Imagine this was May - the wolves would already be tearing at her throat.
Labourites don't seem to care.
I suspect most of them do - they are just scared to come out against the leadership.
If true, what does that say about Labour? People too scared to criticise the leadership over theme ignoring the fact that they were about to appoint to the Shadow Cabinet someone who had been reprimanded over sexual harassment? Where are their values and principles? Where is their courage?
This is the Labour Party that tolerates anti-semitism, the Labour Party that won't kick out members who are also members of Hezbollah, the Labour Party that stands side by side with terrorist apologists, the Labour Party that condones the Shadow Chancellor calling for a female MP to be lynched, the Labour Party that supported the MEND event in Westminster this week.
The current Labour Party has no value or principles.
@Rottenborough You are spot on about this. Gordon Brown's evil genius was to extend benefit payments to a huge chunk of the working poor in such a way those workers think of it as part of their wages. As WTC claimants start to migrate to UC they'll be hit by a double whammy. Firstly they'll experience being treated like a welfare claimant by the DWP. Secondly they'll experience the WTC cut Osborne used UC as a Trojan Horse for. Millions plural of in work Tabloid readers will be put through the sausage grinder with politically explosive results.
The 55p phone line and 6 week wait as distractions. They've always been part of the UC experience. We are talking about them now because migration is just starting to hit folk who ( sadly ) matter in elections and who don't think of themselves as benefit claimants even though they are. It's a time bomb and ( most ) PB Tories are being wilfully blind to what is coming down the tracks and now arriving in the Brexit parliament where they've no majority.
What utter rubbish.
It was Brown who left in place the scandal where those on benefits would lose all of them if they did any part time work under 16 hours a week. Something UC is finally going to address to help people let down by the Labour Party which is supposed to represent them
"would lose all of them if they did any part time work under 16 hours a week"
"Germaine Greer can no longer be called a feminist
Eve Hodgson argues that the exclusionary views of this once-prolific voice of second-wave radical feminism should result in her exclusion from the movement"
While many of my generation may not be hungering for ‘1970s style jobs for life’ we sure as hell are looking for job security.
Brexit is more than just a cultural complication: it will dominate our politics for years to come.
I think flexibility more than security. We want to be able to go travelling for 3-6 months and then come back to a job. We want the ability to work abroad - but not especially in the EU. Aus/US/Can are more popular asI see it.
I don’t know about the travelling part. No one I know seriously expects to be able to take 3 to 6 months off like that and still have a job. I disagree that flexibility is more important than security. Many of young people’s concerns are economic - related to the cost of living and getting on the property ladder. By the time people reach their early to mid thirties they will care less about traveling and more about having enough money to pay bills and save for a deposit on a house. For that you need job security.
Sure, there are people who want to work aboard. Though in my experience people were not too happy about FoM ending for that reason. I don’t see Canada and Australia mentioned that much at all. America used to be, until Trump was elected.
It’s part of the package at many of the big private companies for graduates that after a few years you can have a sabbatical or something like that. Or go abroad and work for them somewhere else. It sounds exciting even if most don’t actually do it.
Different circles of friends though I guess - but I have 4 who have moved to Aus for work in teaching, consultancy, engineering... they say the lifestyle is better...
Most of my friends are in London/S East - so saving for a deposit seems a bit unrealistic frankly unless parents can help out! But yes I agree once a bit older it’s as you say.
Imagine this was May - the wolves would already be tearing at her throat.
Labourites don't seem to care.
I suspect most of them do - they are just scared to come out against the leadership.
If true, what does that say about Labour? People too scared to criticise the leadership over theme ignoring the fact that they were about to appoint to the Shadow Cabinet someone who had been reprimanded over sexual harassment? Where are their values and principles? Where is their courage?
This is the Labour Party that tolerates anti-semitism, the Labour Party that won't kick out members who are also members of Hezbollah, the Labour Party that stands side by side with terrorist apologists, the Labour Party that condones the Shadow Chancellor calling for a female MP to be lynched, the Labour Party that supported the MEND event in Westminster this week.
The current Labour Party has no value or principles.
And when in doubt appoint an independent report and then grant a peerage
Can someone explain, why should allegations of inappropriate behaviour bar someone from being in government/shadow cabinet, but not bar them from being an MP?
Can someone explain, why should allegations of inappropriate behaviour bar someone from being in government/shadow cabinet, but not bar them from being an MP?
They are elected by their constituents for five years so they can stay in place, and even do nothing, and get away with it until the next GE. Time for a recall law - whatever happened to that
Good to know I'd make the cut by a hundred quid xD
You're allowed to stay anyway. We're not proposing to expel Remainers.
Remainers are all getting Irish passports.
Remainers who are already Irish citizens are paying 80 euro for photo ID to prove they are Irish is perhaps more accurate.
The Irish passport office must be turning a healthy surplus these days.
It turns out a friend of mine was born in Belfast whilst his father was serving in Northern Ireland in the war. He qualifies for an Irish passport under an agreement between NI and Eire (like all NI people).
On applying, he discovered that his two sons automatically qualify as their father was born in Ireland. I anticipate their wives can apply once the husbands have the passport.
Can someone explain, why should allegations of inappropriate behaviour bar someone from being in government/shadow cabinet, but not bar them from being an MP?
Also, how long should a warning on such an issue be before it is "spent"?
After all, several of May's appointments were of people who had previously had to resign for misbehaviour (Fox, Bojo). What is the rehab time following a reprimand for frotting?
Labour have appointed an independent lawyer to investigate the rape allegations
Peerage on standby.
All jokes aside, that does seem relevant when you consider why Chakrabarti said she joined Labour when she performed her inquiry, rather than have the strength of independence.
Explaining why she joined Labour on the day she was asked to lead the review, she said: "This is a party looking at itself in the mirror and I wanted to have the trust and confidence not just of the Labour leadership but of party members
Not quite the same situation, perhaps, but it is curious how she felt she could not properly conduct matters without joining the party, and yet here, an independent is apparently necessary (which seems sensible).
Good to know I'd make the cut by a hundred quid xD
You're allowed to stay anyway. We're not proposing to expel Remainers.
Remainers are all getting Irish passports.
Remainers who are already Irish citizens are paying 80 euro for photo ID to prove they are Irish is perhaps more accurate.
The Irish passport office must be turning a healthy surplus these days.
It turns out a friend of mine was born in Belfast whilst his father was serving in Northern Ireland in the war. He qualifies for an Irish passport under an agreement between NI and Eire (like all NI people).
On applying, he discovered that his two sons automatically qualify as their father was born in Ireland. I anticipate their wives can apply once the husbands have the passport.
I've been encouraging my son to take out an Irish passport. He qualifies because his maternal grandmother was Irish.
They are a very accommodating bunch in the Republic.
Can someone explain, why should allegations of inappropriate behaviour bar someone from being in government/shadow cabinet, but not bar them from being an MP?
I imagine arguments to that effect will be highly contingent on what people are alleging and whether the position of the person admitting guilt or found guilty plays a part in any of it. But it would be a hard line to walk in many instances.
Labour have appointed an independent lawyer to investigate the rape allegations
Which is the way to do it, evidence under oath in a court, or evidence to a barrister outside a court's jurisdiction?
Don't we have the police to investigate rape allegations? Any self-respecting lawyer would not accept a job to investigate something criminal like that.
I'm wondering whether the flames of sex-gate were deliberately fanned to divert attention from the Brexit shambles? It's the first time in weeks the government have had any respite from looking incompetent. The public will always be more understanding of human frailties than ones which will cost them money. It could also explain Leadsom's rather bizarre intervention. There's little doubt events were turning ugly for the leading Brexiteers
I'm wondering whether the flames of sex-gate were deliberately fanned to divert attention from the Brexit shambles? It's the first time in weeks the government have had any respite from looking incompetent. The public will always be more understanding of human frailties than ones which will cost them money. It could also explain Leadsom's rather bizarre intervention. There's little doubt events were turning ugly for the leading Brexiteers
This has removed Brexit from the agenda and goodness knows for how long.
All the broadcast media are now gunning for Corbyn over the cover up. It is the worst press he has received to date as leader and this weekend's revelations may complicate things further.
@Rottenborough You are spot on about this. Gordon Brown's evil genius was to extend benefit payments to a huge chunk of the working poor in such a way those workers think of it as part of their wages. As WTC claimants start to migrate to UC they'll be hit by a double whammy. Firstly they'll experience being treated like a welfare claimant by the DWP. Secondly they'll experience the WTC cut Osborne used UC as a Trojan Horse for. Millions plural of in work Tabloid readers will be put through the sausage grinder with politically explosive results.
The 55p phone line and 6 week wait as distractions. They've always been part of the UC experience. We are talking about them now because migration is just starting to hit folk who ( sadly ) matter in elections and who don't think of themselves as benefit claimants even though they are. It's a time bomb and ( most ) PB Tories are being wilfully blind to what is coming down the tracks and now arriving in the Brexit parliament where they've no majority.
What utter rubbish.
It was Brown who left in place the scandal where those on benefits would lose all of them if they did any part time work under 16 hours a week. Something UC is finally going to address to help people let down by the Labour Party which is supposed to represent them
"would lose all of them if they did any part time work under 16 hours a week"
I'm wondering whether the flames of sex-gate were deliberately fanned to divert attention from the Brexit shambles? It's the first time in weeks the government have had any respite from looking incompetent. The public will always be more understanding of human frailties than ones which will cost them money. It could also explain Leadsom's rather bizarre intervention. There's little doubt events were turning ugly for the leading Brexiteers
This has removed Brexit from the agenda and goodness knows for how long.
All the broadcast media are now gunning for Corbyn over the cover up. It is the worst press he has received to date as leader and this weekend's revelations may complicate things further.
At this rate the budget is going to be a footnote
The thing like trump lots of people just dont care. He is on gogglebox tonight, I bet social media will be alight with what a nice old man he is not the cover up / speaking at an extremist event etc etc etc.
I'm wondering whether the flames of sex-gate were deliberately fanned to divert attention from the Brexit shambles? It's the first time in weeks the government have had any respite from looking incompetent. The public will always be more understanding of human frailties than ones which will cost them money. It could also explain Leadsom's rather bizarre intervention. There's little doubt events were turning ugly for the leading Brexiteers
sacking a Cabinet Minister over sexual harassment does not scream competence.
I'm wondering whether the flames of sex-gate were deliberately fanned to divert attention from the Brexit shambles? It's the first time in weeks the government have had any respite from looking incompetent. The public will always be more understanding of human frailties than ones which will cost them money. It could also explain Leadsom's rather bizarre intervention. There's little doubt events were turning ugly for the leading Brexiteers
This theory has cropped up a number of times, but I do not find it particularly credible. Just for starters:
1) I have serious doubts the government has the ability to competently co-ordinate something like this
2) It hasn't prevented the government looking incompetent
3) It would gain them, what, a couple of weeks respite at best?
4) Brexit has been going on for a long time and will continue to do so for a long time, and the next time there's a crisis point what would an intentional diversion like this have gained them?
5) Scandals like this even if flamed up intentionally surely have a way of spreading to places the arsonist did not intend, since people coming forward with allegations is beyond the control of the parties, and none of the leaders could ever know for certain what others may have gotten up to over period of decades. Heck, some of the individuals may have forgotten they once grabbed a bum at a party 10 years ago when drunk. It's uncontrollable, and thus no benefit.
I'm wondering whether the flames of sex-gate were deliberately fanned to divert attention from the Brexit shambles? It's the first time in weeks the government have had any respite from looking incompetent. The public will always be more understanding of human frailties than ones which will cost them money. It could also explain Leadsom's rather bizarre intervention. There's little doubt events were turning ugly for the leading Brexiteers
sacking a Cabinet Minister over sexual harassment does not scream competence.
Officially it was a resignation, but the point is valid.
I'm wondering whether the flames of sex-gate were deliberately fanned to divert attention from the Brexit shambles? It's the first time in weeks the government have had any respite from looking incompetent. The public will always be more understanding of human frailties than ones which will cost them money. It could also explain Leadsom's rather bizarre intervention. There's little doubt events were turning ugly for the leading Brexiteers
sacking a Cabinet Minister over sexual harassment does not scream competence.
Officially it was a resignation, but the point is valid.
You’re quite right. And your other post details very well why this is a silly theory.
Can someone explain, why should allegations of inappropriate behaviour bar someone from being in government/shadow cabinet, but not bar them from being an MP?
They are elected by their constituents for five years so they can stay in place, and even do nothing, and get away with it until the next GE. Time for a recall law - whatever happened to that
The Recall of MP Act 2015 was passed, but it has a very high bar to trigger the recall petition - the MP must be found guilty of a criminal offence and sent to prison, or be suspended from the House of Commons for at least 21 days.
Neither of these apply to Jared O’Mara for example, who’s barely turned up since his election, and various information on him has come to light since then that might suggest he’s an utter arsehole and has been for many years.
It’s possible that some of the sexual harassment cases, if the harassment is against Parliamentary staff, might result in an MP’s suspension, but I’d put money on Bercow making the suspension 20 days just for the hell of it.
@rkrkrk Re the last point on a deposit - well that was my point: that young people want better economic security because they can’t do those things - because saving for a deposit and getting on the property ladder is such a difficulty.
Can someone explain, why should allegations of inappropriate behaviour bar someone from being in government/shadow cabinet, but not bar them from being an MP?
They are elected by their constituents for five years so they can stay in place, and even do nothing, and get away with it until the next GE. Time for a recall law - whatever happened to that
The Recall of MP Act 2015 was passed, but it has a very high bar to trigger the recall petition - the MP must be found guilty of a criminal offence and sent to prison, or be suspended from the House of Commons for at least 21 days.
Neither of these apply to Jared O’Mara for example, who’s barely turned up since his election, and various information on him has come to light since then that might suggest he’s an utter arsehole and has been for many years.
It’s possible that some of the sexual harassment cases, if the harassment is against Parliamentary staff, might result in an MP’s suspension, but I’d put money on Bercow making the suspension 20 days just for the hell of it.
In terms of attendance is O'Mara better or worse that Mairi Black who has only voted in 21% of divisions?
Labour have appointed an independent lawyer to investigate the rape allegations
Which is the way to do it, evidence under oath in a court, or evidence to a barrister outside a court's jurisdiction?
Don't we have the police to investigate rape allegations? Any self-respecting lawyer would not accept a job to investigate something criminal like that.
Presumably it is to investigate the allegation that a Labour official told the victim not to take it further to save her career i.e. the cover up rather than the alleged crime, which the police ought to be investigating (to the extent they can, after so much time has elapsed).
Labour have appointed an independent lawyer to investigate the rape allegations
Which is the way to do it, evidence under oath in a court, or evidence to a barrister outside a court's jurisdiction?
Don't we have the police to investigate rape allegations? Any self-respecting lawyer would not accept a job to investigate something criminal like that.
For that Bex Bailey has to make a formal complaint with the Old Bill surely?
Independent of that it is reasonable for the party to have an internal investigation whatever she decides.
I’m no fan of Corbyn, but I don’t get the sense that this scandal has ‘turned on him’ re media narratives and public pressure. I think it’s wishful thinking from those who want him to go back to being as ‘unpopular’ as he was pre GE.
I’m no fan of Corbyn, but I don’t get the sense that this scandal has ‘turned on him’ re media narratives and public pressure. I think it’s wishful thinking from those who want him to go back to being as ‘unpopular’ as he was pre GE.
Time will tell but today has been a media firestorm against him
I’m no fan of Corbyn, but I don’t get the sense that this scandal has ‘turned on him’ re media narratives and public pressure. I think it’s wishful thinking from those who want him to go back to being as ‘unpopular’ as he was pre GE.
Give it time - the story about him promoting a known harasser has yet to fully permeate into the public consciousness.
Giving your pervy mate a job isn't a good look for any politician. Even worse when you have allowed your halo to be polished so much by your supporters.
Can someone explain, why should allegations of inappropriate behaviour bar someone from being in government/shadow cabinet, but not bar them from being an MP?
They are elected by their constituents for five years so they can stay in place, and even do nothing, and get away with it until the next GE. Time for a recall law - whatever happened to that
The Recall of MP Act 2015 was passed, but it has a very high bar to trigger the recall petition - the MP must be found guilty of a criminal offence and sent to prison, or be suspended from the House of Commons for at least 21 days.
Neither of these apply to Jared O’Mara for example, who’s barely turned up since his election, and various information on him has come to light since then that might suggest he’s an utter arsehole and has been for many years.
It’s possible that some of the sexual harassment cases, if the harassment is against Parliamentary staff, might result in an MP’s suspension, but I’d put money on Bercow making the suspension 20 days just for the hell of it.
In terms of attendance is O'Mara better or worse that Mairi Black who has only voted in 21% of divisions?
I think his is better, though I see a note on PublicWhip which states they feel mere attendance for votes is not as important as people think it is. Personally I think a certain level is appropriate as a minimum, though the additional allegation against O'Mara (other than that he is supposedly an arse) is he isn't even active in his constituency to compensate, though other than tracking surgeries I don't know how you would measure local activity.
Labour have appointed an independent lawyer to investigate the rape allegations
Which is the way to do it, evidence under oath in a court, or evidence to a barrister outside a court's jurisdiction?
Don't we have the police to investigate rape allegations? Any self-respecting lawyer would not accept a job to investigate something criminal like that.
For that Bex Bailey has to make a formal complaint with the Old Bill surely?
Independent of that it is reasonable for the party to have an internal investigation whatever she decides.
Indeed - but it can only an investigation into the cover-up. I would hate to imagine that anyone would effectively be tried for rape by a Labour Party tribunal.
I’m no fan of Corbyn, but I don’t get the sense that this scandal has ‘turned on him’ re media narratives and public pressure. I think it’s wishful thinking from those who want him to go back to being as ‘unpopular’ as he was pre GE.
Give it time - the story about him promoting a known harasser has yet to fully permeate into the public consciousness.
Giving your pervy mate a job isn't a good look for any politician. Even worse when you have allowed your halo to be polished so much by your supporters.
A few days ago the Bex Bailey story - a story that looked pretty bad for Labour - led on the evening news as one of the main stories. So I don’t agree that negative Labour stories more generally haven’t permeated into the public consciousness. The reality is, the media criticising Corbyn has not really been a strategy which has ever worked. During the GE it massively backfired. I don’t know why Conservatives don’t learn this. Stories that made Corbyn look bad have been published in the press now for the last two years, while supporters polish his halo, and in the end it did not prevent him from gaining support.
I’m no fan of Corbyn, but I don’t get the sense that this scandal has ‘turned on him’ re media narratives and public pressure. I think it’s wishful thinking from those who want him to go back to being as ‘unpopular’ as he was pre GE.
Time will tell but today has been a media firestorm against him
That's his bread and butter. With the party in fine and united shape at present, it would take something categorical to stick to him.
I’m no fan of Corbyn, but I don’t get the sense that this scandal has ‘turned on him’ re media narratives and public pressure. I think it’s wishful thinking from those who want him to go back to being as ‘unpopular’ as he was pre GE.
Give it time - the story about him promoting a known harasser has yet to fully permeate into the public consciousness.
Promoting someone against whom a harassment allegation was made, surely, unless it's been proven already?
How much of the tory vote is a not Corbyn vote? Important question. My total guess is it is worth a few percent, but in the right place that can be crucial.
IMO, two things are really shoring up the Conservative vote, Brexit and Corbyn.
Can someone explain, why should allegations of inappropriate behaviour bar someone from being in government/shadow cabinet, but not bar them from being an MP?
They are elected by their constituents for five years so they can stay in place, and even do nothing, and get away with it until the next GE. Time for a recall law - whatever happened to that
The Recall of MP Act 2015 was passed, but it has a very high bar to trigger the recall petition - the MP must be found guilty of a criminal offence and sent to prison, or be suspended from the House of Commons for at least 21 days.
Neither of these apply to Jared O’Mara for example, who’s barely turned up since his election, and various information on him has come to light since then that might suggest he’s an utter arsehole and has been for many years.
It’s possible that some of the sexual harassment cases, if the harassment is against Parliamentary staff, might result in an MP’s suspension, but I’d put money on Bercow making the suspension 20 days just for the hell of it.
In terms of attendance is O'Mara better or worse that Mairi Black who has only voted in 21% of divisions?
That’s a good question, I think they’re both barely above the Shinners in the bottom dozen. Someone here posted a link the other day to a website with the list, but damned if I can find it now.
Good to know I'd make the cut by a hundred quid xD
You're allowed to stay anyway. We're not proposing to expel Remainers.
Remainers are all getting Irish passports.
Remainers who are already Irish citizens are paying 80 euro for photo ID to prove they are Irish is perhaps more accurate.
The Irish passport office must be turning a healthy surplus these days.
It turns out a friend of mine was born in Belfast whilst his father was serving in Northern Ireland in the war. He qualifies for an Irish passport under an agreement between NI and Eire (like all NI people).
On applying, he discovered that his two sons automatically qualify as their father was born in Ireland. I anticipate their wives can apply once the husbands have the passport.
No agreement, simply Irish nationality law. The father through birth on the island of Ireland, and the sons, through having a parent born an Irish citizen on the island of Ireland, are already Irish citizens from birth under Irish law. If the sons have children, they too can be registered as Irish citizens because of the Irish nationality of their fathers, but the children won't be Irish citizens until they are registered. Under current Irish nationality law citizenship can be handed down generation to generation indefinitely so long as each new generation is registered as citizens before they themselves have children.
Sadly spouses no longer qualify simply through marriage, unless they actually reside with their Irish citizen spouse on the island of Ireland for a number of years (3 to 5 I think), but up to about 30 years ago, the spouse of an Irish citizen could simply claim Irish citizenship after a couple of years of marriage without even having to set foot on Irish soil.
Ireland also restricted its nationality law about a decade ago by limiting the initial ius soli to people born on the island of Ireland with at least one parent having the right of legal residence there. But once established, the right to pass on to future generations as outlined above remains.
Source: now wife (American) discovered she could claim Irish nationality and therefore the right to move to the UK to live with me due to her paternal grandmother having being born in County Tyrone. The irony being that said late grandmother was known for her visceral hatred of the British...
I’m no fan of Corbyn, but I don’t get the sense that this scandal has ‘turned on him’ re media narratives and public pressure. I think it’s wishful thinking from those who want him to go back to being as ‘unpopular’ as he was pre GE.
Give it time - the story about him promoting a known harasser has yet to fully permeate into the public consciousness.
Giving your pervy mate a job isn't a good look for any politician. Even worse when you have allowed your halo to be polished so much by your supporters.
A few days ago the Bex Bailey story - a story that looked pretty bad for Labour - led on the evening news as one of the main stories. So I don’t agree that negative Labour stories more generally haven’t permeated into the public consciousness. The reality is, the media criticising Corbyn has not really been a strategy which has ever worked. During the GE it massively backfired. I don’t know why Conservatives don’t learn this. Stories that made Corbyn look bad have been published in the press now for the last two years, while supporters polish his halo, and in the end it did not prevent him from gaining support.
Right now, I don't think that either the Conservatives or Labour have been especially damaged by this. That might reflect that people no longer expect very much of politicians, or that the allegations that have so far been proven against named people are not that serious, or that politics is very tribal.
I’m no fan of Corbyn, but I don’t get the sense that this scandal has ‘turned on him’ re media narratives and public pressure. I think it’s wishful thinking from those who want him to go back to being as ‘unpopular’ as he was pre GE.
Give it time - the story about him promoting a known harasser has yet to fully permeate into the public consciousness.
Giving your pervy mate a job isn't a good look for any politician. Even worse when you have allowed your halo to be polished so much by your supporters.
A few days ago the Bex Bailey story - a story that looked pretty bad for Labour - led on the evening news as one of the main stories. So I don’t agree that negative Labour stories more generally haven’t permeated into the public consciousness. The reality is, the media criticising Corbyn has not really been a strategy which has ever worked. During the GE it massively backfired. I don’t know why Conservatives don’t learn this. Stories that made Corbyn look bad have been published in the press now for the last two years, while supporters polish his halo, and in the end it did not prevent him from gaining support.
Right now, I don't think that either the Conservatives or Labour have been especially damaged by this. That might reflect that people no longer expect very much of politicians, or that the allegations that have so far been proven against named people are not that serious, or that politics is very tribal.
Agreed that I don’t think it’s really damaged either party. I think it’s because of two things: most voters probably see it as a overall issue in politics itself as opposed to an issue with one party, and the tribal nature of politics as you say.
Labour have appointed an independent lawyer to investigate the rape allegations
Which is the way to do it, evidence under oath in a court, or evidence to a barrister outside a court's jurisdiction?
Don't we have the police to investigate rape allegations? Any self-respecting lawyer would not accept a job to investigate something criminal like that.
For that Bex Bailey has to make a formal complaint with the Old Bill surely?
Independent of that it is reasonable for the party to have an internal investigation whatever she decides.
Indeed - but it can only an investigation into the cover-up. I would hate to imagine that anyone would effectively be tried for rape by a Labour Party tribunal.
And the issue is complicated by the fact that, in the case of Miss Bailey, the accused is or was a senior party official (whatever that means).
Unless she has a witness or physical evidence of the rape from six years ago, I’m not sure the police will be able to help her too much, sadly. What would help is for an independent legal investigator to encourage others with complaints to come to them in confidence. If there’s more women with allegations against the same man then that might be grounds for the police to act.
I’m no fan of Corbyn, but I don’t get the sense that this scandal has ‘turned on him’ re media narratives and public pressure. I think it’s wishful thinking from those who want him to go back to being as ‘unpopular’ as he was pre GE.
Give it time - the story about him promoting a known harasser has yet to fully permeate into the public consciousness.
Giving your pervy mate a job isn't a good look for any politician. Even worse when you have allowed your halo to be polished so much by your supporters.
A few days ago the Bex Bailey story - a story that looked pretty bad for Labour - led on the evening news as one of the main stories. So I don’t agree that negative Labour stories more generally haven’t permeated into the public consciousness. The reality is, the media criticising Corbyn has not really been a strategy which has ever worked. During the GE it massively backfired. I don’t know why Conservatives don’t learn this. Stories that made Corbyn look bad have been published in the press now for the last two years, while supporters polish his halo, and in the end it did not prevent him from gaining support.
There is a difference between an attack by your political opponents and one that comes from a media that is pushing attacks on both sides for similar difficulties. Attacks on Corbyn have mainly been for his positions on certain issues so far - the IRA, Islamists etc. This would be be for something that he has actually done since becoming leader. It has a different quality.
It may well not stick - but it is harder to defend on the basis of principle.
I’m no fan of Corbyn, but I don’t get the sense that this scandal has ‘turned on him’ re media narratives and public pressure. I think it’s wishful thinking from those who want him to go back to being as ‘unpopular’ as he was pre GE.
Give it time - the story about him promoting a known harasser has yet to fully permeate into the public consciousness.
Giving your pervy mate a job isn't a good look for any politician. Even worse when you have allowed your halo to be polished so much by your supporters.
A few days ago the Bex Bailey story - a story that looked pretty bad for Labour - led on the evening news as one of the main stories. So I don’t agree that negative Labour stories more generally haven’t permeated into the public consciousness. The reality is, the media criticising Corbyn has not really been a strategy which has ever worked. During the GE it massively backfired. I don’t know why Conservatives don’t learn this. Stories that made Corbyn look bad have been published in the press now for the last two years, while supporters polish his halo, and in the end it did not prevent him from gaining support.
Right now, I don't think that either the Conservatives or Labour have been especially damaged by this. That might reflect that people no longer expect very much of politicians, or that the allegations that have so far been proven against named people are not that serious, or that politics is very tribal.
Agreed that I don’t think it’s really damaged either party. I think it’s because of two things: most voters probably see it as a overall issue in politics itself as opposed to an issue with one party, and the tribal nature of politics as you say.
Take Trump. He should have been sunk, but 35-40% stick by him. That's a minority, but a big minority. His supporters may take the view he's a sonofabitch but at least he's our sonofabitch.
I've been a bit busy recently and not had internet access, but is it really true that our elected MPs, grown men on at least 75 grand a year plus expenses, some of them Knights of the Realm need a goddamn Code Of Conduct to guide them on how to behave around females? Why are we paying them to act like Sixth Formers out on the lash? The Houses of Parliament need to have those bars closed immediately, and any MP found drinking alcohol on the taxpayers clock should be disciplined just like the rest of us. I don't know anyone who is allowed to booze during working hours. Westminster needs to be dragged into the 21st Century.
I’m no fan of Corbyn, but I don’t get the sense that this scandal has ‘turned on him’ re media narratives and public pressure. I think it’s wishful thinking from those who want him to go back to being as ‘unpopular’ as he was pre GE.
Give it time - the story about him promoting a known harasser has yet to fully permeate into the public consciousness.
Giving your pervy mate a job isn't a good look for any politician. Even worse when you have allowed your halo to be polished so much by your supporters.
A few days ago the Bex Bailey story - a story that looked pretty bad for Labour - led on the evening news as one of the main stories. So I don’t agree that negative Labour stories more generally haven’t permeated into the public consciousness. The reality is, the media criticising Corbyn has not really been a strategy which has ever worked. During the GE it massively backfired. I don’t know why Conservatives don’t learn this. Stories that made Corbyn look bad have been published in the press now for the last two years, while supporters polish his halo, and in the end it did not prevent him from gaining support.
Right now, I don't think that either the Conservatives or Labour have been especially damaged by this. That might reflect that people no longer expect very much of politicians, or that the allegations that have so far been proven against named people are not that serious, or that politics is very tribal.
Agreed that I don’t think it’s really damaged either party. I think it’s because of two things: most voters probably see it as a overall issue in politics itself as opposed to an issue with one party, and the tribal nature of politics as you say.
Take Trump. He should have been sunk, but 35-40% stick by him. That's a minority, but a big minority. His supporters may take the view he's a sonofabitch but at least he's our sonofabitch.
And even among those who don’t really like him, they’d rather vote for anyone who doesn’t think that tranny bathrooms and the importance of campus safe spaces are the most important issues facing today’s America.
I’m no fan of Corbyn, but I don’t get the sense that this scandal has ‘turned on him’ re media narratives and public pressure. I think it’s wishful thinking from those who want him to go back to being as ‘unpopular’ as he was pre GE.
Give it time - the story about him promoting a known harasser has yet to fully permeate into the public consciousness.
Promoting someone against whom a harassment allegation was made, surely, unless it's been proven already?
I’m no fan of Corbyn, but I don’t get the sense that this scandal has ‘turned on him’ re media narratives and public pressure. I think it’s wishful thinking from those who want him to go back to being as ‘unpopular’ as he was pre GE.
Give it time - the story about him promoting a known harasser has yet to fully permeate into the public consciousness.
Giving your pervy mate a job isn't a good look for any politician. Even worse when you have allowed your halo to be polished so much by your supporters.
A few days ago the Bex Bailey story - a story that looked pretty bad for Labour - led on the evening news as one of the main stories. So I don’t agree that negative Labour stories more generally haven’t permeated into the public consciousness. The reality is, the media criticising Corbyn has not really been a strategy which has ever worked. During the GE it massively backfired. I don’t know why Conservatives don’t learn this. Stories that made Corbyn look bad have been published in the press now for the last two years, while supporters polish his halo, and in the end it did not prevent him from gaining support.
There is a difference between an attack by your political opponents and one that comes from a media that is pushing attacks on both sides for similar difficulties. Attacks on Corbyn have mainly been for his positions on certain issues so far - the IRA, Islamists etc. This would be be for something that he has actually done since becoming leader. It has a different quality.
It may well not stick - but it is harder to defend on the basis of principle.
But Corbyn has been attacked by both sides of the press on the same issues before. It’s hardly as if The Guardian or the New Statesmen were his cheerleaders.
I also think that we’re dealing with semantics re the IRA/Islamists distinction vs the Kelvin Hopkins situation in the implication one is a position the other is an act. Both are active decisions made by Corbyn - he didn’t just have views on the IRA he chose in the past to associate himself with Gerry Adams, for example. In both situations Corbyn has taken controversial and contentious decisions in cases where the morality of the situation is not really that subjective.
The reality is a lot of what’s happened under Corbyn’s Labour at times has been difficult to defend. That hasn’t ultimately prevented him from going from strength to strength.
I've been a bit busy recently and not had internet access, but is it really true that our elected MPs, grown men on at least 75 grand a year plus expenses, some of them Knights of the Realm need a goddamn Code Of Conduct to guide them on how to behave around females? Why are we paying them to act like Sixth Formers out on the lash? The Houses of Parliament need to have those bars closed immediately, and any MP found drinking alcohol on the taxpayers clock should be disciplined just like the rest of us. I don't know anyone who is allowed to booze during working hours. Westminster needs to be dragged into the 21st Century.
MP's are surely entitled to drink at lunch and dinner. I do.
I’m no fan of Corbyn, but I don’t get the sense that this scandal has ‘turned on him’ re media narratives and public pressure. I think it’s wishful thinking from those who want him to go back to being as ‘unpopular’ as he was pre GE.
Give it time - the story about him promoting a known harasser has yet to fully permeate into the public consciousness.
Promoting someone against whom a harassment allegation was made, surely, unless it's been proven already?
A Labour spokesperson said the party was investigating a formal complaint made against Mr Lewis.
However, in a statement, the former shadow minister said: "I know how I roll. I don't squeeze women's buttocks... They're lying or they're wrong.
What an oddly casual wording for such a statement. It certainly stands out, and given it very much does not look like every statement you see in these situations, I even believe he said it personally.
I’m no fan of Corbyn, but I don’t get the sense that this scandal has ‘turned on him’ re media narratives and public pressure. I think it’s wishful thinking from those who want him to go back to being as ‘unpopular’ as he was pre GE.
Give it time - the story about him promoting a known harasser has yet to fully permeate into the public consciousness.
Giving your pervy mate a job isn't a good look for any politician. Even worse when you have allowed your halo to be polished so much by your supporters.
A few days ago the Bex Bailey story - a story that looked pretty bad for Labour - led on the evening news as one of the main stories. So I don’t agree that negative Labour stories more generally haven’t permeated into the public consciousness. The reality is, the media criticising Corbyn has not really been a strategy which has ever worked. During the GE it massively backfired. I don’t know why Conservatives don’t learn this. Stories that made Corbyn look bad have been published in the press now for the last two years, while supporters polish his halo, and in the end it did not prevent him from gaining support.
Right now, I don't think that either the Conservatives or Labour have been especially damaged by this. That might reflect that people no longer expect very much of politicians, or that the allegations that have so far been proven against named people are not that serious, or that politics is very tribal.
Agreed that I don’t think it’s really damaged either party. I think it’s because of two things: most voters probably see it as a overall issue in politics itself as opposed to an issue with one party, and the tribal nature of politics as you say.
Take Trump. He should have been sunk, but 35-40% stick by him. That's a minority, but a big minority. His supporters may take the view he's a sonofabitch but at least he's our sonofabitch.
And even among those who don’t really like him, they’d rather vote for anyone who doesn’t think that tranny bathrooms and the importance of campus safe spaces are the most important issues facing today’s America.
Tbh as someone who follows American Dems on twitter, I don’t get the sense that those are the most important issues to them in the slightest. If anything it’s the right who obsess more over what happens on college campuses in America.
@KateEMcCann: Looks like @Channel4News has pulled an exclusive about new allegations facing a Tory MP? Earlier email suggested big news on the way.
Time to put a mark in the Tory tally I guess.
Really there have not been very many for any party yet, I wonder if we'll get a drip feed of new names and allegations, or if the damn will burst at any point and there's a rush of names.
I’m no fan of Corbyn, but I don’t get the sense that this scandal has ‘turned on him’ re media narratives and public pressure. I think it’s wishful thinking from those who want him to go back to being as ‘unpopular’ as he was pre GE.
Give it time - the story about him promoting a known harasser has yet to fully permeate into the public consciousness.
Giving your pervy mate a job isn't a good look for any politician. Even worse when you have allowed your halo to be polished so much by your supporters.
A few days ago the Bex Bailey story - a story that looked pretty bad for Labour - led on the evening news as one of the main stories. So I don’t agree that negative Labour stories more generally haven’t permeated into the public consciousness. The reality is, the media criticising Corbyn has not really been a strategy which has ever worked. During the GE it massively backfired. I don’t know why Conservatives don’t learn this. Stories that made Corbyn look bad have been published in the press now for the last two years, while supporters polish his halo, and in the end it did not prevent him from gaining support.
There is a difference between an attack by your political opponents and one that comes from a media that is pushing attacks on both sides for similar difficulties. Attacks on Corbyn have mainly been for his positions on certain issues so far - the IRA, Islamists etc. This would be be for something that he has actually done since becoming leader. It has a different quality.
It may well not stick - but it is harder to defend on the basis of principle.
But Corbyn has been attacked by both sides of the press on the same issues before. It’s hardly as if The Guardian or the New Statesmen were his cheerleaders.
I also think that we’re dealing with semantics re the IRA/Islamists distinction vs the Kelvin Hopkins situation in the implication one is a position the other is an act. Both are active decisions made by Corbyn - he didn’t just have views on the IRA he chose in the past to associate himself with Gerry Adams, for example. In both situations Corbyn has taken controversial and contentious decisions in cases were the morality of the situation is not really that subjective.
The reality is a lot of what’s happened under Corbyn’s Labour at times has been difficult to defend. That hasn’t ultimately prevented him from going from strength to strength.
Like Trump, few people care, unless they are already opponents.
"Germaine Greer can no longer be called a feminist
Eve Hodgson argues that the exclusionary views of this once-prolific voice of second-wave radical feminism should result in her exclusion from the movement"
She really does appear to have become public enemy no 1 among certain sections of the movement.
It's the second wave which always happens after revolutions. The counter revolution begins and those at the vanguard lose their heads. I'm a big fan of GG and always have been. One of the genuinely impressive figures of the 70's.
Re. The 23 year old who accepted a £5000 watch and who has now gone to the police reporting KS for an attempted assault. I would suggest accepting the watch will be seen as payment in kind making him a rent boy. I'd be very surprised if this one flies
I’m no fan of Corbyn, but I don’t get the sense that this scandal has ‘turned on him’ re media narratives and public pressure. I think it’s wishful thinking from those who want him to go back to being as ‘unpopular’ as he was pre GE.
Give it time - the story about him promoting a known harasser has yet to fully permeate into the public consciousness.
Giving your pervy mate a job isn't a good look for any politician. Even worse when you have allowed your halo to be polished so much by your supporters.
A few days ago the Bex Bailey story - a story that looked pretty bad for Labour - led on the evening news as one of the main stories. So I don’t agree that negative Labour stories more generally haven’t permeated into the public consciousness. The reality is, the media criticising Corbyn has not really been a strategy which has ever worked. During the GE it massively backfired. I don’t know why Conservatives don’t learn this. Stories that made Corbyn look bad have been published in the press now for the last two years, while supporters polish his halo, and in the end it did not prevent him from gaining support.
There is a difference between an attack by your political opponents and one that comes from a media that is pushing attacks on both sides for similar difficulties. Attacks on Corbyn have mainly been for his positions on certain issues so far - the IRA, Islamists etc. This would be be for something that he has actually done since becoming leader. It has a different quality.
It may well not stick - but it is harder to defend on the basis of principle.
But Corbyn has been attacked by both sides of the press on the same issues before. It’s hardly as if The Guardian or the New Statesmen were his cheerleaders.
I also think that we’re dealing with semantics re the IRA/Islamists distinction vs the Kelvin Hopkins situation in the implication one is a position the other is an act. Both are active decisions made by Corbyn - he didn’t just have views on the IRA he chose in the past to associate himself with Gerry Adams, for example. In both situations Corbyn has taken controversial and contentious decisions in cases were the morality of the situation is not really that subjective.
The reality is a lot of what’s happened under Corbyn’s Labour at times has been difficult to defend. That hasn’t ultimately prevented him from going from strength to strength.
Like Trump, few people care, unless they are already opponents.
I've been a bit busy recently and not had internet access, but is it really true that our elected MPs, grown men on at least 75 grand a year plus expenses, some of them Knights of the Realm need a goddamn Code Of Conduct to guide them on how to behave around females? Why are we paying them to act like Sixth Formers out on the lash? The Houses of Parliament need to have those bars closed immediately, and any MP found drinking alcohol on the taxpayers clock should be disciplined just like the rest of us. I don't know anyone who is allowed to booze during working hours. Westminster needs to be dragged into the 21st Century.
MP's are surely entitled to drink at lunch and dinner. I do.
That's between you and your employer, if it's fine by them that's grand. I'm paying those feckers out of my tax, and I don't want them boozing on my time. I don't know why Westminster has to have bars on site. I can't have a drink at work. I don't know anybody else who is encouraged to drink whilst on the firm's quid. If MPs want a drink, surely they could nip out of work to a pub around the corner? I'd also expect them to be subject to the same workplace discipline as the rest of us Public Servants, upto and including drink and drug testing.
@KateEMcCann: Looks like @Channel4News has pulled an exclusive about new allegations facing a Tory MP? Earlier email suggested big news on the way.
Time to put a mark in the Tory tally I guess.
Really there have not been very many for any party yet, I wonder if we'll get a drip feed of new names and allegations, or if the damn will burst at any point and there's a rush of names.
I've been a bit busy recently and not had internet access, but is it really true that our elected MPs, grown men on at least 75 grand a year plus expenses, some of them Knights of the Realm need a goddamn Code Of Conduct to guide them on how to behave around females? Why are we paying them to act like Sixth Formers out on the lash? The Houses of Parliament need to have those bars closed immediately, and any MP found drinking alcohol on the taxpayers clock should be disciplined just like the rest of us. I don't know anyone who is allowed to booze during working hours. Westminster needs to be dragged into the 21st Century.
MP's are surely entitled to drink at lunch and dinner. I do.
That's between you and your employer, if it's fine by them that's grand. I'm paying those feckers out of my tax, and I don't want them boozing on my time. I don't know why Westminster has to have bars on site. I can't have a drink at work. I don't know anybody else who is encouraged to drink whilst on the firm's quid. If MPs want a drink, surely they could nip out of work to a pub around the corner? I'd also expect them to be subject to the same workplace discipline as the rest of us Public Servants, upto and including drink and drug testing.
The thing is, there aren't many pubs round the corner. The Red Lion, St. Stephens, and the Marquis of Granby is about it.
I’m no fan of Corbyn, but I don’t get the sense that this scandal has ‘turned on him’ re media narratives and public pressure. I think it’s wishful thinking from those who want him to go back to being as ‘unpopular’ as he was pre GE.
Give it time - the story about him promoting a known harasser has yet to fully permeate into the public consciousness.
Giving your pervy mate a job isn't a good look for any politician. Even worse when you have allowed your halo to be polished so much by your supporters.
A few days ago the Bex Bailey story - a story that looked pretty bad for Labour - led on the evening news as one of the main stories. So I don’t agree that negative Labour stories more generally haven’t permeated into the public consciousness. The reality is, the media criticising Corbyn has not really been a strategy which has ever worked. During the GE it massively backfired. I don’t know why Conservatives don’t learn this. Stories that made Corbyn look bad have been published in the press now for the last two years, while supporters polish his halo, and in the end it did not prevent him from gaining support.
Right now, I don't think that either the Conservatives or Labour have been especially damaged by this. That might reflect that people no longer expect very much of politicians, or that the allegations that have so far been proven against named people are not that serious, or that politics is very tribal.
Agreed that I don’t think it’s really damaged either party. I think it’s because of two things: most voters probably see it as a overall issue in politics itself as opposed to an issue with one party, and the tribal nature of politics as you say.
Take Trump. He should have been sunk, but 35-40% stick by him. That's a minority, but a big minority. His supporters may take the view he's a sonofabitch but at least he's our sonofabitch.
Even Barry Goldwater got 38% in 1964 and George McGovern got 37% in 1972 and George HW Bush also got 37% in 1992.
Any president with an approval rating under 40% is in trouble.
I've been a bit busy recently and not had internet access, but is it really true that our elected MPs, grown men on at least 75 grand a year plus expenses, some of them Knights of the Realm need a goddamn Code Of Conduct to guide them on how to behave around females? Why are we paying them to act like Sixth Formers out on the lash? The Houses of Parliament need to have those bars closed immediately, and any MP found drinking alcohol on the taxpayers clock should be disciplined just like the rest of us. I don't know anyone who is allowed to booze during working hours. Westminster needs to be dragged into the 21st Century.
MP's are surely entitled to drink at lunch and dinner. I do.
That's between you and your employer, if it's fine by them that's grand. I'm paying those feckers out of my tax, and I don't want them boozing on my time. I don't know why Westminster has to have bars on site. I can't have a drink at work. I don't know anybody else who is encouraged to drink whilst on the firm's quid. If MPs want a drink, surely they could nip out of work to a pub around the corner? I'd also expect them to be subject to the same workplace discipline as the rest of us Public Servants, upto and including drink and drug testing.
The thing is, there aren't many pubs round the corner. The Red Lion, St. Stephens, and the Marquis of Granby is about it.
Well that's tough luck for the poor little dears! Just because there ain't any decent boozers near their place of employment, it doesn't mean we have to supply them with eight!
I’m no fan of Corbyn, but I don’t get the sense that this scandal has ‘turned on him’ re media narratives and public pressure. I think it’s wishful thinking from those who want him to go back to being as ‘unpopular’ as he was pre GE.
Give it time - the story about him promoting a known harasser has yet to fully permeate into the public consciousness.
Giving your pervy mate a job isn't a good look for any politician. Even worse when you have allowed your halo to be polished so much by your supporters.
A few days ago the Bex Bailey story - a story that looked pretty bad for Labour - led on the evening news as one of the main stories. So I don’t agree that negative Labour stories more generally haven’t permeated into the public consciousness. The reality is, the media criticising Corbyn has not really been a strategy which has ever worked. During the GE it massively backfired. I don’t know why Conservatives don’t learn this. Stories that made Corbyn look bad have been published in the press now for the last two years, while supporters polish his halo, and in the end it did not prevent him from gaining support.
Right now, I don't think that either the Conservatives or Labour have been especially damaged by this. That might reflect that people no longer expect very much of politicians, or that the allegations that have so far been proven against named people are not that serious, or that politics is very tribal.
Agreed that I don’t think it’s really damaged either party. I think it’s because of two things: most voters probably see it as a overall issue in politics itself as opposed to an issue with one party, and the tribal nature of politics as you say.
Take Trump. He should have been sunk, but 35-40% stick by him. That's a minority, but a big minority. His supporters may take the view he's a sonofabitch but at least he's our sonofabitch.
Even Barry Goldwater got 38% in 1964 and George McGovern got 37% in 1972 and George HW Bush also got 37% in 1992.
Any president with an approval rating under 40% is in trouble.
It depends what people think of their opponent. Trump was always unpopular, but his opponent was more so, in swing States. You don't have to be faster than the bear, you just have to be faster than the other person, when the bear is chasing the pair of you.
Completely OT, random wikipedia trawling tells me that the Nebraska Legislature is officially the only state legislature in the US which is unicameral and officially non-partisan, which is interesting (though the page notes the parties back specific candidates and so votes can still end up on partisan lines)
I've been a bit busy recently and not had internet access, but is it really true that our elected MPs, grown men on at least 75 grand a year plus expenses, some of them Knights of the Realm need a goddamn Code Of Conduct to guide them on how to behave around females? Why are we paying them to act like Sixth Formers out on the lash? The Houses of Parliament need to have those bars closed immediately, and any MP found drinking alcohol on the taxpayers clock should be disciplined just like the rest of us. I don't know anyone who is allowed to booze during working hours. Westminster needs to be dragged into the 21st Century.
MP's are surely entitled to drink at lunch and dinner. I do.
That's between you and your employer, if it's fine by them that's grand. I'm paying those feckers out of my tax, and I don't want them boozing on my time. I don't know why Westminster has to have bars on site. I can't have a drink at work. I don't know anybody else who is encouraged to drink whilst on the firm's quid. If MPs want a drink, surely they could nip out of work to a pub around the corner? I'd also expect them to be subject to the same workplace discipline as the rest of us Public Servants, upto and including drink and drug testing.
The thing is, there aren't many pubs round the corner. The Red Lion, St. Stephens, and the Marquis of Granby is about it.
Well that's tough luck for the poor little dears! Just because there ain't any decent boozers near their place of employment, it doesn't mean we have to supply them with eight!
But if they only had one, then all MPs would have to drink with the SNP.....
Good to know I'd make the cut by a hundred quid xD
You're allowed to stay anyway. We're not proposing to expel Remainers.
Remainers are all getting Irish passports.
Remainers who are already Irish citizens are paying 80 euro for photo ID to prove they are Irish is perhaps more accurate.
The Irish passport office must be turning a healthy surplus these days.
It turns out a friend of mine was born in Belfast whilst his father was serving in Northern Ireland in the war. He qualifies for an Irish passport under an agreement between NI and Eire (like all NI people).
On applying, he discovered that his two sons automatically qualify as their father was born in Ireland. I anticipate their wives can apply once the husbands have the passport.
There is no agreement between NI and the Republic as such - the Republic essentially regards the six counties as being part of Ireland for nationality purposes. The very pretty Irish passport shows no reference to a border at all - the island of Ireland being essentially seen as one nation and one people.
The Americans effectively do the same - anyone born in NI is regarded as Irish not British and is eligible to apply for a green card via the diversity lottery as if they were Irish. People born on mainland GB are ineligible - as so many Brits get green cards so we exceed the limits already. Although after the events in New York this week Trump is seeking to end the diversity lottery entirely - although maybe they will keep one especially for the Irish!
Completely OT, random wikipedia trawling tells me that the Nebraska Legislature is officially the only state legislature in the US which is unicameral and officially non-partisan, which is interesting (though the page notes the parties back specific candidates and so votes can still end up on partisan lines)
In reality, it's overwhelmingly Republican (like Independents in rural English councils were really Conservatives, but very liberal Republican. They voted to abolish capital punishment, but a referendum overturned it.
I’m no fan of Corbyn, but I don’t get the sense that this scandal has ‘turned on him’ re media narratives and public pressure. I think it’s wishful thinking from those who want him to go back to being as ‘unpopular’ as he was pre GE.
Give it time - the story about him promoting a known harasser has yet to fully permeate into the public consciousness.
Giving your pervy mate a job isn't a good look for any politician. Even worse when you have allowed your halo to be polished so much by your supporters.
A few days ago the Bex Bailey story - a story that looked pretty bad for Labour - led on the evening news as one of the main stories. So I don’t agree that negative Labour stories more generally haven’t permeated into the public consciousness. The reality is, the media criticising Corbyn has not really been a strategy which has ever worked. During the GE it massively backfired. I don’t know why Conservatives don’t learn this. Stories that made Corbyn look bad have been published in the press now for the last two years, while supporters polish his halo, and in the end it did not prevent him from gaining support.
Right now, I don't think that either the Conservatives or Labour have been especially damaged by this. That might reflect that people no longer expect very much of politicians, or that the allegations that have so far been proven against named people are not that serious, or that politics is very tribal.
Agreed that I don’t think it’s really damaged either party. I think it’s because of two things: most voters probably see it as a overall issue in politics itself as opposed to an issue with one party, and the tribal nature of politics as you say.
Take Trump. He should have been sunk, but 35-40% stick by him. That's a minority, but a big minority. His supporters may take the view he's a sonofabitch but at least he's our sonofabitch.
Even Barry Goldwater got 38% in 1964 and George McGovern got 37% in 1972 and George HW Bush also got 37% in 1992.
Any president with an approval rating under 40% is in trouble.
It depends what people think of their opponent. Trump was always unpopular, but his opponent was more so, in swing States. You don't have to be faster than the bear, you just have to be faster than the other person, when the bear is chasing the pair of you.
Well currently he trails Sanders by 11% and Sanders is clearly more appealing in the rustbelt swing states than Hillary was.
Completely OT, random wikipedia trawling tells me that the Nebraska Legislature is officially the only state legislature in the US which is unicameral and officially non-partisan, which is interesting (though the page notes the parties back specific candidates and so votes can still end up on partisan lines)
In reality, it's overwhelmingly Republican (like Independents in rural English councils were really Conservatives, but very liberal Republican. They voted to abolish capital punishment, but a referendum overturned it.
The best bit on the wikipedia article is this bit.
in January 2010 it was reported that the Legislature debated whether or not there was partisanship in Legislature, and "then finished the talk with a vote that followed party lines"
Still, an interesting point of distinction that, legally at any rate, it is nonpartisan, even if in practice it is not.
Completely OT, random wikipedia trawling tells me that the Nebraska Legislature is officially the only state legislature in the US which is unicameral and officially non-partisan, which is interesting (though the page notes the parties back specific candidates and so votes can still end up on partisan lines)
In reality, it's overwhelmingly Republican (like Independents in rural English councils were really Conservatives, but very liberal Republican. They voted to abolish capital punishment, but a referendum overturned it.
The best bit on the wikipedia article is this bit.
in January 2010 it was reported that the Legislature debated whether or not there was partisanship in Legislature, and "then finished the talk with a vote that followed party lines"
Still, an interesting point of distinction that, legally at any rate, it is nonpartisan, even if in practice it is not.
Many smaller municipalities in the US are nominally non-partisan but practically everyone local knows which slate is the Democrats and which slate is the Republicans.
Comments
The current Labour Party has no value or principles.
"would lose all of them if they did any part time work under 16 hours a week"
Don't you mean over?
Different circles of friends though I guess - but I have 4 who have moved to Aus for work in teaching, consultancy, engineering... they say the lifestyle is better...
Most of my friends are in London/S East - so saving for a deposit seems a bit unrealistic frankly unless parents can help out! But yes I agree once a bit older it’s as you say.
On applying, he discovered that his two sons automatically qualify as their father was born in Ireland. I anticipate their wives can apply once the husbands have the passport.
After all, several of May's appointments were of people who had previously had to resign for misbehaviour (Fox, Bojo). What is the rehab time following a reprimand for frotting?
Explaining why she joined Labour on the day she was asked to lead the review, she said: "This is a party looking at itself in the mirror and I wanted to have the trust and confidence not just of the Labour leadership but of party members
Not quite the same situation, perhaps, but it is curious how she felt she could not properly conduct matters without joining the party, and yet here, an independent is apparently necessary (which seems sensible).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36304722
They are a very accommodating bunch in the Republic.
Am I jumping to conclusions?
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/926516608507482112
How can it be just to act in that way?
Labour has a very strange idea about the rule of law
All the broadcast media are now gunning for Corbyn over the cover up. It is the worst press he has received to date as leader and this weekend's revelations may complicate things further.
At this rate the budget is going to be a footnote
1) I have serious doubts the government has the ability to competently co-ordinate something like this
2) It hasn't prevented the government looking incompetent
3) It would gain them, what, a couple of weeks respite at best?
4) Brexit has been going on for a long time and will continue to do so for a long time, and the next time there's a crisis point what would an intentional diversion like this have gained them?
5) Scandals like this even if flamed up intentionally surely have a way of spreading to places the arsonist did not intend, since people coming forward with allegations is beyond the control of the parties, and none of the leaders could ever know for certain what others may have gotten up to over period of decades. Heck, some of the individuals may have forgotten they once grabbed a bum at a party 10 years ago when drunk. It's uncontrollable, and thus no benefit.
And your other post details very well why this is a silly theory.
Neither of these apply to Jared O’Mara for example, who’s barely turned up since his election, and various information on him has come to light since then that might suggest he’s an utter arsehole and has been for many years.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recall_of_MPs_Act_2015
It’s possible that some of the sexual harassment cases, if the harassment is against Parliamentary staff, might result in an MP’s suspension, but I’d put money on Bercow making the suspension 20 days just for the hell of it.
Independent of that it is reasonable for the party to have an internal investigation whatever she decides.
Giving your pervy mate a job isn't a good look for any politician. Even worse when you have allowed your halo to be polished so much by your supporters.
Sadly spouses no longer qualify simply through marriage, unless they actually reside with their Irish citizen spouse on the island of Ireland for a number of years (3 to 5 I think), but up to about 30 years ago, the spouse of an Irish citizen could simply claim Irish citizenship after a couple of years of marriage without even having to set foot on Irish soil.
Ireland also restricted its nationality law about a decade ago by limiting the initial ius soli to people born on the island of Ireland with at least one parent having the right of legal residence there. But once established, the right to pass on to future generations as outlined above remains.
Source: now wife (American) discovered she could claim Irish nationality and therefore the right to move to the UK to live with me due to her paternal grandmother having being born in County Tyrone. The irony being that said late grandmother was known for her visceral hatred of the British...
Unless she has a witness or physical evidence of the rape from six years ago, I’m not sure the police will be able to help her too much, sadly. What would help is for an independent legal investigator to encourage others with complaints to come to them in confidence. If there’s more women with allegations against the same man then that might be grounds for the police to act.
It may well not stick - but it is harder to defend on the basis of principle.
Westminster needs to be dragged into the 21st Century.
Ooooops!
I also think that we’re dealing with semantics re the IRA/Islamists distinction vs the Kelvin Hopkins situation in the implication one is a position the other is an act. Both are active decisions made by Corbyn - he didn’t just have views on the IRA he chose in the past to associate himself with Gerry Adams, for example. In both situations Corbyn has taken controversial and contentious decisions in cases where the morality of the situation is not really that subjective.
The reality is a lot of what’s happened under Corbyn’s Labour at times has been difficult to defend. That hasn’t ultimately prevented him from going from strength to strength.
However, in a statement, the former shadow minister said: "I know how I roll. I don't squeeze women's buttocks... They're lying or they're wrong.
What an oddly casual wording for such a statement. It certainly stands out, and given it very much does not look like every statement you see in these situations, I even believe he said it personally.
Really there have not been very many for any party yet, I wonder if we'll get a drip feed of new names and allegations, or if the damn will burst at any point and there's a rush of names.
Re. The 23 year old who accepted a £5000 watch and who has now gone to the police reporting KS for an attempted assault. I would suggest accepting the watch will be seen as payment in kind making him a rent boy. I'd be very surprised if this one flies
https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/926510864349450240/photo/1
Any president with an approval rating under 40% is in trouble.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-41857694
Have you or anybody you know been the victim of a random drive-by WW2 armaments look-alike depositing incident? If so....
The Americans effectively do the same - anyone born in NI is regarded as Irish not British and is eligible to apply for a green card via the diversity lottery as if they were Irish. People born on mainland GB are ineligible - as so many Brits get green cards so we exceed the limits already. Although after the events in New York this week Trump is seeking to end the diversity lottery entirely - although maybe they will keep one especially for the Irish!
in January 2010 it was reported that the Legislature debated whether or not there was partisanship in Legislature, and "then finished the talk with a vote that followed party lines"
Still, an interesting point of distinction that, legally at any rate, it is nonpartisan, even if in practice it is not.