politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Register

Categories

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Six of the top seven in the betting on Corbyn’s successor are

SystemSystem Posts: 12,171
edited October 2019 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Six of the top seven in the betting on Corbyn’s successor are women

Chart of Betfair exchange prices from betdata.io

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176
    First like Japan.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Wot no Jess Phillips?
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    edited October 2019
    Third!
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Lol, Keir Starmer. The most overrated politician in the UK
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    One of the worst books you will ever read


  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,772
    I thought Jezza had not said he would stand down. Unlike John McDonnell.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,129
    What a shit offering. Only cooper is capable enough.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176
    A draw is enough for Japan to top the group.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,772
    Pidcock is worth a flutter imho.

    Labour are bonkers enough it seems.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,149
    If Corbyn loses the next general election and steps down and is succeeded by another Corbynista like Long-Bailey, Rayner or Pidcock, hard not to see the LDs overtaking Labour within an election or too
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    What a shit offering. Only cooper is capable enough.

    Ugh, having that whining windbag chuntering on. No thank you.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    God, I have days when I think very few people could do a worse job than Corbyn, but then i see Yvette Cooper or Keir Starmer's names being tossed around as potential successors...
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,772
    HYUFD said:

    If Corbyn loses the next general election and steps down and is succeeded by another Corbynista like Long-Bailey, Rayner or Pidcock, hard not to see the LDs overtaking Labour within an election or too

    If Labour get a total shellacking then it is very hard to speculate what will happen leader wise.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    It was a good game
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Keir Starmer looks a clear lay to me. He doesn’t have any USP beyond Brexit.

    I backed Rebecca Long-Bailey at a range of odds over 300, which was nice.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,054
    What, no Dianne Abbott? :wink:

    Somebody's gender is a terrible (and usually illegal) reason to choose them for a job. This sort of tokenism is probably ineffective and may actually be counter-productive.

    Mind you, the set of male candidates isn't exactly overwhelming either, especially if McIRA is ruled out.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Good for sport that Scotland were knocked out on the pitch rather than by a typhoon.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,129
    Scott_P said:

    It was a good game

    Good...good...it was f##king amazing game.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,570
    Sat in No 10s bar in Aberdeen watching the end of the match. Huge disappointment but when Japan finally won there was a round of applause from all the Scottish supporters.

    Such good sports. Really sorry they are going no further.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Philip_Thompson said:

    Good for sport that Scotland were knocked out on the pitch rather than by a typhoon.

    They played ok today, it was the inept display against the Irish that did for them. Ireland are utter arse.
  • Yellow_SubmarineYellow_Submarine Posts: 647
    Following yesterday's debate about what if anything ' austerity ' is the new MP for Peterborough makes her first mark. This is a classic example of the invisible bit 9f the welfare safety net disappearing. ' Invisible ' in it's delivered in a non universalised way by local councils who had huge central cuts outsourced to them.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/oct/13/families-in-england-hit-by-70-cut-in-school-uniform-grant

    As an aside, here in deepest Leaverstan , we had two ' Uniform Banks ' launch in the last two years and one ' pay what you can afford ' pop up uniform shop using donated stock.
  • Yellow_SubmarineYellow_Submarine Posts: 647
    Following yesterday's debate about what if anything ' austerity ' is the new MP for Peterborough makes her first mark. This is a classic example of the invisible bit 9f the welfare safety net disappearing. ' Invisible ' in it's delivered in a non universalised way by local councils who had huge central cuts outsourced to them.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/oct/13/families-in-england-hit-by-70-cut-in-school-uniform-grant

    As an aside, here in deepest Leaverstan , we had two ' Uniform Banks ' launch in the last two years and one ' pay what you can afford ' pop up uniform shop using donated stock.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    FPT:

    Canada is heading for electoral stalemate, with the Quebec separatists potentially holding the balance of power. The election is on 21st October. Latest forecast:

    Con 140
    Lib 135
    BQ 33
    NDP 25
    Grn 4
    PPC 1

    https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/elections/poll-tracker/canada/
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    dyedwoolie said:

    Wot no Jess Phillips?

    No Dawn Butler? Three lawyers: Starmer, RLB and Emily T. Angela Rayner is associated with the National Education Service policy, which might mean she has achieved more than her rivals.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Following yesterday's debate about what if anything ' austerity ' is the new MP for Peterborough makes her first mark. This is a classic example of the invisible bit 9f the welfare safety net disappearing. ' Invisible ' in it's delivered in a non universalised way by local councils who had huge central cuts outsourced to them.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/oct/13/families-in-england-hit-by-70-cut-in-school-uniform-grant

    As an aside, here in deepest Leaverstan , we had two ' Uniform Banks ' launch in the last two years and one ' pay what you can afford ' pop up uniform shop using donated stock.

    There's something wrong with uniforms costing £300.

    My daughter's school uniform was purchased at Asda and cost about £30 for the whole year.

    There's no reason uniforms need to be expensive or branded. Cheap, generic uniforms are easily available and are surely a better solution than grants.
  • Yellow_SubmarineYellow_Submarine Posts: 647
    edited October 2019
    Deleted duplicated post.
  • Yellow_SubmarineYellow_Submarine Posts: 647
    Second favourite in this market makes this move today. They aren't going to include the conference vote on Carbon neutrality by 2030 in the manifesto but are toughening up other stuff.

    Added to her ' journey ' on a second referendum she's preparing.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/13/labour-pledges-to-ban-sale-of-petrol-diesel-cars
  • Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268
    Yvette Cooper is the only one the Tories would be worried about. But of course Labour won't choose her.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,869
    Starmer is a clear lay at those odds.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,772
    AlastairMeeks said:

    Keir Starmer looks a clear lay to me. He doesn’t have any USP beyond Brexit.

    I backed Rebecca Long-Bailey at a range of odds over 300, which was nice.

    good bets.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,129
    No McDonnell...somebody has been briefing the media that jezza is worn out and he is already in day to day control.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,772
    Smirkgate now leading Daily Mail webite
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,772
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    No McDonnell...somebody has been briefing the media that jezza is worn out and he is already in day to day control.

    if you want a friend in politics get a dog.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    rottenborough said:

    Smirkgate now leading Daily Mail webite

    Smirking is one of the leading far right indicators
  • twistedfirestopper3twistedfirestopper3 Posts: 2,434
    It's got to be one of the female candidates, hasn't it? All the other major parties have had women leaders, and Labour will feel under pressure to catch up. Thornberry and Cooper probably have the gravitas and experience for it but Long-Bailey seems beloved of Corbyn, so she'd be my bet, if I was a betting man.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,772
    Gabs2 said:

    Yvette Cooper is the only one the Tories would be worried about. But of course Labour won't choose her.

    Yep.
  • Yellow_SubmarineYellow_Submarine Posts: 647
    edited October 2019
    Deleted.
  • Yellow_SubmarineYellow_Submarine Posts: 647
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    No McDonnell...somebody has been briefing the media that jezza is worn out and he is already in day to day control.

    There is definately something going on. Corbyn won't be challenged immeadiately, will become PM if he wins an early election and retire if he loses it. The senario that is clearly being prepped for is a long extension for a Spring General Electon and/or EU referendum. As well as McDonnell laying the ground notice the sudden spate of think pieces pointing out how Jacinda Adern took over weeks before an election her party was going to lose after a lacklustre leader called it a day.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    twistedfirestopper3 said:

    It's got to be one of the female candidates, hasn't it? All the other major parties have had women leaders, and Labour will feel under pressure to catch up. Thornberry and Cooper probably have the gravitas and experience for it but Long-Bailey seems beloved of Corbyn, so she'd be my bet, if I was a betting man.

    Thornberry is far too posh. Cooper is irritating and hectoring. Long Bailey a bit thick, its Rayner for me
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    isam said:

    rottenborough said:

    Smirkgate now leading Daily Mail webite

    Smirking is one of the leading far right indicators
    What is Smirkgate?
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,533
    Philip_Thompson said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Following yesterday's debate about what if anything ' austerity ' is the new MP for Peterborough makes her first mark. This is a classic example of the invisible bit 9f the welfare safety net disappearing. ' Invisible ' in it's delivered in a non universalised way by local councils who had huge central cuts outsourced to them.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/oct/13/families-in-england-hit-by-70-cut-in-school-uniform-grant

    As an aside, here in deepest Leaverstan , we had two ' Uniform Banks ' launch in the last two years and one ' pay what you can afford ' pop up uniform shop using donated stock.

    There's something wrong with uniforms costing £300.

    My daughter's school uniform was purchased at Asda and cost about £30 for the whole year.

    There's no reason uniforms need to be expensive or branded. Cheap, generic uniforms are easily available and are surely a better solution than grants.
    In my patch at least it seemed a total racket that I tried to get changed together with a local UKIP activist (who was a celebrated local character - did a charity parachute jump aged 90). The local uniform shop had a monopoly and you HAD to buy uniforms from them. They gave schools a % of the price (10% I think), and of course the schools were glad of the funds. A local shop produced an absolutely identical one at a quarter of the price, but kids who wore it would be sent home by the schools if it was spotted. I reported it to the Monopolies Commission and Trading Standards, each of whom said "Not our problem".
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,772
    edited October 2019
    Philip_Thompson said:

    isam said:

    rottenborough said:

    Smirkgate now leading Daily Mail webite

    Smirking is one of the leading far right indicators
    What is Smirkgate?
    Was Patel laughing or smirking as Marr read out details of the end of car production in UK under her No Deal fantasy?
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,038
    Philip_Thompson said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Following yesterday's debate about what if anything ' austerity ' is the new MP for Peterborough makes her first mark. This is a classic example of the invisible bit 9f the welfare safety net disappearing. ' Invisible ' in it's delivered in a non universalised way by local councils who had huge central cuts outsourced to them.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/oct/13/families-in-england-hit-by-70-cut-in-school-uniform-grant

    As an aside, here in deepest Leaverstan , we had two ' Uniform Banks ' launch in the last two years and one ' pay what you can afford ' pop up uniform shop using donated stock.

    There's something wrong with uniforms costing £300.

    My daughter's school uniform was purchased at Asda and cost about £30 for the whole year.

    There's no reason uniforms need to be expensive or branded. Cheap, generic uniforms are easily available and are surely a better solution than grants.
    Expensive uniforms are essential for keeping the riff raff out of Tarquin and Jemima's school.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Yellow_Submarine said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    No McDonnell...somebody has been briefing the media that jezza is worn out and he is already in day to day control.

    There is definately something going on. Corbyn won't be challenged immeadiately, will become PM if he wins an early election and retire if he loses it. The senario that is clearly being prepped for is a long extension for a Spring General Electon and/or EU referendum. As well as McDonnell laying the ground notice the sudden spate of think pieces pointing out how Jacinda Adern took over weeks before an election her party was going to lose after a lacklustre leader called it a day.
    If the referendum fails and a deal is in place then labour will be out of luck trying to delay. The LDs and SNP want an election immediately to capitalize on their positions.
  • twistedfirestopper3twistedfirestopper3 Posts: 2,434
    rottenborough said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    isam said:

    rottenborough said:

    Smirkgate now leading Daily Mail webite

    Smirking is one of the leading far right indicators
    What is Smirkgate?
    Was Patel laughing or smirking as Marr read out details of the end of car production in UK under her No Deal fantasy?
    It's not the smirking that's the problem, according to our bevy of PB beauties... it's her fat arse and shite dress sense :)
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,772
    dyedwoolie said:

    twistedfirestopper3 said:

    It's got to be one of the female candidates, hasn't it? All the other major parties have had women leaders, and Labour will feel under pressure to catch up. Thornberry and Cooper probably have the gravitas and experience for it but Long-Bailey seems beloved of Corbyn, so she'd be my bet, if I was a betting man.

    Thornberry is far too posh. Cooper is irritating and hectoring. Long Bailey a bit thick, its Rayner for me
    She is worth a flutter I think. Bit of a dark horse and not totally wedded to the Corbyn-McDonnell view of the world.

    Hope Jess Philips runs as it would liven up the contest no end, and who knows?

    Manchester vs Birmingham?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,772
    twistedfirestopper3 said:

    rottenborough said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    isam said:

    rottenborough said:

    Smirkgate now leading Daily Mail webite

    Smirking is one of the leading far right indicators
    What is Smirkgate?
    Was Patel laughing or smirking as Marr read out details of the end of car production in UK under her No Deal fantasy?
    It's not the smirking that's the problem, according to our bevy of PB beauties... it's her fat arse and shite dress sense :)
    I'm not getting involved in that one.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,038
    rottenborough said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    isam said:

    rottenborough said:

    Smirkgate now leading Daily Mail webite

    Smirking is one of the leading far right indicators
    What is Smirkgate?
    Was Patel laughing or smirking as Marr read out details of the end of car production in UK under her No Deal fantasy?
    Looked like a simper to me.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    rottenborough said:

    dyedwoolie said:

    twistedfirestopper3 said:

    It's got to be one of the female candidates, hasn't it? All the other major parties have had women leaders, and Labour will feel under pressure to catch up. Thornberry and Cooper probably have the gravitas and experience for it but Long-Bailey seems beloved of Corbyn, so she'd be my bet, if I was a betting man.

    Thornberry is far too posh. Cooper is irritating and hectoring. Long Bailey a bit thick, its Rayner for me
    She is worth a flutter I think. Bit of a dark horse and not totally wedded to the Corbyn-McDonnell view of the world.

    Hope Jess Philips runs as it would liven up the contest no end, and who knows?

    Manchester vs Birmingham?
    Philips has no chance tbh, shes just a loudmouth with a few mates, no particular skillset, no USP, and she lies
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,780
    Gabs2 said:

    Yvette Cooper is the only one the Tories would be worried about. But of course Labour won't choose her.

    No, with the dire state of the opposition you forget just what a lousy state the Tories are themselves in. In any other circumstances they would be 10%+ behind in the polls now. So the Tories should be worried about any of them other than the Momentum tanky cultists - that is all in that list bar Long-Bailey and Pidcock. With all the rest you can see a tenuous route back towards being a more inclusive broad church party of the left.

    However, Long-Bailey is the annointed one and is clearly coordinating her manoeuvres with McDonnell. She will walk the leadership contest with Momentum backing. Her odds are ridiculously long at 14%.
  • Time_to_LeaveTime_to_Leave Posts: 2,547
    If Corbyn goes, isn’t the real danger for Labour that ultra-Cobynites go Green and the centre left consolidates around Swinson?
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    dyedwoolie said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    No McDonnell...somebody has been briefing the media that jezza is worn out and he is already in day to day control.

    There is definately something going on. Corbyn won't be challenged immeadiately, will become PM if he wins an early election and retire if he loses it. The senario that is clearly being prepped for is a long extension for a Spring General Electon and/or EU referendum. As well as McDonnell laying the ground notice the sudden spate of think pieces pointing out how Jacinda Adern took over weeks before an election her party was going to lose after a lacklustre leader called it a day.
    If the referendum fails and a deal is in place then labour will be out of luck trying to delay. The LDs and SNP want an election immediately to capitalize on their positions.
    LOL, because your wishful thinking has never been proved wrong over the last few weeks :p

    I think it's very unlikely that the SNP would support a Tory motion to call an election without Labour support. They have a phobia of being seen as helping the Tories in any way; remember they didn't even support May's motion calling for an election in 2017, stating "Scotland will never dance to a Tory PM's tune" or somesuch. In the event that Labour refuse to back an election, the SNP would probably react the exact same way they did in September: they'd call them frit and urge them to "get their act together" and agree an election date with them, but they'd stop short of actually agreeing to the Tories' date themselves.

    The Lib Dems might well back the Tories in a FTPA amendment, but (a) it's not clear that even they would be enough for a simple majority, (b) there'd be scope for a ton of wrecking amendments, and (c) less likely but still possible, the Lords could nuke the whole thing.

    All told, it's probably ~25% chance an early election gets called without Labour's support.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,605
    SandyRentool said:

    rottenborough said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    isam said:

    rottenborough said:

    Smirkgate now leading Daily Mail webite

    Smirking is one of the leading far right indicators
    What is Smirkgate?
    Was Patel laughing or smirking as Marr read out details of the end of car production in UK under her No Deal fantasy?
    Looked like a simper to me.
    Marr thought she was laughing. "It's no laughing matter"
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Danny565 said:

    dyedwoolie said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    No McDonnell...somebody has been briefing the media that jezza is worn out and he is already in day to day control.

    There is definately something going on. Corbyn won't be challenged immeadiately, will become PM if he wins an early election and retire if he loses it. The senario that is clearly being prepped for is a long extension for a Spring General Electon and/or EU referendum. As well as McDonnell laying the ground notice the sudden spate of think pieces pointing out how Jacinda Adern took over weeks before an election her party was going to lose after a lacklustre leader called it a day.
    If the referendum fails and a deal is in place then labour will be out of luck trying to delay. The LDs and SNP want an election immediately to capitalize on their positions.
    LOL, because your wishful thinking has never been proved wrong over the last few weeks :p

    I think it's very unlikely that the SNP would support a Tory motion to call an election without Labour support. They have a phobia of being seen as helping the Tories in any way; remember they didn't even support May's motion calling for an election in 2017, stating "Scotland will never dance to a Tory PM's tune" or somesuch. In the event that Labour refuse to back an election, the SNP would probably react the exact same way they did in September: they'd call them frit and urge them to "get their act together" and agree an election date with them, but they'd stop short of actually agreeing to the Tories' date themselves.

    The Lib Dems might well back the Tories in a FTPA amendment, but (a) it's not clear that even they would be enough for a simple majority, (b) there'd be scope for a ton of wrecking amendments, and (c) less likely but still possible, the Lords could nuke the whole thing.

    All told, it's probably ~25% chance an early election gets called without Labour's support.
    If the SNP refuse to back it then they will look as ridiculous as Labour.
    Wrecking amendments won't pass, the crossbenchers won't interfere with a call for an election and labour Lords on their own are just a minority bunch of seat fillers.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,533
    Yellow_Submarine said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    No McDonnell...somebody has been briefing the media that jezza is worn out and he is already in day to day control.

    There is definately something going on. Corbyn won't be challenged immeadiately, will become PM if he wins an early election and retire if he loses it. The senario that is clearly being prepped for is a long extension for a Spring General Electon and/or EU referendum. As well as McDonnell laying the ground notice the sudden spate of think pieces pointing out how Jacinda Adern took over weeks before an election her party was going to lose after a lacklustre leader called it a day.
    That looks a reasonable analysis. Most members would be looking for someone who hasn't been associated with the failed no-confidence move against JC, and who remains calm and friendly under fire (because every Labour leader gets roasted for something or other). I think people do associate Cooper with the anti-Corbyn lobby, and Nandy is too variable on Brexit; the others look plausible.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    dyedwoolie said:

    Danny565 said:

    dyedwoolie said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    No McDonnell...somebody has been briefing the media that jezza is worn out and he is already in day to day control.

    There is definately something going on. Corbyn won't be challenged immeadiately, will become PM if he wins an early election and retire if he loses it. The senario that is clearly being prepped for is a long extension for a Spring General Electon and/or EU referendum. As well as McDonnell laying the ground notice the sudden spate of think pieces pointing out how Jacinda Adern took over weeks before an election her party was going to lose after a lacklustre leader called it a day.
    If the referendum fails and a deal is in place then labour will be out of luck trying to delay. The LDs and SNP want an election immediately to capitalize on their positions.
    LOL, because your wishful thinking has never been proved wrong over the last few weeks :p

    I think it's very unlikely that the SNP would support a Tory motion to call an election without Labour support. They have a phobia of being seen as helping the Tories in any way; remember they didn't even support May's motion calling for an election in 2017, stating "Scotland will never dance to a Tory PM's tune" or somesuch. In the event that Labour refuse to back an election, the SNP would probably react the exact same way they did in September: they'd call them frit and urge them to "get their act together" and agree an election date with them, but they'd stop short of actually agreeing to the Tories' date themselves.

    The Lib Dems might well back the Tories in a FTPA amendment, but (a) it's not clear that even they would be enough for a simple majority, (b) there'd be scope for a ton of wrecking amendments, and (c) less likely but still possible, the Lords could nuke the whole thing.

    All told, it's probably ~25% chance an early election gets called without Labour's support.
    If the SNP refuse to back it then they will look as ridiculous as Labour.
    Wrecking amendments won't pass, the crossbenchers won't interfere with a call for an election and labour Lords on their own are just a minority bunch of seat fillers.
    By "wrecking amendments", I mean things like votes at 16, EU citizens' votes, maybe even new boundary changes that disadvantage the Tories. They're all things the Lib Dems would happily support, even if they were also supporting the main motion calling for an election, so I don't know why you're so convinced they wouldn't pass?

    I did allow that the Lords rejecting it was less likely, but it still can't be ruled out, especially since, in the scenario we're talking about, the amendment would only have scraped through the Commons by the skin of its teeth.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Danny565 said:

    dyedwoolie said:

    Danny565 said:

    dyedwoolie said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    No McDonnell...somebody has been briefing the media that jezza is worn out and he is already in day to day control.

    There is definately something going on. Corbyn won't be challenged immeadiately, will become PM if he wins an early election and retire if he loses it.r a Spring General Electon and/or EU referendum. As well as McDonnell laying the ground notice the sudden spate of think pieces pointing out how Jacinda Adern took over weeks before an election her party was going to lose after a lacklustre leader called it a day.
    If the referendum fails and a deal is in place then labour will be out of luck trying to delay. The LDs and SNP want an election immediately to capitalize on their positions.
    LOL, because your wishful thinking has never been proved wrong over the last few weeks :p

    mesuch. In the event that Labour refuse to back an election, the SNP would probably react the exact same way they did in September: they'd call them frit and urge them to "get their act together" and agree an election date with them, but they'd stop short of actually agreeing to the Tories' date themselves.

    The Lib Dems might well back the Tories in a FTPA amendment, but (a) it's not clear that even they would be enough for a simple majority, (b) there'd be scope for a ton of wrecking amendments, and (c) less likely but still possible, the Lords could nuke the whole thing.

    All told, it's probably ~25% chance an early election gets called without Labour's support.
    If the SNP refuse to back it then they will look as ridiculous as Labour.
    Wrecking amendments won't pass, the crossbenchers won't interfere with a call for an election and labour Lords on their own are just a minority bunch of seat fillers.
    By "wrecking amendments", I mean things like votes at 16, EU citizens' votes, maybe even new boundary changes that disadvantage the Tories. They're all things the Lib Dems would happily support, even if they were also supporting the main motion calling for an election, so I don't know why you're so convinced they wouldn't pass?

    I did allow that the Lords rejecting it was less likely, but it still can't be ruled out, especially since, in the scenario we're talking about, the amendment would only have scraped through the Commons by the skin of its teeth.
    Clearly if wrecking amendments are passed the bill falls and there is no election. The LDs and SNP arent going to go for an election and deliberately stop it with amendments. I dont think either are cavalier enough to gerrymander the constitution like that either, it's a labour sort of thing to do.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    edited October 2019
    dyedwoolie said:



    Clearly if wrecking amendments are passed the bill falls and there is no election. The LDs and SNP arent going to go for an election and deliberately stop it with amendments. I dont think either are cavalier enough to gerrymander the constitution like that either, it's a labour sort of thing to do.

    OK, "wrecking amendments" probably wasn't the right choice of words. I meant that votes at 16, or votes for EU citizens would be "wrecking amendments" (i.e. disadvantageous) from the Tories' perspective; from the Lib Dems' perspective, an early election in which 16- and 17-year-olds and EU citizens can vote would be the best case scenario, so why would they not vote to allow both things to happen?
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    edited October 2019
    Danny565 said:

    dyedwoolie said:



    Clearly if wrecking amendments are passed the bill falls and there is no election. The LDs and SNP arent going to go for an election and deliberately stop it with amendments. I dont think either are cavalier enough to gerrymander the constitution like that either, it's a labour sort of thing to do.

    OK, "wrecking amendments" probably wasn't the right choice of words. I meant that votes at 16, or votes for EU citizens would be "wrecking amendments" (i.e. disadvantageous) from the Tories' perspective; from the Lib Dems' perspective, an early election in which 16- and 17-year-olds and EU citizens can vote would be the best case scenario, so why would they not vote to allow both things to happen?
    Because if they vote for votes at 16 the whole bill will be canned/voted down by the government and they wont get the election they were voting for in the first place. That's why they dont attach ridiculous amendments to everything in sight, the bills dont get through.
    Any change made in haste like that btw would be very unlikely to be in place or make a difference to 'this' election
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/13/kurds-say-785-isis-affiliates-have-escaped-camp-after-turkish-shelling

    Cheers Donald, you massive oaf
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,570
    Noo said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/13/kurds-say-785-isis-affiliates-have-escaped-camp-after-turkish-shelling

    Cheers Donald, you massive oaf

    It was so predictable this would happen they should charge him with aiding an enemy of the US.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    Noo said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/13/kurds-say-785-isis-affiliates-have-escaped-camp-after-turkish-shelling

    Cheers Donald, you massive oaf

    You'd think that Syria was such a damn mess it would be hard to make it any worse, but he's managed it.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1183376772395655171?s=19
    And to my 5 remaining voters I say fuck you, fuck you very much indeed
  • beentheredonethatbeentheredonethat Posts: 838
    NickPalmer said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Following yesterday's debate about what if anything ' austerity ' is the new MP for Peterborough makes her first mark. This is a classic example of the invisible bit 9f the welfare safety net disappearing. ' Invisible ' in it's delivered in a non universalised way by local councils who had huge central cuts outsourced to them.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/oct/13/families-in-england-hit-by-70-cut-in-school-uniform-grant

    As an aside, here in deepest Leaverstan , we had two ' Uniform Banks ' launch in the last two years and one ' pay what you can afford ' pop up uniform shop using donated stock.

    There's something wrong with uniforms costing £300.

    My daughter's school uniform was purchased at Asda and cost about £30 for the whole year.

    There's no reason uniforms need to be expensive or branded. Cheap, generic uniforms are easily available and are surely a better solution than grants.
    In my patch at least it seemed a total racket that I tried to get changed together with a local UKIP activist (who was a celebrated local character - did a charity parachute jump aged 90). The local uniform shop had a monopoly and you HAD to buy uniforms from them. They gave schools a % of the price (10% I think), and of course the schools were glad of the funds. A local shop produced an absolutely identical one at a quarter of the price, but kids who wore it would be sent home by the schools if it was spotted. I reported it to the Monopolies Commission and Trading Standards, each of whom said "Not our problem".
    That is utterly disgraceful. Good on you and the UKIP activist for putting aside party politics to try and do the right thing.

  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    isam said:

    One of the worst books you will ever read


    Ah, you have not seen my Labour Next Leader book then. Dumpster fire as they say.
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    dyedwoolie said:

    rottenborough said:

    dyedwoolie said:

    twistedfirestopper3 said:

    It's got to be one of the female candidates, hasn't it? All the other major parties have had women leaders, and Labour will feel under pressure to catch up. Thornberry and Cooper probably have the gravitas and experience for it but Long-Bailey seems beloved of Corbyn, so she'd be my bet, if I was a betting man.

    Thornberry is far too posh. Cooper is irritating and hectoring. Long Bailey a bit thick, its Rayner for me
    She is worth a flutter I think. Bit of a dark horse and not totally wedded to the Corbyn-McDonnell view of the world.

    Hope Jess Philips runs as it would liven up the contest no end, and who knows?

    Manchester vs Birmingham?
    Philips has no chance tbh, shes just a loudmouth with a few mates, no particular skillset, no USP, and she lies
    That doesn't seem to have stopped Boris..
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    dyedwoolie said:

    Lol, Keir Starmer. The most overrated politician in the UK

    He's edged Labour closer and closer to a position of full on remain in all circumstances than Corbyn probably would have liked. He has not gotten them all the way, but he may as well have and seems to embody the membership's position on the question better than the leadership.
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    isam said:

    One of the worst books you will ever read


    Unless you also read one of Byronic/SeanT's
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    kle4 said:

    dyedwoolie said:

    Lol, Keir Starmer. The most overrated politician in the UK

    He's edged Labour closer and closer to a position of full on remain in all circumstances than Corbyn probably would have liked. He has not gotten them all the way, but he may as well have and seems to embody the membership's position on the question better than the leadership.
    If a deal is agreed he will have achieved nothing in a job no longer required. He will be a used condom in the party and quickly flushed
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    Philip_Thompson said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Following yesterday's debate about what if anything ' austerity ' is the new MP for Peterborough makes her first mark. This is a classic example of the invisible bit 9f the welfare safety net disappearing. ' Invisible ' in it's delivered in a non universalised way by local councils who had huge central cuts outsourced to them.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/oct/13/families-in-england-hit-by-70-cut-in-school-uniform-grant

    As an aside, here in deepest Leaverstan , we had two ' Uniform Banks ' launch in the last two years and one ' pay what you can afford ' pop up uniform shop using donated stock.

    There's something wrong with uniforms costing £300.

    My daughter's school uniform was purchased at Asda and cost about £30 for the whole year.

    There's no reason uniforms need to be expensive or branded. Cheap, generic uniforms are easily available and are surely a better solution than grants.
    It's a right fiddle, especially as even if you want a brand they will not allow a generic jumper which you can sew the brand on yourself.

    It makes me suspicious toward the trend in my parts toward more blazer style uniforms - they do look smarter, which I like, but it seems like it makes it that much harder for a generic uniform to be possible, and they cost more to the parent to boot.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    dyedwoolie said:

    kle4 said:

    dyedwoolie said:

    Lol, Keir Starmer. The most overrated politician in the UK

    He's edged Labour closer and closer to a position of full on remain in all circumstances than Corbyn probably would have liked. He has not gotten them all the way, but he may as well have and seems to embody the membership's position on the question better than the leadership.
    If a deal is agreed he will have achieved nothing in a job no longer required. He will be a used condom in the party and quickly flushed
    Perhaps, but that is a big if - we won't know if he is overrated until we reach the endgame. He has done a lot for Remain, and if that wins he will get plaudits.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    dyedwoolie said:

    https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1183376772395655171?s=19
    And to my 5 remaining voters I say fuck you, fuck you very much indeed

    I don't quite follow - isn't he just saying none should back the deal under any circumstances, likely because even if they say it is to be subject to a referendum, they'd face the accsusation from LDs that they backed the deal in some fashion?
  • Yellow_SubmarineYellow_Submarine Posts: 647
    Time_to_Leave said:

    If Corbyn goes, isn’t the real danger for Labour that ultra-Cobynites go Green and the centre left consolidates around Swinson?

    It depends on the franchise. If there are £3 votes ( or similar ) again they'll be a wave of #FBPE sign ups to sway policy/reclaim the party. That's where a Jess Phillips comes in. In that senario it would be Swinson with the problem. Hhowever it's also why I suspect there won't be £3 votes this time.
  • FlannerFlanner Posts: 437
    Philip_Thompson said:

    isam said:

    rottenborough said:

    Smirkgate now leading Daily Mail webite

    Smirking is one of the leading far right indicators
    What is Smirkgate?
    Excellent question. IMHO, there are two smirks - both created whenever the damage inevitable from Brexit is mentioned, and rarely easy to tell apart.

    Smirk A is essentially visual shorthand for "Project Fear again": the - often serious - belief that all Brexit downsides are spurious, or at least likely only to affect little people
    Smirk B is a smile of pure pleasure. Just as among technofanatics, "disruptive" is high praise for a new business (FAR more interesting than "profitable" or "job-creating"), so among many Leavers the real argument for Brexit is the chaos it'll cause. Mostly, in their view, among the kind of untermenschen who deserve to be chaoticised because they're so boooooring.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,241
    kle4 said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Following yesterday's debate about what if anything ' austerity ' is the new MP for Peterborough makes her first mark. This is a classic example of the invisible bit 9f the welfare safety net disappearing. ' Invisible ' in it's delivered in a non universalised way by local councils who had huge central cuts outsourced to them.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/oct/13/families-in-england-hit-by-70-cut-in-school-uniform-grant

    As an aside, here in deepest Leaverstan , we had two ' Uniform Banks ' launch in the last two years and one ' pay what you can afford ' pop up uniform shop using donated stock.

    There's something wrong with uniforms costing £300.

    My daughter's school uniform was purchased at Asda and cost about £30 for the whole year.

    There's no reason uniforms need to be expensive or branded. Cheap, generic uniforms are easily available and are surely a better solution than grants.
    It's a right fiddle, especially as even if you want a brand they will not allow a generic jumper which you can sew the brand on yourself.

    It makes me suspicious toward the trend in my parts toward more blazer style uniforms - they do look smarter, which I like, but it seems like it makes it that much harder for a generic uniform to be possible, and they cost more to the parent to boot.
    It's not just the blazers, or the badges. It's also the tendency for pointless details, like coloured piping. Some of it is about the cosy school-clothes shop nexus. Worse is the way that some schools use expensive uniforms to manipulate their intake.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,318
    edited October 2019
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Noo said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/13/kurds-say-785-isis-affiliates-have-escaped-camp-after-turkish-shelling

    Cheers Donald, you massive oaf

    It was so predictable this would happen they should charge him with aiding an enemy of the US.
    And there is also some horrific footage coming out of war crimes being perpetrated by the Turks or those acting on their behalf against unarmed civilians.

    "Massive oaf" is being far too kind to Trump on this. The man is a menace.

    (Oh - and just for @isam, an overweight, ill-mannered, badly dressed menace - with hair that on its own should be grounds for some sort of impeachment. :) )
  • ArtistArtist Posts: 1,893
    Starmer polled top on who would make a good leader with Labour members a couple of months ago. Labour members aren't as cultist as people make out.

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/07/22/corbyns-reputation-takes-big-hit-labour-members-mo
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176
    Stuartinromford said:

    kle4 said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Following yesterday's debate about what if anything ' austerity ' is the new MP for Peterborough makes her first mark. This is a classic example of the invisible bit 9f the welfare safety net disappearing. ' Invisible ' in it's delivered in a non universalised way by local councils who had huge central cuts outsourced to them.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/oct/13/families-in-england-hit-by-70-cut-in-school-uniform-grant

    As an aside, here in deepest Leaverstan , we had two ' Uniform Banks ' launch in the last two years and one ' pay what you can afford ' pop up uniform shop using donated stock.

    There's something wrong with uniforms costing £300.

    My daughter's school uniform was purchased at Asda and cost about £30 for the whole year.

    There's no reason uniforms need to be expensive or branded. Cheap, generic uniforms are easily available and are surely a better solution than grants.
    It's a right fiddle, especially as even if you want a brand they will not allow a generic jumper which you can sew the brand on yourself.

    It makes me suspicious toward the trend in my parts toward more blazer style uniforms - they do look smarter, which I like, but it seems like it makes it that much harder for a generic uniform to be possible, and they cost more to the parent to boot.
    It's not just the blazers, or the badges. It's also the tendency for pointless details, like coloured piping. Some of it is about the cosy school-clothes shop nexus. Worse is the way that some schools use expensive uniforms to manipulate their intake.
    I’ve heard of one secondary school in South West London that only allows pupils to wear a coat if it is the official school coat costing £35.
  • blueblueblueblue Posts: 875
    dyedwoolie said:

    Danny565 said:

    dyedwoolie said:



    Clearly if wrecking amendments are passed the bill falls and there is no election. The LDs and SNP arent going to go for an election and deliberately stop it with amendments. I dont think either are cavalier enough to gerrymander the constitution like that either, it's a labour sort of thing to do.

    OK, "wrecking amendments" probably wasn't the right choice of words. I meant that votes at 16, or votes for EU citizens would be "wrecking amendments" (i.e. disadvantageous) from the Tories' perspective; from the Lib Dems' perspective, an early election in which 16- and 17-year-olds and EU citizens can vote would be the best case scenario, so why would they not vote to allow both things to happen?
    Because if they vote for votes at 16 the whole bill will be canned/voted down by the government and they wont get the election they were voting for in the first place. That's why they dont attach ridiculous amendments to everything in sight, the bills dont get through.
    Any change made in haste like that btw would be very unlikely to be in place or make a difference to 'this' election
    And if the Tories do win even after all that, they'll have a green light to do a little helpful "tinkering" of their own :wink:
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 4,042
    dyedwoolie said:

    Wot no Jess Phillips?

    Corbynites hate her for being vocally anti-Corbyn, and they control the party for now.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Time_to_Leave said:

    If Corbyn goes, isn’t the real danger for Labour that ultra-Cobynites go Green and the centre left consolidates around Swinson?

    It depends on the franchise. If there are £3 votes ( or similar ) again they'll be a wave of #FBPE sign ups to sway policy/reclaim the party. That's where a Jess Phillips comes in. In that senario it would be Swinson with the problem. Hhowever it's also why I suspect there won't be £3 votes this time.
    There were no £3 votes in 2016.
  • blueblueblueblue Posts: 875
    Artist said:

    Starmer polled top on who would make a good leader with Labour members a couple of months ago. Labour members aren't as cultist as people make out.

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/07/22/corbyns-reputation-takes-big-hit-labour-members-mo

    But the problem is a lot like the one the Tories have with Brexit Party - the purists want Corbyn, only Corbyn, no matter how disastrous and repellent he is, much like the BPers are wedded to a Hard Brexit / No Deal.

    If Corbyn the Communal is replaced by Sensible Centrist Starmer, a good chunk of the Labour "purity" vote will be lost to them forever...
  • eekeek Posts: 28,405
    tlg86 said:

    Stuartinromford said:

    kle4 said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Following yesterday's debate about what if anything ' austerity ' is the new MP for Peterborough makes her first mark. This is a classic example of the invisible bit 9f the welfare safety net disappearing. ' Invisible ' in it's delivered in a non universalised way by local councils who had huge central cuts outsourced to them.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/oct/13/families-in-england-hit-by-70-cut-in-school-uniform-grant

    As an aside, here in deepest Leaverstan , we had two ' Uniform Banks ' launch in the last two years and one ' pay what you can afford ' pop up uniform shop using donated stock.

    There's something wrong with uniforms costing £300.

    My daughter's school uniform was purchased at Asda and cost about £30 for the whole year.

    There's no reason uniforms need to be expensive or branded. Cheap, generic uniforms are easily available and are surely a better solution than grants.
    It's a right fiddle, especially as even if you want a brand they will not allow a generic jumper which you can sew the brand on yourself.

    It makes me suspicious toward the trend in my parts toward more blazer style uniforms - they do look smarter, which I like, but it seems like it makes it that much harder for a generic uniform to be possible, and they cost more to the parent to boot.
    It's not just the blazers, or the badges. It's also the tendency for pointless details, like coloured piping. Some of it is about the cosy school-clothes shop nexus. Worse is the way that some schools use expensive uniforms to manipulate their intake.
    I’ve heard of one secondary school in South West London that only allows pupils to wear a coat if it is the official school coat costing £35.
    Locally all the secondary schools all require mandatory tartan skirts (the schools all use different tartans).

    That means while you can dress a boy for £30 it's a minimum of £50 if you have girls.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,570
    edited October 2019
    beentheredonethat said:

    NickPalmer said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Following yesterday's debate about what if anything ' austerity ' is the new MP for Peterborough makes her first mark. This is a classic example of the invisible bit 9f the welfare safety net disappearing. ' Invisible ' in it's delivered in a non universalised way by local councils who had huge central cuts outsourced to them.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/oct/13/families-in-england-hit-by-70-cut-in-school-uniform-grant

    As an aside, here in deepest Leaverstan , we had two ' Uniform Banks ' launch in the last two years and one ' pay what you can afford ' pop up uniform shop using donated stock.

    There's something wrong with uniforms costing £300.

    My daughter's school uniform was purchased at Asda and cost about £30 for the whole year.

    There's no reason uniforms need to be expensive or branded. Cheap, generic uniforms are easily available and are surely a better solution than grants.
    In my patch at least it seemed a total racket that I tried to get changed together with a local UKIP activist (who was a celebrated local character - did a charity parachute jump aged 90). The local uniform shop had a monopoly and you HAD to buy uniforms from them. They gave schools a % of the price (10% I think), and of course the schools were glad of the funds. A local shop produced an absolutely identical one at a quarter of the price, but kids who wore it would be sent home by the schools if it was spotted. I reported it to the Monopolies Commission and Trading Standards, each of whom said "Not our problem".
    That is utterly disgraceful. Good on you and the UKIP activist for putting aside party politics to try and do the right thing.

    My daughter left KGGS in Grantham (Mrs T's old school) in June to go to University. She still has friends at the school and has heard the new headmaster has caused a lot of anger with two decisions. He has decided that 6th formers have to wear school uniform where previously they had a smart but non uniform dress code. More importantly he has changed the colour of the whole school's uniform. Many parents rely on being able to buy uniforms from older pupils, especially as kids grow so fast in their early to mid teens and much of the uniform is too small long before it is worn out. Really really stupid ideas.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,806
    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Bad luck for Scotland in the rugby.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,570
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Bad luck for Scotland in the rugby.

    Afternoon MD.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,362
    eek said:

    tlg86 said:

    Stuartinromford said:

    kle4 said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Following yesterday's debate about what if anything ' austerity ' is the new MP for Peterborough makes her first mark. This is a classic example of the invisible bit 9f the welfare safety net disappearing. ' Invisible ' in it's delivered in a non universalised way by local councils who had huge central cuts outsourced to them.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/oct/13/families-in-england-hit-by-70-cut-in-school-uniform-grant

    As an aside, here in deepest Leaverstan , we had two ' Uniform Banks ' launch in the last two years and one ' pay what you can afford ' pop up uniform shop using donated stock.

    There's something wrong with uniforms costing £300.

    My daughter's school uniform was purchased at Asda and cost about £30 for the whole year.

    There's no reason uniforms need to be expensive or branded. Cheap, generic uniforms are easily available and are surely a better solution than grants.
    It's a right fiddle, especially as even if you want a brand they will not allow a generic jumper which you can sew the brand on yourself.

    It makes me suspicious toward the trend in my parts toward more blazer style uniforms - they do look smarter, which I like, but it seems like it makes it that much harder for a generic uniform to be possible, and they cost more to the parent to boot.
    It's not just the blazers, or the badges. It's also the tendency for pointless details, like coloured piping. Some of it is about the cosy school-clothes shop nexus. Worse is the way that some schools use expensive uniforms to manipulate their intake.
    I’ve heard of one secondary school in South West London that only allows pupils to wear a coat if it is the official school coat costing £35.
    Locally all the secondary schools all require mandatory tartan skirts (the schools all use different tartans).

    That means while you can dress a boy for £30 it's a minimum of £50 if you have girls.
    they have good taste, tartan should be de riguer for all schools
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Bad luck for Scotland in the rugby.

    I think "well done Japan" is more appropriate here. Scotland were third best in the group and got exactly what they deserved.
    Fingers crossed Australia can take England to pieces on Saturday.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,478
    edited October 2019
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    beentheredonethat said:

    NickPalmer said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Following yesterday's debate about what if anything ' austerity ' is the new MP for Peterborough makes her first mark. This is a classic example of the invisible bit 9f the welfare safety net disappearing. ' Invisible ' in it's delivered in a non universalised way by local councils who had huge central cuts outsourced to them.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/oct/13/families-in-england-hit-by-70-cut-in-school-uniform-grant

    As an aside, here in deepest Leaverstan , we had two ' Uniform Banks ' launch in the last two years and one ' pay what you can afford ' pop up uniform shop using donated stock.

    There's something wrong with uniforms costing £300.

    My daughter's school uniform was purchased at Asda and cost about £30 for the whole year.

    There's no reason uniforms need to be expensive or branded. Cheap, generic uniforms are easily available and are surely a better solution than grants.
    In my patch at least it seemed a total racket that I tried to get changed together with a local UKIP activist (who was a celebrated local character - did a charity parachute jump aged 90). The local uniform shop had a monopoly and you HAD to buy uniforms from them. They gave schools a % of the price (10% I think), and of course the schools were glad of the funds. A local shop produced an absolutely identical one at a quarter of the price, but kids who wore it would be sent home by the schools if it was spotted. I reported it to the Monopolies Commission and Trading Standards, each of whom said "Not our problem".
    That is utterly disgraceful. Good on you and the UKIP activist for putting aside party politics to try and do the right thing.

    My daughter left KGGS in Grantham (Mrs T's old school) in June to go to University. She still has friends at the school and has heard the new headmaster has caused a lot of anger with two decisions. He has decided that 6th formers have to wear school uniform where previously they had a smart but non uniform dress code. More importantly he has changed the colour of the whole school's uniform. Many parents rely on being able to buy uniforms from older pupils, especially as kids grow so fast in their early to mid teens and much of the uniform is too small long before it is worn out. Really really stupid ideas.
    Grandson 2 has just (September) started his A level years at a grammar school in Kent. The VIth formers.... that's what I call them anyway..... have to wear business suits. Looks very smart. I suspect that if/when he gets to Uni the suit will be abandoned, of course.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,806
    Mr. Noo, the two sentiments are not exclusive. I hope Japan beat the Springboks.

    Are you Australian?

    Mr. Tyndall, that kind of dickishness is damned stupid when it comes to school uniforms. Entirely unnecessary and increases costs of parents, sometimes significantly.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,038
    RLB campaign rap for the leadership contest:

    May I have your attention please?
    May I have your attention please?
    Will the real Long-Bailey please stand up?
    I repeat, will the real Long-Bailey please stand up?
    We're gonna have a problem here..

    Not sure if the rest of the lyrics are appropriate, mind.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,038
    eek said:

    tlg86 said:

    Stuartinromford said:

    kle4 said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Following yesterday's debate about what if anything ' austerity ' is the new MP for Peterborough makes her first mark. This is a classic example of the invisible bit 9f the welfare safety net disappearing. ' Invisible ' in it's delivered in a non universalised way by local councils who had huge central cuts outsourced to them.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/oct/13/families-in-england-hit-by-70-cut-in-school-uniform-grant

    As an aside, here in deepest Leaverstan , we had two ' Uniform Banks ' launch in the last two years and one ' pay what you can afford ' pop up uniform shop using donated stock.

    There's something wrong with uniforms costing £300.

    My daughter's school uniform was purchased at Asda and cost about £30 for the whole year.

    There's no reason uniforms need to be expensive or branded. Cheap, generic uniforms are easily available and are surely a better solution than grants.
    It's a right fiddle, especially as even if you want a brand they will not allow a generic jumper which you can sew the brand on yourself.

    It makes me suspicious toward the trend in my parts toward more blazer style uniforms - they do look smarter, which I like, but it seems like it makes it that much harder for a generic uniform to be possible, and they cost more to the parent to boot.
    It's not just the blazers, or the badges. It's also the tendency for pointless details, like coloured piping. Some of it is about the cosy school-clothes shop nexus. Worse is the way that some schools use expensive uniforms to manipulate their intake.
    I’ve heard of one secondary school in South West London that only allows pupils to wear a coat if it is the official school coat costing £35.
    Locally all the secondary schools all require mandatory tartan skirts (the schools all use different tartans).

    Who runs the LEA? Gary Glitter?

  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,683
    OldKingCole said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    beentheredonethat said:

    NickPalmer said:

    Philip_Thompson said:



    There's something wrong with uniforms costing £300.

    My daughter's school uniform was purchased at Asda and cost about £30 for the whole year.

    There's no reason uniforms need to be expensive or branded. Cheap, generic uniforms are easily available and are surely a better solution than grants.

    In my patch at least it seemed a total racket that I tried to get changed together with a local UKIP activist (who was a celebrated local character - did a charity parachute jump aged 90). The local uniform shop had a monopoly and you HAD to buy uniforms from them. They gave schools a % of the price (10% I think), and of course the schools were glad of the funds. A local shop produced an absolutely identical one at a quarter of the price, but kids who wore it would be sent home by the schools if it was spotted. I reported it to the Monopolies Commission and Trading Standards, each of whom said "Not our problem".
    That is utterly disgraceful. Good on you and the UKIP activist for putting aside party politics to try and do the right thing.

    My daughter left KGGS in Grantham (Mrs T's old school) in June to go to University. She still has friends at the school and has heard the new headmaster has caused a lot of anger with two decisions. He has decided that 6th formers have to wear school uniform where previously they had a smart but non uniform dress code. More importantly he has changed the colour of the whole school's uniform. Many parents rely on being able to buy uniforms from older pupils, especially as kids grow so fast in their early to mid teens and much of the uniform is too small long before it is worn out. Really really stupid ideas.
    Grandson 2 has just (September) started his A level years at a grammar school in Kent. The VIth formers.... that's what I call them anyway..... have to wear business suits. Looks very smart. I suspect that if/when he gets to Uni the suit will be abandoned, of course.
    Any form of enforced dress code for sixth-formers is deplorable - it should be a time of freedom, maturity and self-expression.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,772
    Quincel said:

    dyedwoolie said:

    Wot no Jess Phillips?

    Corbynites hate her for being vocally anti-Corbyn, and they control the party for now.
    Last week she said Labour wont win a majority. That itself was enough to set the hounds of hell on her.

    Phillips vs Johnson at the dispatch box would be box office.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,772
    dyedwoolie said:

    https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1183376772395655171?s=19
    And to my 5 remaining voters I say fuck you, fuck you very much indeed

    God alone knows what he is thinking now.

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,806
    Mr. Borough, 'thinking' may be too generous a word.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,478
    Stark_Dawning said:

    OldKingCole said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    beentheredonethat said:

    NickPalmer said:

    Philip_Thompson said:



    There's something wrong with uniforms costing £300.

    My daughter's school uniform was purchased at Asda and cost about £30 for the whole year.

    There's no reason uniforms need to be expensive or branded. Cheap, generic uniforms are easily available and are surely a better solution than grants.

    In my patch at least it seemed a total racket that I tried to get changed together with a local UKIP activist (who was a celebrated local character - did a charity parachute jump aged 90). The local uniform shop had a monopoly and you HAD to buy uniforms from them. They gave schools a % of the price (10% I think), and of course the schools were glad of the funds. A local shop produced an absolutely identical one at a quarter of the price, but kids who wore it would be sent home by the schools if it was spotted. I reported it to the Monopolies Commission and Trading Standards, each of whom said "Not our problem".
    That is utterly disgraceful. Good on you and the UKIP activist for putting aside party politics to try and do the right thing.

    My daughter left KGGS in Grantham (Mrs T's old school) in June to go to University. She still has friends at the school and has heard the new headmaster has caused a lot of anger with two decisions. He has decided that 6th formers have to wear school uniform where previously they had a smart but non uniform dress code. More importantly he has changed the colour of the whole school's uniform. Many parents rely on being able to buy uniforms from older pupils, especially as kids grow so fast in their early to mid teens and much of the uniform is too small long before it is worn out. Really really stupid ideas.
    Grandson 2 has just (September) started his A level years at a grammar school in Kent. The VIth formers.... that's what I call them anyway..... have to wear business suits. Looks very smart. I suspect that if/when he gets to Uni the suit will be abandoned, of course.
    Any form of enforced dress code for sixth-formers is deplorable - it should be a time of freedom, maturity and self-expression.
    I haven't talked to him about it yet; suspect it might turn out to be relaxed in the second year. I never liked wearing a suit myself, except in very formal situations. Shirt and tie, plus of course trousers suited me best. Of course, if I was still working in a hospital there'd be no tie nowadays. TBH, I don't think I've worn one since I retired, apart from weddings, funerals and the like.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Following yesterday's debate about what if anything ' austerity ' is the new MP for Peterborough makes her first mark. This is a classic example of the invisible bit 9f the welfare safety net disappearing. ' Invisible ' in it's delivered in a non universalised way by local councils who had huge central cuts outsourced to them.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/oct/13/families-in-england-hit-by-70-cut-in-school-uniform-grant

    As an aside, here in deepest Leaverstan , we had two ' Uniform Banks ' launch in the last two years and one ' pay what you can afford ' pop up uniform shop using donated stock.

    At my school the parents (with support from the school) organised a second hand uniform store.

    Buy a item for £10, sell an item for £5, or swap like for like
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,751
    A dozen British officials led by Johnson’s chief negotiator, David Frost, were in talks with the European commission’s Brexit taskforce on Sunday but sources in Brussels downplayed the possibility of a major breakthrough.

    “A Northern Ireland-only backstop as proposed by the EU in February 2018 could be landed by the European council on Thursday – anything else will not,” said one diplomatic source.

    EU officials have privately warned that at best a “technical extension” taking the UK’s membership of the bloc beyond 31 October will be necessary to work through the details of Johnson’s new approach to the issue of customs.

    Speaking on Sunday, Ireland's agriculture minister Michael Creed, a senior member of Varadkar’s cabinet, said: There are very significant issues to be addressed here. We are not there yet.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/13/eu-ready-to-grant-brexit-extension-as-johnson-prepares-for-key-summit
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    Chris said:

    A dozen British officials led by Johnson’s chief negotiator, David Frost, were in talks with the European commission’s Brexit taskforce on Sunday but sources in Brussels downplayed the possibility of a major breakthrough.

    “A Northern Ireland-only backstop as proposed by the EU in February 2018 could be landed by the European council on Thursday – anything else will not,” said one diplomatic source.

    EU officials have privately warned that at best a “technical extension” taking the UK’s membership of the bloc beyond 31 October will be necessary to work through the details of Johnson’s new approach to the issue of customs.

    Speaking on Sunday, Ireland's agriculture minister Michael Creed, a senior member of Varadkar’s cabinet, said: There are very significant issues to be addressed here. We are not there yet.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/13/eu-ready-to-grant-brexit-extension-as-johnson-prepares-for-key-summit

    The running commentary from the various sides doesn't help - in fact it seems to actively hinder - and won't impact MP or EU decisions, so why do they even bother? Telling us there are significant issues or that talks were productive, or other cliches, it's just so silly.
This discussion has been closed.