, now the ISIS bigwigs can narrow down the suspects.
    That doesn't add up. If knowledge that ISIS were working on laptop bombs were that sensitive, they wouldn't have announced a laptop ban thereby telling the world they knew about it.
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    MikeK said:

    surbiton said:

    Wherever Israel got the information from. the ISIS leadership now need to suspect only a few people.

    What info is this, surbiton?
    the Jews the jews they did it all etc.
    Are you anti-semetic ? Many right wing Tories are.
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    kle4 said:

    It could stave of a challenge - if the vote share is high enough, it is possible it will be enough in enough key places to ensure losses are not too bad, say to around 200 total seats. If that happens, it is bad, but Corbyn really could say he has been hamstrung by MPs who wouldn't back him, and they would be too afraid to challenge him given he did far better than they said he would.

    None of this will wash for the simple reason that Corbyn made no effort at all to prevent the election taking place. He meekly bowed to May's plans at a time of maximum disadvantage to his party , and by so doing effectively betrayed the membership of the party he pretends to lead. For this reason , the blame for every seat lost can be pinned on him.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,780
    SOCIAL SECURITY
    After seven years of rising poverty and inequality – is that right? I’d feel better seeing a chart on it.

    Triple lock – I don’t support this policy, but if Labour can claim back even a small percentage of the older vote, it will save many seats, so very sensible commitment politically.

    Aren’t the tories also against hidden fees and charges in the pensions industry, enabling large pensions funds? Isn’t that already happening?

    Immediately end ‘worst’ excesses of the government’s welfare changes? Very clever wording, means they are not saying changing them all, at least not right away.

    Commission a report into expanding the Access to Work programme – so you want to do it but don’t know if it is a good idea?

    SECURE HOMES FOR ALL
    Home is at the heart of all of our lives – oh come on, what does that mean?

    Priortise brownfield sites and protect the green belt – everyone always says this! It’s code for ‘building homes is important, just not near me’.

    New towns is a good idea though.

    I personally support the bedroom tax in principle.

    HEALTHCARE FOR ALL
    Basically we will end all problems in the NHS – I feel like I’ve heard this before.

    Is the LGBT smokers but not in this version?

    What are ‘excess’ private profits vs mere private profits?

    National care service, national education service – very ambitious sounding stuff, can it be paid for?

    SAFER COMMUNITIES
    Rather short section on security and counter terrorism

    What’s wrong with requiring people to tell the authorities if someone is breaking the law? Is there more to this they just aren’ getting into because they assume I know?

    will consider the reinstatement of other legal aid entitlements’? Why wait for recommendations here, when promising to restore other stuff without waiting?

    More police, more fire officers, more prison officers – naturally.

    More and more open inquiries? Sometimes we still have lessons to learn, but sometimes we need to move on.

    LEADING RICHER LIVES
    You cannot empower local government If you impoverish it is a good line.

    I’ve seen a lot of planning, and how people will ignore any policy considerations or wider needs purely for their own selfish desires – I’m not hugely sympathetic to nimbys.

    ‘end the cuts to youth services’ is not the same as reversing them is it? If they are to reverse it, why so coy here and not other areas, they are right youth services have been slashed.

    Guido will like the policy on Fixed Odds betting terminals.

    I constantly hear about how tourism is important to the UK, why do all politicians tell me it is forgotten.
    A new clean air act to deal with legacy of illegal air quality? If it is already illegal, no need for a new act is there?

    Is it necessary to promise to mark the ongoing centenary of WW1? I guess they were worried people thought they wouldn't.

    Labour will always support the BBC? Tell that to your own supporters, mr corbyn.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,780
    EXTENDING DEMOCRACY
    A constitutional convention was a good idea of Ed M’s, and is a good one now.

    Reduce voting age if you must, but reduce drinking age and the like, and much more, too, to be consistent.

    So lobbying act gags charities, but the replacement will be tougher? I guess tougher on others.

    Not committing to more mayors? Good.

    Info on a Scottish investment bank and welsh investment is not part of extending democracy

    NI section almost comically brief – I look forward to see what the Tories have to say

    A MORE EQUAL SOCIETY
    Mostly just saying how great Labour is at equality issues and that’s it.

    A GLOBAL BRITAIN
    Rather self righteous stuff. Exhausting diplomatic solutions is meaningless – everyone agrees on that, they disagree on when they are exhausted.

    Labour would remove the us bace on diego Garcia so the chaagos islanders can return home? What else does support their right to return home mean, when it is a BOT?

    Labour remains committed to an independent inquiry into Britain’s
    military role in the 1984 raid on the Golden Temple in Amritsar
    – an oddly specific thing to mention, particularly as a concluding point.

    Tories only just met 2%, this is bad as they’ve cut a lot. Labour will commit to spend ‘at least’ 2%, so doing about same as Tories?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,780
    Conclusion
    The manifesto was a bit wordy, 150% the size of the last one, and without enough easy bullet pointed summaries and the like to make it easier to read (could the paragraphs be numbered at least), and there was little rhythm to the topics brought up in individual sections. It has a much better opening design at least! (The last was a lengthy, twisted statement on flat white background). ‘working with trade unions’ was the biggest theme I took away, other than that spending would increase massively, there was much more detail on workers conditions than most bits. I also feel like ‘seven years of failure’, while an obvious line, may come back to haunt them if the Tories win a majority – even after that failure they will win. Also, infrastructure spending was explained how it would be funded, but most of the rest was not, why is the detail there on some not others

    PHEW, GOT THAT OFF MY CHEST.
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    calum said:
    Labour are proposing a top-down reorganisation of the NHS?
    And not just that either. They want to build from scratch an NES for education as well - presumably as a job creation opportunity for hundreds of thousands of totally useless civil servants to boss about every school in the country.

    Don't forget, one of the core aims of any Labour Government (regardless of whether it's centre, soft or hard Left) is to get as large a share of the population dependent on the largesse of the state - either through benefits or employment - as possible. Expanding the client base naturally increases the pool of reliable (and reliably dependent) voters upon which it can call.
  • Options
    CyanCyan Posts: 1,262

    MikeK said:

    surbiton said:

    Wherever Israel got the information from. the ISIS leadership now need to suspect only a few people.

    What info is this, surbiton?
    the Jews the jews they did it all etc.
    Get some sense. Who do you think the foreign power was? Of course it was Israel.

    Newsweek: U.S. Officials ‘Warned Israel’ Not to Share Sensitive Intel With Trump
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    surbiton said:

    MikeK said:

    surbiton said:

    Wherever Israel got the information from. the ISIS leadership now need to suspect only a few people.

    What info is this, surbiton?
    Trump's leaking of the "laptop" explosive came from Israel according to many US media. Of course, the information is so sensitive that apparently Israel did not want it even shared with Allies.

    Whatever, this information is [ presumably, a new kind of explosive that can be triggered ], only a few people in ISIS will have had access to it.

    So, now the ISIS bigwigs can narrow down the suspects.
    That doesn't add up. If knowledge that ISIS were working on laptop bombs were that sensitive, they wouldn't have announced a laptop ban thereby telling the world they knew about it.
    How would they save planes from being blown up ?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,780
    edited May 2017
    calum said:
    In fairness that's a lot more helpful than my rambling thoughts on the subject, and, if accurate at least, a lot more digestible than Labour's not well presented information.
  • Options
    KentRisingKentRising Posts: 2,850


    Labour remains committed to an independent inquiry into Britain’s
    military role in the 1984 raid on the Golden Temple in Amritsar


    Phew, that'll swing a few marginals.
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Scott_P said:
    Oh dear, is this man dumb or something ? Why not give his name and address ? He seems to think he is talking to people in Trump Tower.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,031
    Can someone tell me what the point of water privatisation is? You have an industry where the supply infrastructure (both water and sewage) cannot be easily replicated to the consumer, the source supply is fairly fixed (aquifers, reservoirs etc), and the room for innovation is very low.

    In contrast, telecoms privatisation has been a boon. For one thing, it has allowed massive amount of innovation even though, for fixed lines at least, the infrastructure remains with one company. I just can't say the same for water.

    Can someone tell me what's been gained by the consumer (both residential and business) from water privatisation? Is the service 'better' now than it was in (say) the 1980s?
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    surbiton said:

    Oh dear, is this man dumb or something ? Why not give his name and address ? He seems to think he is talking to people in Trump Tower.

    See previous tweets. The best defence his staff can come up with is that he really is too stupid to know how dumb he is
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,780

    Can someone tell me what the point of water privatisation is? You have an industry where the supply infrastructure (both water and sewage) cannot be easily replicated to the consumer, the source supply is fairly fixed (aquifers, reservoirs etc), and the room for innovation is very low.

    In contrast, telecoms privatisation has been a boon. For one thing, it has allowed massive amount of innovation even though, for fixed lines at least, the infrastructure remains with one company. I just can't say the same for water.

    Can someone tell me what's been gained by the consumer (both residential and business) from water privatisation? Is the service 'better' now than it was in (say) the 1980s?

    A question I have often wondered.
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    kle4 said:

    It could stave of a challenge - if the vote share is high enough, it is possible it will be enough in enough key places to ensure losses are not too bad, say to around 200 total seats. If that happens, it is bad, but Corbyn really could say he has been hamstrung by MPs who wouldn't back him, and they would be too afraid to challenge him given he did far better than they said he would.

    Funny you should mention 200 seats...

    https://twitter.com/georgeeaton/status/864566148490252290
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898
    edited May 2017

    Can someone tell me what the point of water privatisation is? You have an industry where the supply infrastructure (both water and sewage) cannot be easily replicated to the consumer, the source supply is fairly fixed (aquifers, reservoirs etc), and the room for innovation is very low.

    In contrast, telecoms privatisation has been a boon. For one thing, it has allowed massive amount of innovation even though, for fixed lines at least, the infrastructure remains with one company. I just can't say the same for water.

    Can someone tell me what's been gained by the consumer (both residential and business) from water privatisation? Is the service 'better' now than it was in (say) the 1980s?

    Wasn't the main point of water privatisation to bring in tens of billions in private investment to upgrade some very old and creaking infrastructure?

    More water now gets where it's going, rather than being lost out of holes in the pipes.
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    edited May 2017

    Can someone tell me what the point of water privatisation is? You have an industry where the supply infrastructure (both water and sewage) cannot be easily replicated to the consumer, the source supply is fairly fixed (aquifers, reservoirs etc), and the room for innovation is very low.

    In contrast, telecoms privatisation has been a boon. For one thing, it has allowed massive amount of innovation even though, for fixed lines at least, the infrastructure remains with one company. I just can't say the same for water.

    Can someone tell me what's been gained by the consumer (both residential and business) from water privatisation? Is the service 'better' now than it was in (say) the 1980s?

    Licence to print money. The real increase in prices [ over inflation ] must be extremely high.
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    Can someone tell me what the point of water privatisation is? You have an industry where the supply infrastructure (both water and sewage) cannot be easily replicated to the consumer, the source supply is fairly fixed (aquifers, reservoirs etc), and the room for innovation is very low.

    In contrast, telecoms privatisation has been a boon. For one thing, it has allowed massive amount of innovation even though, for fixed lines at least, the infrastructure remains with one company. I just can't say the same for water.

    Can someone tell me what's been gained by the consumer (both residential and business) from water privatisation? Is the service 'better' now than it was in (say) the 1980s?

    Possibly fair - but still doesn't follow that any benefit would be gained from the (very considerable) costs of buying the network back again, either.
  • Options
    BromptonautBromptonaut Posts: 1,113
    "We will invite the National Infrastructure Commission to recommend the next stages for developing and upgrading the National Cycle Network. We reaffirm the commitments in the Cycling and Walking Investment Strategy."

    Huzzah!
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,780

    kle4 said:

    It could stave of a challenge - if the vote share is high enough, it is possible it will be enough in enough key places to ensure losses are not too bad, say to around 200 total seats. If that happens, it is bad, but Corbyn really could say he has been hamstrung by MPs who wouldn't back him, and they would be too afraid to challenge him given he did far better than they said he would.

    Funny you should mention 200 seats...

    http//twitter.com/georgeeaton/status/864566148490252290
    I'm not surprised - 200 would still be bad, but psycologically it feels more defendable, and of course it would mean a big but not mahoosive Tory majority.
  • Options
    chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    Can't say that I find anything wrong with my water provider.

    If Corbyn intends to spend £66bn buying it I expect champagne to flow out of the drinking taps.
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    It could stave of a challenge - if the vote share is high enough, it is possible it will be enough in enough key places to ensure losses are not too bad, say to around 200 total seats. If that happens, it is bad, but Corbyn really could say he has been hamstrung by MPs who wouldn't back him, and they would be too afraid to challenge him given he did far better than they said he would.

    Funny you should mention 200 seats...

    http//twitter.com/georgeeaton/status/864566148490252290
    I'm not surprised - 200 would still be bad, but psycologically it feels more defendable, and of course it would mean a big but not mahoosive Tory majority.
    That would mean an increase in the Tory majority of about 70. Remember no other party will take seats from the Tories either.

    200 actually would be a good number. I am quite optimistic. I think 190 is max.
  • Options
    OGH continues to be Yvette Cooper's Cheerleader in Chief I see. Frankly she wouldn't be in my top 10 as I find her lacking in that essential skill of anyone aspiring to the top job in British politics, being able to think on one's feet. For all his faults, Dave had this ability in spades (I suppose that's what an Eton education does for you), whereas Theresa May struggles but just about gets by. Yvette Cooper simply hasn't got it at all in my experience. Doubtless there will be other contenders anyway.
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    Can someone tell me what the point of water privatisation is? You have an industry where the supply infrastructure (both water and sewage) cannot be easily replicated to the consumer, the source supply is fairly fixed (aquifers, reservoirs etc), and the room for innovation is very low.

    In contrast, telecoms privatisation has been a boon. For one thing, it has allowed massive amount of innovation even though, for fixed lines at least, the infrastructure remains with one company. I just can't say the same for water.

    Can someone tell me what's been gained by the consumer (both residential and business) from water privatisation? Is the service 'better' now than it was in (say) the 1980s?

    Possibly fair - but still doesn't follow that any benefit would be gained from the (very considerable) costs of buying the network back again, either.
    Tell me why is it a sound investment for the private sector to borrow and buy a monopoly utility and not for the government ?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,780
    surbiton said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    It could stave of a challenge - if the vote share is high enough, it is possible it will be enough in enough key places to ensure losses are not too bad, say to around 200 total seats. If that happens, it is bad, but Corbyn really could say he has been hamstrung by MPs who wouldn't back him, and they would be too afraid to challenge him given he did far better than they said he would.

    Funny you should mention 200 seats...

    http//twitter.com/georgeeaton/status/864566148490252290
    I'm not surprised - 200 would still be bad, but psycologically it feels more defendable, and of course it would mean a big but not mahoosive Tory majority.
    That would mean an increase in the Tory majority of about 70. Remember no other party will take seats from the Tories either.

    200 actually would be a good number. I am quite optimistic. I think 190 is max.
    I agree. Going backwards is still bad though, but given expectations, if they do crack 200, they will probably claim success, and Corbyn's position will not be as under threat as might be thought.
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    MTimT said:

    "Their fundamental aim is a Marxist transformation of Labour Party. Andy they couldn't care less if that means perpetual Tory rule in the meantime"

    What the f8ck does 'in the meantime' mean in this context? If they transform Labour into a Marxit Party, the meantime is until the end of days.

    Fringe groups can triumph in the end in British politics - just look at Brexit.

    Their calculation is that if the Labour party sticks to being a hard left party, sooner or later their number will come up and they'll sweep to power.
    Vanishingly unlikely. A Far Left party would be contrary to the interests and views of too large a portion of the electorate.

    If Labour disappears down the plughole then it will be replaced. The Corbynites can't just sit on 120, or 90, or 60 seats and wait for an opportunity to take over that won't come. Either a new progressive party will be formed by refugees from Labour, or the Conservatives will split into two factions and become both Government and Opposition at the same time.
    Wouldn't the new, less extreme left of centre successor party just get infiltrated in its turn?
    I doubt (although I can't be sure, of course,) that it would make the same stupid mistakes.

    If, by some chance, the moderates manage to wrest back control of Labour then the first thing we should look out for is the expulsion of Corbyn and his acolytes. If they are allowed to return to the backbenches in peace then this will be a signal to the voters that Labour has failed to learn its lesson.
  • Options
    chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341

    Can someone tell me what's been gained by the consumer (both residential and business) from water privatisation? Is the service 'better' now than it was in (say) the 1980s?

    Yes. I can't recall the last time we had a hosepipe ban.

    The railways were also bloody dreadful as BR.

    Corbyn is just trying the whole damn thing into something that unions can bugger about with.


  • Options
    nunununu Posts: 6,024
    Pulpstar said:

    calum said:
    There's some decent ideas in there, but the whole lot together is nuts.
    Yep, agree.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,031
    Sandpit said:

    Can someone tell me what the point of water privatisation is? You have an industry where the supply infrastructure (both water and sewage) cannot be easily replicated to the consumer, the source supply is fairly fixed (aquifers, reservoirs etc), and the room for innovation is very low.

    In contrast, telecoms privatisation has been a boon. For one thing, it has allowed massive amount of innovation even though, for fixed lines at least, the infrastructure remains with one company. I just can't say the same for water.

    Can someone tell me what's been gained by the consumer (both residential and business) from water privatisation? Is the service 'better' now than it was in (say) the 1980s?

    Wasn't the main point of water privatisation to bring in tens of billions in private investment to upgrade some very old and creaking infrastructure?

    More water now gets where it's going, rather than being lost out of holes in the pipes.
    The questions are whether that investment has happened, and at what cost to the consumer compared to what it would have cost the government.

    I look back to (say) the Kielder and Rutland reservoir schemes in the 1970s, and the Thames Water Ring Main in the late 1980s, amongst others, and look at what's happening today. Off the top of my head the biggie's the Thames Tideway Scheme, and there have been smaller ones such as the Abberton Reservoir extension.

    Are we really getting more investment than there used to be?
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    SeanT said:

    Global Gastronomy Latest


    I know PB-ers love and cherish my views on matters culinary and oenophile, so I have an update.

    I've just come back from a Times Travel assignment in Palermo and Pantelleria, two weeks before that I did a trip through the gardens and chateaux of the Loire.

    It made for a fascinating comparison. In both cases I stayed in very nice hotels, and, more importantly, ate in all kinds of establishments, from famous Michelin starred restaurants to brasseries and trattorias. Both regions are well known but not absolutely renowned for their wine and cuisine.

    France was nice (better and more flavoursome than recent experiences in Lyon, Paris, etc). I had one totally outstanding meal - oysters and foie gras in a revered Art Deco brasserie in Nantes. Simple but brilliant ingredients, served simply but brilliantly.

    Italy was good, with several moments of greatness: a pasta dish of sea urchins and scorpionfish at the Igeia in Palermo was just mindblowing. In general, Italy was consistently one or two notches better, even if the Michelin stars were rarer.

    Italy won.

    Italy has been beating France for cuisine for a while now. Surprised it has taken you this long to realise, Sean. Michelin stars are not, IMO, the same mark of quality they used to be, especially in France.
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Scott_P said:

    surbiton said:

    Oh dear, is this man dumb or something ? Why not give his name and address ? He seems to think he is talking to people in Trump Tower.

    See previous tweets. The best defence his staff can come up with is that he really is too stupid to know how dumb he is
    Actually does not have the patience to read an intel document.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,427

    Can someone tell me what the point of water privatisation is? You have an industry where the supply infrastructure (both water and sewage) cannot be easily replicated to the consumer, the source supply is fairly fixed (aquifers, reservoirs etc), and the room for innovation is very low.

    In contrast, telecoms privatisation has been a boon. For one thing, it has allowed massive amount of innovation even though, for fixed lines at least, the infrastructure remains with one company. I just can't say the same for water.

    Can someone tell me what's been gained by the consumer (both residential and business) from water privatisation? Is the service 'better' now than it was in (say) the 1980s?

    It goes back to the basic problem of nationalised industries - investment becomes a negative. Spend money on reducing the workforce (usually), or bung a subsidy at them until the next election? improve environmental standards (expensive), or write a waiver for government owned entities?
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,031
    chestnut said:

    Can someone tell me what's been gained by the consumer (both residential and business) from water privatisation? Is the service 'better' now than it was in (say) the 1980s?

    Yes. I can't recall the last time we had a hosepipe ban.

    (Snip)

    Looks like there was one in 2012
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17340844
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    edited May 2017
    surbiton said:

    Can someone tell me what the point of water privatisation is? You have an industry where the supply infrastructure (both water and sewage) cannot be easily replicated to the consumer, the source supply is fairly fixed (aquifers, reservoirs etc), and the room for innovation is very low.

    In contrast, telecoms privatisation has been a boon. For one thing, it has allowed massive amount of innovation even though, for fixed lines at least, the infrastructure remains with one company. I just can't say the same for water.

    Can someone tell me what's been gained by the consumer (both residential and business) from water privatisation? Is the service 'better' now than it was in (say) the 1980s?

    Possibly fair - but still doesn't follow that any benefit would be gained from the (very considerable) costs of buying the network back again, either.
    Tell me why is it a sound investment for the private sector to borrow and buy a monopoly utility and not for the government ?
    Because there are better things to do with the money. Either (a) spend it on something more worthwhile, or (b) don't borrow it in the first place.

    You can make a case for rail re-nationalisation. I don't agree with it for reasons I shan't bore on about right now, but you can make a case for it. But why water? Who, apart from the Far Left, is asking for water supply to be re-nationalised? What is so wrong with the current arrangements that the best solution to them would be re-nationalisation? And how many voters actually care - let alone want to see billions in public money spent on such a thing?
  • Options
    At what level of seat wins would Corbyn and his chums realise that their game was up and simply give up the good fight ...... would that be the case were they to win say fewer than 150 seats .....130 seats ...... 120 seats ...... just how low would Labour have to fall to force the marxists out?
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820

    Fox is making progress building one empire at least.

    https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/864564863439208449

    Well, it worked extremely well in 1944:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Fortitude

  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,946
    SeanT said:

    Global Gastronomy Latest


    I know PB-ers love and cherish my views on matters culinary and oenophile, so I have an update.

    I've just come back from a Times Travel assignment in Palermo and Pantelleria, two weeks before that I did a trip through the gardens and chateaux of the Loire.

    It made for a fascinating comparison. In both cases I stayed in very nice hotels, and, more importantly, ate in all kinds of establishments, from famous Michelin starred restaurants to brasseries and trattorias. Both regions are well known but not absolutely renowned for their wine and cuisine.

    France was nice (better and more flavoursome than recent experiences in Lyon, Paris, etc). I had one totally outstanding meal - oysters and foie gras in a revered Art Deco brasserie in Nantes. Simple but brilliant ingredients, served simply but brilliantly.

    Italy was good, with several moments of greatness: a pasta dish of sea urchins and scorpionfish at the Igeia in Palermo was just mindblowing. In general, Italy was consistently one or two notches better, even if the Michelin stars were rarer.

    Italy won.

    The Igeia is fantastic. Spent a few nights there in 2015. Breakfast was stunning, evening meal a work of art.
  • Options
    rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 2,038
    nunu said:

    Pulpstar said:

    calum said:
    There's some decent ideas in there, but the whole lot together is nuts.
    Yep, agree.
    Too much for one parliament, unless your name's Clem Attlee.
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    It could stave of a challenge - if the vote share is high enough, it is possible it will be enough in enough key places to ensure losses are not too bad, say to around 200 total seats. If that happens, it is bad, but Corbyn really could say he has been hamstrung by MPs who wouldn't back him, and they would be too afraid to challenge him given he did far better than they said he would.

    Funny you should mention 200 seats...

    http//twitter.com/georgeeaton/status/864566148490252290
    I'm not surprised - 200 would still be bad, but psycologically it feels more defendable, and of course it would mean a big but not mahoosive Tory majority.
    Indeed. Given that the SNP is likely to hold the bulk of its seats, that would imply a Tory majority of around 90.

    200 seats is the lowest value - for psychological reasons, as you identify - that I think McCluskey could've got away with. If he wanted to be reasonably sure of setting the bar low enough to guarantee success then he could've picked 150, but then he would've looked totally cuckoo rather than, merely, faintly ridiculous.

    And we should also remember that 200 seats would still be Labour's worst result since the Thirties.
This discussion has been closed.