Sorry SO, don't mean to be rude, but this is pure NuLab and explains why centrists don't get anywhere.
The provinces and people in them who are down and out want to be trained and want these opportunities.
We must start there and stop taking the easy (and socially disruptive) route of importing masses of people to do it instead.
And what you describe isn't an option anyway. Theres no big pool of construction experts (to our standards) available in the world we can just readily import to quickly build lots of projects.
Train. Train. Train.
It is worth pointing out that Angela Rayner, although she is less than stellar on schools and universities, has a very good grasp of the importance of lifelong learning and retraining, and some pretty intelligent policies on how to make it work.
These would I think have been votewinners and more important highly effective if packaged and sold properly in the Labour manifesto. Instead, they went on broadband and railway renationalisation - which were, to put it mildly, neither.
I have just watched Novaro Media reporting on the loss of Blyth Valley.
The lack of self awareness of the girl with the microphone is astounding. She blames everyone for voting other than for Labour. But I particularly groaned at her comment that she had been to Stoke South on campaign. A seat Labour were never going to win. Why was she not in Stoke North where they might have had a faint chance?
These people are completely divorced from reality. And yet they are so self-righteous and holier than thou they simply cannot deal with their own huge failures.
I don’t expect young Labour activists around my age (or younger) to immediately ‘get’ why they lost nor do I blame them for the loss. They don’t really hold that much power, or influence in terms of decision making. The same goes for Owen Jones. I blame people like McCluskey, Murray, Milne and Corbyn all of whom held considerable power and who ignored the evidence of public opinion on the leadership when it was right in front of them.
With @SouthamObserver pro mass migration memes you can guarantee Labour will be out of power even if it tacks to the centre. And I thought he wanted to win back WWC voters.
Clueless.
It's very difficult to see how Boris Johnson is going to avoid these themes. No crucial trade deals with the huge markets of India and China without migration.
Casino agrees that ther eis a shortage of supply of the people needed to work on major infrastructure projects in the UK. Thus, if we want to invest in infrastructure we are going to need to bring people in to do the work. It's not a political point, it's a question of logic.
Those skills don't exist overseas. That's what I keep trying to tell you.
It's the leaders, project managers and specialists that are the constraint.
Yes, sure, you could import lots of mass unskilled labour (which would be very unpopular, by the way) but it wouldn't get you anywhere.
You also need people who understand our construction, planning and environmental standards.
Obviously, I can't comment on the quantity or quality of the leaders, project managers or specialists, but do have knowledge of the practical, hands on tools side. There is a house building site near my work that can't get enough brickies for love nor money. I have friends who have been one man bands for years who are now trying to take on apprentices. If Johnson is serious about this, he needs to get more apprenticeships pronto, not just the fancy pants engineers. We'll still need overseas workers to plug the gap.
Exactly. Brickies, tilers, sparks, plumbers, plasterers, joiners and so on. We clearly need to invest in training these people up. But until we do - and while it is happening - we will need to plug the gaps.
I have just watched Novaro Media reporting on the loss of Blyth Valley.
The lack of self awareness of the girl with the microphone is astounding. She blames everyone for voting other than for Labour. But I particularly groaned at her comment that she had been to Stoke South on campaign. A seat Labour were never going to win. Why was she not in Stoke North where they might have had a faint chance?
These people are completely divorced from reality. And yet they are so self-righteous and holier than thou they simply cannot deal with their own huge failures.
I don’t expect young Labour activists around my age (or younger) to immediately ‘get’ why they lost nor do I blame them for the loss. They don’t really hold that much power, or influence in terms of decision making. The same goes for Owen Jones. I blame people like McCluskey, Murray, Milne and Corbyn all of whom held considerable power and who ignored the evidence of public opinion on the leadership when it was right in front of them.
They didn't ignore it. They didn't care about it. Their interest was only ever in controlling the party. Jones was well connected enough to know this. I agree, though, that many thousands of young Labour activists have been totally betrayed by the leadership. Hopefully, they listened carefully to what they were told on the doorstep.
I have just watched Novaro Media reporting on the loss of Blyth Valley.
The lack of self awareness of the girl with the microphone is astounding. She blames everyone for voting other than for Labour. But I particularly groaned at her comment that she had been to Stoke South on campaign. A seat Labour were never going to win. Why was she not in Stoke North where they might have had a faint chance?
These people are completely divorced from reality. And yet they are so self-righteous and holier than thou they simply cannot deal with their own huge failures.
They will still be dumbfounded at the result because "I don't know a single person who voted Tory on Thursday." Not understanding that many of their parents and grandprents will have gone out and done the dirty deed.
Social media allows them to stay in their silos of similarity without having exposure to alternative views. Block, block, block. Well, you can do that on social media. But there is a much bigger world where it doesn't quite work like that.
That Jeremy Corbyn article is just about as tone deaf as is possible. Not even a scintilla of contrition.
Far from his humble seeming manner Jeremy Corbyn is in fact an incredibly arrogant man. He knows he is correct and morally virtuous in a far more intense way than most politicians, who may all have a bit of messiah complex about them. Nothing could show him is wrong. Even when his popularity fades to what it used to be that will be proof he is right because the 'wrong' people are criticising him.
Burgon is on Sky repeating the excuses from Newsnight on friday by the losing candidate against IDS, the narrative is set and being baked in. Some twitter posters said this would happen, they are right.
Labour are facing the prospect of becoming irrelevant in UK politics, unless they can detach momentum
It has happened in Scotland and the earthquake last thursday has put them perilously close to the same in England and Wales, apart from London
If Boris does a SNP in England and Wales over the next five years, he could be looking at 15 years as PM
The SNP can always define itself against Westminster. Once we are out of the EU who will Johnson's bogeymen be? He controls it all.
According to my Facebook page....... which urgently needs a sort out ......... John Simpson says that Johnson is boycotting Today (not sure about Radio 4/BBC as a whole) because of the BBC's bias against the Conservatives.
Whereas in fact Boris is boycotting Today for the same reason he ducked Andrew Neil, Jeremy Vine, and the debates. Boris hates scrutiny, being held to account, and even hard questions. It is a pattern we saw in the Conservative leadership hustings and as Mayor.
Stll don't understand what's happened do you? The people who will be holding this Conservative govt. to account are the voters. In May 2024. Not unceasingly by some self-selected sub-committee of the Blob, whose only interest is showing their dislike of Conservatives to other members of the Blob.
Government by a disapproving media sucking air through their teeth and tut-tutting died on Thursday.
I do understand what happened and have just told you. Boris is ducking scrutiny because Boris has always ducked scrutiny, and because he can. Sophistry about media bias is just that.
I think Labour’s best bet for leader is Angela Rayner. I think the PLP won’t nominate anyone from the left of the party, it’ll be from the right to the soft left.
Good to see you back. I like Rayner too, she has the fight in her that is needed.
There is a real capacity gap in big civil engineering companies. I was in a meeting with our Cheif Executive the other week discussing our £450 million rebuild as one of the 6 approved "new hospitals". He intends to have our plans signed off sharpish, as there are simply not that many building firms capable of such projects, after the failure of Carillion.
All this spending, and no tax rises is going to make for a very Gordon Brown style budget. What could possibly go wrong?
I have just watched Novaro Media reporting on the loss of Blyth Valley.
The lack of self awareness of the girl with the microphone is astounding. She blames everyone for voting other than for Labour. But I particularly groaned at her comment that she had been to Stoke South on campaign. A seat Labour were never going to win. Why was she not in Stoke North where they might have had a faint chance?
These people are completely divorced from reality. And yet they are so self-righteous and holier than thou they simply cannot deal with their own huge failures.
I don’t expect young Labour activists around my age (or younger) to immediately ‘get’ why they lost nor do I blame them for the loss. They don’t really hold that much power, or influence in terms of decision making. The same goes for Owen Jones. I blame people like McCluskey, Murray, Milne and Corbyn all of whom held considerable power and who ignored the evidence of public opinion on the leadership when it was right in front of them.
But who encourages them? Who let them loose? Who will foster a grievance rather than ask some searching questions?
No people wont immediately get why they lost, but someone who immediately goes to blaming all those horrible people for not doing as they should and voting correctly, well, are they ever going to get it?
I hope the majority in Labour do end up getting it. There will be complexities to get but more of them need to grasp the simple first step, as some things are far from unclear
Well the Labour self relfection is going well, the Corbynite wingf.
I wrote about this yesterday. It is the obvious response to their success in the north and desire to build and consolidate that new coalition they have brought together.
Boris also has a weakness for large infrastructure projects from his proposed airport in the Thames estuary to the garden bridge to the rather more useful Crossrail and the Olympic investment (I know some of these started before his time but he strongly supported them). HS2 isw nailed on. Hopefully some of the new ideas will do some good and help to rebalance our economy.
The issue won't be the money. It will be the skills and availability of workers available to do it. If he pushes ahead regardless it will just inflate rates, wages and costs.
Right now there are about three major programmes I could be working on.
What is public/private split on these big projects? I remember reading that the new Spurs’ ground was employing every available electrician in London at one point, though I expect that was an exaggeration.
Very basically, the clienting is all public but the supply chain is all private.
One reason Crossrail is suffering is that there aren't enough radio or signalling engineers to commission the volume of works required in the time required - we're trying to do nine major stations at once, whereas we have the resources to probably only do two or three.
I am curious why crossrail didn’t open incrementally, one station at a time either slowly heading into London, or opening the major stations and filing in the gaps. I am sure they are engineering constraints that make this impossible. But if the project had started with say only 2-3 stations in London, they would have seen an ROI sooner. It’s how we build digital things.
I argued for a staged opening approach in the central section. That's what we did with the Jubilee Line.
TfL rejected it. They want to go for the full revenue of the whole thing asap (as their finances are desperate) but it's bloody high risk.
It that case someone was foolish, they really should have followed your advice.
I have just watched Novaro Media reporting on the loss of Blyth Valley.
The lack of self awareness of the girl with the microphone is astounding. She blames everyone for voting other than for Labour. But I particularly groaned at her comment that she had been to Stoke South on campaign. A seat Labour were never going to win. Why was she not in Stoke North where they might have had a faint chance?
These people are completely divorced from reality. And yet they are so self-righteous and holier than thou they simply cannot deal with their own huge failures.
I don’t expect young Labour activists around my age (or younger) to immediately ‘get’ why they lost nor do I blame them for the loss. They don’t really hold that much power, or influence in terms of decision making. The same goes for Owen Jones. I blame people like McCluskey, Murray, Milne and Corbyn all of whom held considerable power and who ignored the evidence of public opinion on the leadership when it was right in front of them.
The Labour membership elected Corbyn in the first place, and it's not like he was an unknown quantity when they did so. He was the Buggins' turn candidate of the Socialist Campaign Group, a fringe fanatic with a decades-long record of rebellion against the Labour whip and an unhealthy obsession with "liberation" movements - many of which were anti-democratic and very violent. Those who voted for him cannot simply be absolved of blame.
It was a catastrophic misjudgment, committed in a fit of rage against the electorate, and there is every reason to imagine that something similar will happen again this time.
There is a real capacity gap in big civil engineering companies. I was in a meeting with our Cheif Executive the other week discussing our £450 million rebuild as one of the 6 approved "new hospitals". He intends to have our plans signed off sharpish, as there are simply not that many building firms capable of such projects, after the failure of Carillion.
All this spending, and no tax rises is going to make for a very Gordon Brown style budget. What could possibly go wrong?
Guess you didn't manage to steer the conversation around to the other 34 "new hospitals"...
I've just been listening to Len McCluskey talking to John Pienaar on Radio 5. McCluskey is completely in denial, according to him the defeat was all down to Brexit, as well as the biased media attacking Corbyn, and Labour have actually won all the arguments. Pienaar was a tad sceptical of this argument.
I've just been listening to Len McCluskey talking to John Pienaar on Radio 5. McCluskey is completely in denial, according to him the defeat was all down to Brexit, as well as the biased media attacking Corbyn, and Labour have actually won all the arguments. Pienaar was a tad sceptical of this argument.
The narrative is running now, they are being consistant and one message. If there are any old school Labour people here you need to change this now otherwise you are fucked.
She's probably right that castigating those in the party simply saying they were wrong wont on it's own help, and that labels like Blairite are not useful as that's about the past not the future. I hope she's never called someone a Thatcherite.
That Jeremy Corbyn article is just about as tone deaf as is possible. Not even a scintilla of contrition.
Far from his humble seeming manner Jeremy Corbyn is in fact an incredibly arrogant man. He knows he is correct and morally virtuous in a far more intense way than most politicians, who may all have a bit of messiah complex about them. Nothing could show him is wrong. Even when his popularity fades to what it used to be that will be proof he is right because the 'wrong' people are criticising him.
As opposed to which other politicians? The messiah complex, the certainty of rectitude you condemn in Corbyn could surely be as easily applied to Cameron and Blair, or even Thatcher and Churchill.
I've just been listening to Len McCluskey talking to John Pienaar on Radio 5. McCluskey is completely in denial, according to him the defeat was all down to Brexit, as well as the biased media attacking Corbyn, and Labour have actually won all the arguments. Pienaar was a tad sceptical of this argument.
"If it's a Yes, we will say 'on we go', and if it's a No we will say 'we continue'."
A continuity Corbyn candidate will make the Labour shortlist, and the members will elect them by a landslide. Watch.
Labour are facing the prospect of becoming irrelevant in UK politics, unless they can detach momentum
It has happened in Scotland and the earthquake last thursday has put them perilously close to the same in England and Wales, apart from London
If Boris does a SNP in England and Wales over the next five years, he could be looking at 15 years as PM
The SNP can always define itself against Westminster. Once we are out of the EU who will Johnson's bogeymen be? He controls it all.
Ha. You really think they will struggle in that respect? Look at Trump. And weep.
The Democrats control the House in the US and there is a constitutional separation of powers. If he really wants to Johnson can smash up the civil service, mess around with the courts and abolish the BBC.
Yes it was, and hopefully it was vague enough he'll have calmed down and not take a wrecking ball to things. But we are at his mercy. It was a rare policy that was clearly only in there because of recent court losses.
Labour are facing the prospect of becoming irrelevant in UK politics, unless they can detach momentum
It has happened in Scotland and the earthquake last thursday has put them perilously close to the same in England and Wales, apart from London
If Boris does a SNP in England and Wales over the next five years, he could be looking at 15 years as PM
The SNP can always define itself against Westminster. Once we are out of the EU who will Johnson's bogeymen be? He controls it all.
According to my Facebook page....... which urgently needs a sort out ......... John Simpson says that Johnson is boycotting Today (not sure about Radio 4/BBC as a whole) because of the BBC's bias against the Conservatives.
I would say that the Today Programme needs to row back from being an abuse platform for apology-trolls. Then they may regain some respect. See their famous interview with eg Zaha Hadid.
Have other politicians been boycotting? I do hope so.
Labour are facing the prospect of becoming irrelevant in UK politics, unless they can detach momentum
It has happened in Scotland and the earthquake last thursday has put them perilously close to the same in England and Wales, apart from London
If Boris does a SNP in England and Wales over the next five years, he could be looking at 15 years as PM
The SNP can always define itself against Westminster. Once we are out of the EU who will Johnson's bogeymen be? He controls it all.
According to my Facebook page....... which urgently needs a sort out ......... John Simpson says that Johnson is boycotting Today (not sure about Radio 4/BBC as a whole) because of the BBC's bias against the Conservatives.
Whereas in fact Boris is boycotting Today for the same reason he ducked Andrew Neil, Jeremy Vine, and the debates. Boris hates scrutiny, being held to account, and even hard questions. It is a pattern we saw in the Conservative leadership hustings and as Mayor.
Stll don't understand what's happened do you? The people who will be holding this Conservative govt. to account are the voters. In May 2024. Not unceasingly by some self-selected sub-committee of the Blob, whose only interest is showing their dislike of Conservatives to other members of the Blob.
Government by a disapproving media sucking air through their teeth and tut-tutting died on Thursday.
I do understand what happened and have just told you. Boris is ducking scrutiny because Boris has always ducked scrutiny, and because he can. Sophistry about media bias is just that.
Is it your case that
1. media bias is not a thing which can exist or
2. it does sometimes exist, but not in this case?
And to condescend to specifics, do you think the decision to use the ice statue was the decision of a wanker, or of someone who was something other than a wanker? You may take into account the complete ineffectiveness of the ploy in answering this question.
I've just been listening to Len McCluskey talking to John Pienaar on Radio 5. McCluskey is completely in denial, according to him the defeat was all down to Brexit, as well as the biased media attacking Corbyn, and Labour have actually won all the arguments. Pienaar was a tad sceptical of this argument.
Len is repeating the initial holding line. I wouldn’t take that too seriously. More serious is the emergent timetable. If necessary the PLP will need to force a leadership election.
Just a question on the immigration/capacity argument - in relation to the non skilled workforce (notwithstanding CR’s point about skilled people). Is this a national issue or a localised one? Might there actually pent up supply in the North, despite all the massive projects in and around London? And if Brexit leads to unemployment in certain key industries, mightn’t new infrastructure be the perfect solution to that.
Mr. kle4, it's disturbing to hear some of them bang on (via Twitter) about media conspiracies and billionaires thwarting them, as if they're resistance fighters being crushed by corporate empires rather than advocates of a political party that failed to persuade the electorate.
But that sort of mental gymnastics does allow them to pretend they haven't lost the argument. They haven't been rejected. They've been denied any chance because of the evil media, the stupid uneducated voters, the influence of the wealthy, the unfair voting system.
Their faith remains intact, untroubled by contact with reality.
Labour are facing the prospect of becoming irrelevant in UK politics, unless they can detach momentum
It has happened in Scotland and the earthquake last thursday has put them perilously close to the same in England and Wales, apart from London
If Boris does a SNP in England and Wales over the next five years, he could be looking at 15 years as PM
The SNP can always define itself against Westminster. Once we are out of the EU who will Johnson's bogeymen be? He controls it all.
According to my Facebook page....... which urgently needs a sort out ......... John Simpson says that Johnson is boycotting Today (not sure about Radio 4/BBC as a whole) because of the BBC's bias against the Conservatives.
Whereas in fact Boris is boycotting Today for the same reason he ducked Andrew Neil, Jeremy Vine, and the debates. Boris hates scrutiny, being held to account, and even hard questions. It is a pattern we saw in the Conservative leadership hustings and as Mayor.
Stll don't understand what's happened do you? The people who will be holding this Conservative govt. to account are the voters. In May 2024. Not unceasingly by some self-selected sub-committee of the Blob, whose only interest is showing their dislike of Conservatives to other members of the Blob.
Government by a disapproving media sucking air through their teeth and tut-tutting died on Thursday.
Good post and it will take time for the Blob to realise how they have been sidelined
That Jeremy Corbyn article is just about as tone deaf as is possible. Not even a scintilla of contrition.
Far from his humble seeming manner Jeremy Corbyn is in fact an incredibly arrogant man. He knows he is correct and morally virtuous in a far more intense way than most politicians, who may all have a bit of messiah complex about them. Nothing could show him is wrong. Even when his popularity fades to what it used to be that will be proof he is right because the 'wrong' people are criticising him.
As opposed to which other politicians? The messiah complex, the certainty of rectitude you condemn in Corbyn could surely be as easily applied to Cameron and Blair, or even Thatcher and Churchill.
There is just one difference - I wonder if I could put my finger on it... ypu got it they were WINNERS! What's my prize?
That Jeremy Corbyn article is just about as tone deaf as is possible. Not even a scintilla of contrition.
Far from his humble seeming manner Jeremy Corbyn is in fact an incredibly arrogant man. He knows he is correct and morally virtuous in a far more intense way than most politicians, who may all have a bit of messiah complex about them. Nothing could show him is wrong. Even when his popularity fades to what it used to be that will be proof he is right because the 'wrong' people are criticising him.
As opposed to which other politicians? The messiah complex, the certainty of rectitude you condemn in Corbyn could surely be as easily applied to Cameron and Blair, or even Thatcher and Churchill.
Did you not see me include that most politicians have a bit of messiah complex about them? So I dont know what your complaint here is. Others being arrogant doesnt matter when assessing his level of moralistic arrogance.
The issue is scale of that complex when set against what theyve achieved and what the public think. Cameron, Blair, Thatcher and Churchill at least won to fuel any messiah complex. Corbyn's is unblemished despite never winning.
Labour are facing the prospect of becoming irrelevant in UK politics, unless they can detach momentum
It has happened in Scotland and the earthquake last thursday has put them perilously close to the same in England and Wales, apart from London
If Boris does a SNP in England and Wales over the next five years, he could be looking at 15 years as PM
The SNP can always define itself against Westminster. Once we are out of the EU who will Johnson's bogeymen be? He controls it all.
According to my Facebook page....... which urgently needs a sort out ......... John Simpson says that Johnson is boycotting Today (not sure about Radio 4/BBC as a whole) because of the BBC's bias against the Conservatives.
Whereas in fact Boris is boycotting Today for the same reason he ducked Andrew Neil, Jeremy Vine, and the debates. Boris hates scrutiny, being held to account, and even hard questions. It is a pattern we saw in the Conservative leadership hustings and as Mayor.
Stll don't understand what's happened do you? The people who will be holding this Conservative govt. to account are the voters. In May 2024. Not unceasingly by some self-selected sub-committee of the Blob, whose only interest is showing their dislike of Conservatives to other members of the Blob.
Government by a disapproving media sucking air through their teeth and tut-tutting died on Thursday.
I do understand what happened and have just told you. Boris is ducking scrutiny because Boris has always ducked scrutiny, and because he can. Sophistry about media bias is just that.
Our media has no interest in forensic analysis. It doesn't do "scrutiny". It does "gotcha!", aimed at topping the 24-hour rolling news for a while. The requirement to find constant controversy, to fuel outrage - it has helped poison the body politic. Bravo to Boris for taking it head on. It wasn't without risks - as the pompous wittering of Andrew Neil trying to fry the campaign showed. But the media better start understanding that they have been parked in a siding - and will stay there until they can run to a somewhat more objective set of standards.
"We asked, but a Government Minister was not available....."
Labour are facing the prospect of becoming irrelevant in UK politics, unless they can detach momentum
It has happened in Scotland and the earthquake last thursday has put them perilously close to the same in England and Wales, apart from London
If Boris does a SNP in England and Wales over the next five years, he could be looking at 15 years as PM
The SNP can always define itself against Westminster. Once we are out of the EU who will Johnson's bogeymen be? He controls it all.
According to my Facebook page....... which urgently needs a sort out ......... John Simpson says that Johnson is boycotting Today (not sure about Radio 4/BBC as a whole) because of the BBC's bias against the Conservatives.
Whereas in fact Boris is boycotting Today for the same reason he ducked Andrew Neil, Jeremy Vine, and the debates. Boris hates scrutiny, being held to account, and even hard questions. It is a pattern we saw in the Conservative leadership hustings and as Mayor.
Casino agrees that ther eis a shortage of supply of the people needed to work on major infrastructure projects in the UK. Thus, if we want to invest in infrastructure we are going to need to bring people in to do the work. It's not a political point, it's a question of logic.
It is a political issue though, because Boris Johnson has led people to believe that immigration will be cut almost to nothing and it will be possible for homegrown re-skilling to fill the gap. Homegrown re-skilling can never fill the gap in that timeframe, and the new immigration will simply be from outside Europe for reasons of trade imperative.
Yes, I know. Johnson made lots of promises he is not going to be able to keep. But I doubt if bringing people in to work on infrastructure projects is going to cause huge concern. We need them. Just as we need them in the NHS and other areas. Voters understand this.
I'm not so sure about that. I remember seeing some polling evidence, on here I think, that said that some core Tory voters remained hostile to immigration even with prompts that they would be looked after in hospital or in care by immigrants when older etc. He has a lot of difficult expectations to manage.
I think you need to distinguish between core Tory voters and a lot of people who voted Tory on Thursday. I really don't think most people mind immigration when they believe it is clearly beneficial to the country.
Of course, we should be investing money in training engineers, trades people, nurses, doctors, care workers etc. That is self-evidently correct. But right now we do not have the people we need, so we either accept no new infrastructure and declining service provision or we allow immigration to plug the gaps. I do, not think the Tories. new voting demographic will accept further decline and non-investment.
One of the other issues with getting enough engineers for infrastructure projects in this country is that engineers also have skills that are in high demand in better paying careers. Management consultants, insurance companies, finance companies and others, all want their problem solving and quantitative analytical skills and are prepared to pay for them.
Based on my experience as an engineer graduating about 10 years ago the traditional engineering employers can't compete on salaries and a significant number of graduates will go off to work in other sectors. Whilst the gap does seem to close a bit at more senior levels, by that point you've lost a lot of talent permanently to KPMG, Deloitte, McKinsey and others. It's not just training that's the problem, it's also retention.
That graph shows why the result of the 2016 referendum has been so important to so many voters, especially in the north of England and why politicians who thought they knew better were punished on Thursday. Voters are increasingly disengaged from politics and politicians. The LibDem election leaflets had all the barcharts based on the Euro election results, forgetting that most British people find the Euro elections as utterly irrelevant and in truth only 2 dogs and 3 cats bother to vote.
Time for the LibDems to come to terms with the fact that people quite like the idea of them repairing roads, running schools and other local services but wouldn't trust them to run the country with a bargepole. Thankfully unless Boris f*cks up, there will not be another Labour government until I am well and truly retired, if ever. We can have IndyRef2 in 2030 which will be a generation after 2014 and then we can have them every 16 years thereafter and make a national holiday out of them so people can have a piss up and some fun. The SNP should look to Canada and follow what happened in Quebec.
I would never have thought it ever to come to pass but a Liberal policy from the 1970s is surely the way ahead, namely a federal UK with a tiny Westminster parliament dealing with major issues like foreign affairs and strong national assemblies in the 4 countries dealing with all the things which really matter to most people in their daily lives.
Labour are facing the prospect of becoming irrelevant in UK politics, unless they can detach momentum
It has happened in Scotland and the earthquake last thursday has put them perilously close to the same in England and Wales, apart from London
If Boris does a SNP in England and Wales over the next five years, he could be looking at 15 years as PM
The SNP can always define itself against Westminster. Once we are out of the EU who will Johnson's bogeymen be? He controls it all.
According to my Facebook page....... which urgently needs a sort out ......... John Simpson says that Johnson is boycotting Today (not sure about Radio 4/BBC as a whole) because of the BBC's bias against the Conservatives.
Whereas in fact Boris is boycotting Today for the same reason he ducked Andrew Neil, Jeremy Vine, and the debates. Boris hates scrutiny, being held to account, and even hard questions. It is a pattern we saw in the Conservative leadership hustings and as Mayor.
Stll don't understand what's happened do you? The people who will be holding this Conservative govt. to account are the voters. In May 2024. Not unceasingly by some self-selected sub-committee of the Blob, whose only interest is showing their dislike of Conservatives to other members of the Blob.
Government by a disapproving media sucking air through their teeth and tut-tutting died on Thursday.
I do understand what happened and have just told you. Boris is ducking scrutiny because Boris has always ducked scrutiny, and because he can. Sophistry about media bias is just that.
Is it your case that
1. media bias is not a thing which can exist or
2. it does sometimes exist, but not in this case?
And to condescend to specifics, do you think the decision to use the ice statue was the decision of a wanker, or of someone who was something other than a wanker? You may take into account the complete ineffectiveness of the ploy in answering this question.
There is media bias. Most of it was anti-Corbyn. Media bias does not explain why Boris is ducking scrutiny; that is just this week's excuse. Boris was ducking scrutiny a decade ago as Mayor; he even ducked Conservative Party hustings FFS.
I have just watched Novaro Media reporting on the loss of Blyth Valley.
The lack of self awareness of the girl with the microphone is astounding. She blames everyone for voting other than for Labour. But I particularly groaned at her comment that she had been to Stoke South on campaign. A seat Labour were never going to win. Why was she not in Stoke North where they might have had a faint chance?
These people are completely divorced from reality. And yet they are so self-righteous and holier than thou they simply cannot deal with their own huge failures.
They will still be dumbfounded at the result because "I don't know a single person who voted Tory on Thursday." Not understanding that many of their parents and grandprents will have gone out and done the dirty deed.
Social media allows them to stay in their silos of similarity without having exposure to alternative views. Block, block, block. Well, you can do that on social media. But there is a much bigger world where it doesn't quite work like that.
I was told on Friday evening that "I've never met anyone before who could agree with Jeremy Corbyn." Same chap, when I challenged him about Boris lying said "I don't mind that!" Takes all sorts!!
If you want a sign of the revolution that has happened in Downing Street, look at those photos on the front of the Sundays. The ones of Boris and Carrie in Margaret Thatcher's study.
I've just been listening to Len McCluskey talking to John Pienaar on Radio 5. McCluskey is completely in denial, according to him the defeat was all down to Brexit, as well as the biased media attacking Corbyn, and Labour have actually won all the arguments. Pienaar was a tad sceptical of this argument.
Len is repeating the initial holding line. I wouldn’t take that too seriously. More serious is the emergent timetable. If necessary the PLP will need to force a leadership election.
The PLP is a wet dishrag, that much has been made obvious by their tame acquiescence to this disaster. Besides, they don't own the timetable or the rule book. That's the NEC, which is in the pocket of Corbyn.
I've just been listening to Len McCluskey talking to John Pienaar on Radio 5. McCluskey is completely in denial, according to him the defeat was all down to Brexit, as well as the biased media attacking Corbyn, and Labour have actually won all the arguments. Pienaar was a tad sceptical of this argument.
Len is repeating the initial holding line. I wouldn’t take that too seriously. More serious is the emergent timetable. If necessary the PLP will need to force a leadership election.
After emerging from the darkened room after 72 hours (not because I was disappointed Corbyn lost, I was not) the best way forward is not Starmer to resurrect Blair, or Long-Bailey to uphold the Jezza legacy. Titter!
Jess Phillips is as close to the answer as I can get, she could give Johnson a run for his money. Long-Bailey it is then! Well I suppose anything is better than magic grandpa! Good night!
I've just been listening to Len McCluskey talking to John Pienaar on Radio 5. McCluskey is completely in denial, according to him the defeat was all down to Brexit, as well as the biased media attacking Corbyn, and Labour have actually won all the arguments. Pienaar was a tad sceptical of this argument.
Len is repeating the initial holding line. I wouldn’t take that too seriously. More serious is the emergent timetable. If necessary the PLP will need to force a leadership election.
The PLP is a wet dishrag, that much has been made obvious by their tame acquiescence to this disaster. Besides, they don't own the timetable or the rule book. That's the NEC, which is in the pocket of Corbyn.
Yep this is going to be a stitch up with those clinging on or on their way off setting up people.
Long-Bailey and Burgon will be the one's they'll push for here.
I would never have thought it ever to come to pass but a Liberal policy from the 1970s is surely the way ahead, namely a federal UK with a tiny Westminster parliament dealing with major issues like foreign affairs and strong national assemblies in the 4 countries dealing with all the things which really matter to most people in their daily lives.
That was a big part of the reason I joined the Liberals in the first place. Seems to have vanished from LD policy documents, especially since the NE Referendum.
That Jeremy Corbyn article is just about as tone deaf as is possible. Not even a scintilla of contrition.
Far from his humble seeming manner Jeremy Corbyn is in fact an incredibly arrogant man. He knows he is correct and morally virtuous in a far more intense way than most politicians, who may all have a bit of messiah complex about them. Nothing could show him is wrong. Even when his popularity fades to what it used to be that will be proof he is right because the 'wrong' people are criticising him.
As opposed to which other politicians? The messiah complex, the certainty of rectitude you condemn in Corbyn could surely be as easily applied to Cameron and Blair, or even Thatcher and Churchill.
There are two separate issues which get blurred here.
There's (a) being sure you're right and (b) recognising that voters disagree and modifying your policies to the extent necessary to get a majority.
VERY few people (politicians or anyone else) respond to an adverse election (let alone a bad poll) by saying "Ah, I see my policies were not just unpopular but actually wrong and I need to rethink what I believe". To a greater or lesser extent, they say "In order to achieve most of my good policies, I need to compromise with the voters by adopting some things I don't really agree with".
Disagreeing with that, rather than a messianic strain, is what really drives Corbyn. He is very reluctant to even pretend that he's going to do something he thinks is wrong - at best one can get him to shut up and go along with it (keeping Trident, not abolishing the monarchy). In other respects, he feels one needs to simply argue the case for what one thinks (after proper discussion) is the right thing to do. If you win, great. If not, keep trying.
Most of us have a streak of "Oh well, if the voters want X, we'd better include it in our manifesto, so we can get a majority for our good stuff (and our Ministerial jobs) even though we privately think it's empty rhetoric/pointless/low priority/undesirable". A lot of the discussion on this forum is like that, and some here have openly advocated real cynicism - fake news, cunning rhetoric, and so on - in order to win. There's a case for it if you think it's crucial to win, but it's also something that drives public cynicism, and to quite a large extent I think that Britain is better-served by politicians who simply say frankly what they believe is right. If they're actually right, their time will come. If they're wrong, then it's a good thing that they don't win.
I've just been listening to Len McCluskey talking to John Pienaar on Radio 5. McCluskey is completely in denial, according to him the defeat was all down to Brexit, as well as the biased media attacking Corbyn, and Labour have actually won all the arguments. Pienaar was a tad sceptical of this argument.
Len is repeating the initial holding line. I wouldn’t take that too seriously. More serious is the emergent timetable. If necessary the PLP will need to force a leadership election.
After emerging from the darkened room after 72 hours (not because I was disappointed Corbyn lost, I was not) the best way forward is not Starmer to resurrect Blair, or Long-Bailey to uphold the Jezza legacy. Titter!
Jess Phillips is as close to the answer as I can get, she could give Johnson a run for his money. Long-Bailey it is then! Well I suppose anything is better than magic grandpa! Good night!
Lack of accountability is a central part of Boris Johnson’s credo. He has already done everything he can to avoid any meaningful questioning. Of course that’s going to continue.
That graph shows why the result of the 2016 referendum has been so important to so many voters, especially in the north of England and why politicians who thought they knew better were punished on Thursday. Voters are increasingly disengaged from politics and politicians. The LibDem election leaflets had all the barcharts based on the Euro election results, forgetting that most British people find the Euro elections as utterly irrelevant and in truth only 2 dogs and 3 cats bother to vote.
Time for the LibDems to come to terms with the fact that people quite like the idea of them repairing roads, running schools and other local services but wouldn't trust them to run the country with a bargepole. Thankfully unless Boris f*cks up, there will not be another Labour government until I am well and truly retired, if ever. We can have IndyRef2 in 2030 which will be a generation after 2014 and then we can have them every 16 years thereafter and make a national holiday out of them so people can have a piss up and some fun. The SNP should look to Canada and follow what happened in Quebec.
I would never have thought it ever to come to pass but a Liberal policy from the 1970s is surely the way ahead, namely a federal UK with a tiny Westminster parliament dealing with major issues like foreign affairs and strong national assemblies in the 4 countries dealing with all the things which really matter to most people in their daily lives.
There's a very interesting case to be made that the LibDems should withdraw entirely from Westminster politics and aim to become a party purely of local government.
It is likely to have a greater influence on people's lives if it is lobbying for changes from a base of many thousands of councillors, rather than a dozen MPs.
Labour are facing the prospect of becoming irrelevant in UK politics, unless they can detach momentum
It has happened in Scotland and the earthquake last thursday has put them perilously close to the same in England and Wales, apart from London
If Boris does a SNP in England and Wales over the next five years, he could be looking at 15 years as PM
The SNP can always define itself against Westminster. Once we are out of the EU who will Johnson's bogeymen be? He controls it all.
According to my Facebook page....... which urgently needs a sort out ......... John Simpson says that Johnson is boycotting Today (not sure about Radio 4/BBC as a whole) because of the BBC's bias against the Conservatives.
Whereas in fact Boris is boycotting Today for the same reason he ducked Andrew Neil, Jeremy Vine, and the debates. Boris hates scrutiny, being held to account, and even hard questions. It is a pattern we saw in the Conservative leadership hustings and as Mayor.
Stll don't understand what's happened do you? The people who will be holding this Conservative govt. to account are the voters. In May 2024. Not unceasingly by some self-selected sub-committee of the Blob, whose only interest is showing their dislike of Conservatives to other members of the Blob.
Government by a disapproving media sucking air through their teeth and tut-tutting died on Thursday.
I do understand what happened and have just told you. Boris is ducking scrutiny because Boris has always ducked scrutiny, and because he can. Sophistry about media bias is just that.
Is it your case that
1. media bias is not a thing which can exist or
2. it does sometimes exist, but not in this case?
And to condescend to specifics, do you think the decision to use the ice statue was the decision of a wanker, or of someone who was something other than a wanker? You may take into account the complete ineffectiveness of the ploy in answering this question.
There is media bias. Most of it was anti-Corbyn. Media bias does not explain why Boris is ducking scrutiny; that is just this week's excuse. Boris was ducking scrutiny a decade ago as Mayor; he even ducked Conservative Party hustings FFS.
And he won an 80 seat majority. He must be doing something right
I've just been listening to Len McCluskey talking to John Pienaar on Radio 5. McCluskey is completely in denial, according to him the defeat was all down to Brexit, as well as the biased media attacking Corbyn, and Labour have actually won all the arguments. Pienaar was a tad sceptical of this argument.
Len is repeating the initial holding line. I wouldn’t take that too seriously. More serious is the emergent timetable. If necessary the PLP will need to force a leadership election.
After emerging from the darkened room after 72 hours (not because I was disappointed Corbyn lost, I was not) the best way forward is not Starmer to resurrect Blair, or Long-Bailey to uphold the Jezza legacy. Titter!
Jess Phillips is as close to the answer as I can get, she could give Johnson a run for his money. Long-Bailey it is then! Well I suppose anything is better than magic grandpa! Good night!
We agree again! Phillips it is.
Probably not though. Perhaps Jezza will have a change of heart. Third time lucky?
Labour are facing the prospect of becoming irrelevant in UK politics, unless they can detach momentum
It has happened in Scotland and the earthquake last thursday has put them perilously close to the same in England and Wales, apart from London
If Boris does a SNP in England and Wales over the next five years, he could be looking at 15 years as PM
The SNP can always define itself against Westminster. Once we are out of the EU who will Johnson's bogeymen be? He controls it all.
According to my Facebook page....... which urgently needs a sort out ......... John Simpson says that Johnson is boycotting Today (not sure about Radio 4/BBC as a whole) because of the BBC's bias against the Conservatives.
Whereas in fact Boris is boycotting Today for the same reason he ducked Andrew Neil, Jeremy Vine, and the debates. Boris hates scrutiny, being held to account, and even hard questions. It is a pattern we saw in the Conservative leadership hustings and as Mayor.
Stll don't understand what's happened do you? The people who will be holding this Conservative govt. to account are the voters. In May 2024. Not unceasingly by some self-selected sub-committee of the Blob, whose only interest is showing their dislike of Conservatives to other members of the Blob.
Government by a disapproving media sucking air through their teeth and tut-tutting died on Thursday.
I do understand what happened and have just told you. Boris is ducking scrutiny because Boris has always ducked scrutiny, and because he can. Sophistry about media bias is just that.
Is it your case that
1. media bias is not a thing which can exist or
2. it does sometimes exist, but not in this case?
And to condescend to specifics, do you think the decision to use the ice statue was the decision of a wanker, or of someone who was something other than a wanker? You may take into account the complete ineffectiveness of the ploy in answering this question.
There is media bias. Most of it was anti-Corbyn. Media bias does not explain why Boris is ducking scrutiny; that is just this week's excuse. Boris was ducking scrutiny a decade ago as Mayor; he even ducked Conservative Party hustings FFS.
And he won an 80 seat majority. He must be doing something right
Yes, and that is the problem. Politicians will increasingly duck scrutiny because it works.
Labour are facing the prospect of becoming irrelevant in UK politics, unless they can detach momentum
It has happened in Scotland and the earthquake last thursday has put them perilously close to the same in England and Wales, apart from London
If Boris does a SNP in England and Wales over the next five years, he could be looking at 15 years as PM
Once we are out of the EU who will Johnson's bogeymen be? He controls it all.
According to my Facebook page....... which urgently needs a sort out ......... John Simpson says that Johnson is boycotting Today (not sure about Radio 4/BBC as a whole) because of the BBC's bias against the Conservatives.
Whereas in fact Boris is boycotting Today for the same reason he ducked Andrew Neil, Jeremy Vine, and the debates. Boris hates scrutiny, being held to account, and even hard questions. It is a pattern we saw in the Conservative leadership hustings and as Mayor.
Stll don't understand what's happened do you? The people who will be holding this Conservative govt. to account are the voters. In May 2024. Not unceasingly by some self-selected sub-committee of the Blob, whose only interest is showing their dislike of Conservatives to other members of the Blob.
Government by a disapproving media sucking air through their teeth and tut-tutting died on Thursday.
I do understand what happened and have just told you. Boris is ducking scrutiny because Boris has always ducked scrutiny, and because he can. Sophistry about media bias is just that.
Is it your case that
1. media bias is not a thing which can exist or
2. it does sometimes exist, but not in this case?
And to condescend to specifics, do you think the decision to use the ice statue was the decision of a wanker, or of someone who was something other than a wanker? You may take into account the complete ineffectiveness of the ploy in answering this question.
There is media bias. Most of it was anti-Corbyn. Media bias does not explain why Boris is ducking scrutiny; that is just this week's excuse. Boris was ducking scrutiny a decade ago as Mayor; he even ducked Conservative Party hustings FFS.
And he won an 80 seat majority. He must be doing something right
As PM he won't be able to duck. He'll be OK in the Commons for a couple of years, but then he'll come a cropper. Probably on TV, and quite possibly;ly over N Ireland.
With @SouthamObserver pro mass migration memes you can guarantee Labour will be out of power even if it tacks to the centre. And I thought he wanted to win back WWC voters.
Clueless.
Casino agrees that ther eis a shortage of supply of the people needed to work on major infrastructure projects in the UK. Thus, if we want to invest in infrastructure we are going to need to bring people in to do the work. It's not a political point, it's a question of logic.
Those skills don't exist overseas. That's what I keep trying to tell you.
It's the leaders, project managers and specialists that are the constraint.
Yes, sure, you could import lots of mass unskilled labour (which would be very unpopular, by the way) but it wouldn't get you anywhere.
You also need people who understand our construction, planning and environmental standards.
Obviously, I can't comment on the quantity or quality of the leaders, project managers or specialists, but do have knowledge of the practical, hands on tools side. There is a house building site near my work that can't get enough brickies for love nor money. I have friends who have been one man bands for years who are now trying to take on apprentices. If Johnson is serious about this, he needs to get more apprenticeships pronto, not just the fancy pants engineers. We'll still need overseas workers to plug the gap.
I know numbers of trained brickies who are now doing other things. They probably will not come back.
Labour are facing the prospect of becoming irrelevant in UK politics, unless they can detach momentum
It has happened in Scotland and the earthquake last thursday has put them perilously close to the same in England and Wales, apart from London
If Boris does a SNP in England and Wales over the next five years, he could be looking at 15 years as PM
The SNP can always define itself against Westminster. Once we are out of the EU who will Johnson's bogeymen be? He controls it all.
According to my Facebook page....... which urgently needs a sort out ......... John Simpson says that Johnson is boycotting Today (not sure about Radio 4/BBC as a whole) because of the BBC's bias against the Conservatives.
Whereas in fact Boris is boycotting Today for the same reason he ducked Andrew Neil, Jeremy Vine, and the debates. Boris hates scrutiny, being held to account, and even hard questions. It is a pattern we saw in the Conservative leadership hustings and as Mayor.
Stll don't understand what's happened do you? The people who will be holding this Conservative govt. to account are the voters. In May 2024. Not unceasingly by some self-selected sub-committee of the Blob, whose only interest is showing their dislike of Conservatives to other members of the Blob.
Government by a disapproving media sucking air through their teeth and tut-tutting died on Thursday.
I do understand what happened and have just told you. Boris is ducking scrutiny because Boris has always ducked scrutiny, and because he can. Sophistry about media bias is just that.
Is it your case that
1. media bias is not a thing which can exist or
2. it does sometimes exist, but not in this case?
And to condescend to specifics, do you ing this question.
There is media bias. Most of it was anti-Corbyn. Media bias does not explain why Boris is ducking scrutiny; that is just this week's excuse. Boris was ducking scrutiny a decade ago as Mayor; he even ducked Conservative Party hustings FFS.
And he won an 80 seat majority. He must be doing something right
Yes, and that is the problem. Politicians will increasingly duck scrutiny because it works.
Indeed so. They'll speak only to who they want and polarise matters even further.
My sense is that behind the angry Tweets and the full-scale denial in the press, the far-left senses it may be in danger of losing its grip. The scale of this defeat is so huge and so humiliating that there is no hiding place. The 2017 smokescreen has been erased. The elctorate has delivered its judgment on Corbyn and the Bennite nostalgia he stood for. It is a damning one. My guess is that a lot of wool is falling off a lot of eyes right now among normal Labour members.
The FBU is balls deep in Corbynism. They love him, and urged us all to love him too. I've had 5 weeks of Facebook posts from usually sane colleagues arguing like students about how Corbyn will lead us to the promised land. It's been strangely quiet since Thursday night. I'm pretty certain the FBU will want to stick with Corbynism.
I have the impression that the FBU are one of the TUs still controlled by the far left - the others being roughly UCU, NUT as was, and the rail unions.
Whenever the next lot of mad or leftie students want a riot or an occupation, these are the people who crawl out of the woodwork in support, and then McMao makes a speech supporting 'liberation' or similar.
There are two separate issues which get blurred here.
There's (a) being sure you're right and (b) recognising that voters disagree and modifying your policies to the extent necessary to get a majority.
VERY few people (politicians or anyone else) respond to an adverse election (let alone a bad poll) by saying "Ah, I see my policies were not just unpopular but actually wrong and I need to rethink what I believe". To a greater or lesser extent, they say "In order to achieve most of my good policies, I need to compromise with the voters by adopting some things I don't really agree with".
Disagreeing with that, rather than a messianic strain, is what really drives Corbyn. He is very reluctant to even pretend that he's going to do something he thinks is wrong - at best one can get him to shut up and go along with it (keeping Trident, not abolishing the monarchy). In other respects, he feels one needs to simply argue the case for what one thinks (after proper discussion) is the right thing to do. If you win, great. If not, keep trying.
Most of us have a streak of "Oh well, if the voters want X, we'd better include it in our manifesto, so we can get a majority for our good stuff (and our Ministerial jobs) even though we privately think it's empty rhetoric/pointless/low priority/undesirable". A lot of the discussion on this forum is like that, and some here have openly advocated real cynicism - fake news, cunning rhetoric, and so on - in order to win. There's a case for it if you think it's crucial to win, but it's also something that drives public cynicism, and to quite a large extent I think that Britain is better-served by politicians who simply say frankly what they believe is right. If they're actually right, their time will come. If they're wrong, then it's a good thing that they don't win.
So where does the WASPI bribe fit in with that? Where does nationalised broadband fit in? Neither of these are ideologocal pillars of the manifesto. Why can't he admit that these were policies that didn't work? (I'll freely admit I thought the former was gaining traction - clearly it wasn't)
With @SouthamObserver pro mass migration memes you can guarantee Labour will be out of power even if it tacks to the centre. And I thought he wanted to win back WWC voters.
Clueless.
Casino agrees that ther eis a shortage of supply of the people needed to work on major infrastructure projects in the UK. Thus, if we want to invest in infrastructure we are going to need to bring people in to do the work. It's not a political point, it's a question of logic.
Those skills don't exist overseas. That's what I keep trying to tell you.
It's the leaders, project managers and specialists that are the constraint.
Yes, sure, you could import lots of mass unskilled labour (which would be very unpopular, by the way) but it wouldn't get you anywhere.
You also need people who understand our construction, planning and environmental standards.
Obviously, I can't comment on the quantity or quality of the leaders, project managers or specialists, but do have knowledge of the practical, hands on tools side. There is a house building site near my work that can't get enough brickies for love nor money. I have friends who have been one man bands for years who are now trying to take on apprentices. If Johnson is serious about this, he needs to get more apprenticeships pronto, not just the fancy pants engineers. We'll still need overseas workers to plug the gap.
I know numbers of trained brickies who are now doing other things. They probably will not come back.
Friend of mine was grousing in the pub a week or so ago that he couldn't get semi/unskilled labour either. Not quite shopfitting, but similar. Got the guys in the middle, but not the ones to do the basics. Recently hired a dozen Romanians; shipped them over, put them up in a hotel. Cost, but got the job done. A no, not 'slaves' or six to a room.
They'll speak only to who they want and polarise matters even further.
They'll speak to the voters. They won't speak to Channel 4 news. Because - what is the bloody point? There's no floating voters in the Channel 4 newsroom.
Lisa Nandy has confirmed for the first time that she might stand as the next Labour leader.
Asked by Andrew Marr, the MP for Wigan says: "Well, the honest answer is I'm seriously thinking about it.
"The reason I'm thinking about it is because we've just had the most shattering defeat where you really felt in towns like mine that the Earth was quaking".
She says we've watched the entire Labour base "crumble beneath our feet".
She adds: "I think I definitely have a contribution to make" but the party needs to take some time to think about how to "take that very hard road back to power and who is best placed to fix it".
They'll speak only to who they want and polarise matters even further.
They'll speak to the voters. They won't speak to Channel 4 news. Because - what is the bloody point? There's no floating voters in the Channel 4 newsroom.
Funnily enough I can’t remember Blair being overly interested at doing interviews when he was in power. He certainly turned down election debates. I know he popped up on Frost/Marr a fair bit though.
We probably compare pretty favourably with a lot of countries with the conventional mechanisms we use to scrutinise our leaders, like PMQs. Of course some PMs have tried to play around with that a bit - Blair turning it into a weekly rather than twice weekly slot and Brown ducking it whenever he could find a good excuse, for instance.
I agree that Boris’ natural tendency is to try and avoid this sort of thing, but I’m not sure he is the very first one to do so.
Labour are facing the prospect of becoming irrelevant in UK politics, unless they can detach momentum
It has happened in Scotland and the earthquake last thursday has put them perilously close to the same in England and Wales, apart from London
If Boris does a SNP in England and Wales over the next five years, he could be looking at 15 years as PM
The SNP can always define itself against Westminster. Once we are out of the EU who will Johnson's bogeymen be? He controls it all.
According to my Facebook page....... which urgently needs a sort out ......... John Simpson says that Johnson is boycotting Today (not sure about Radio 4/BBC as a whole) because of the BBC's bias against the Conservatives.
Whereas in fact Boris is boycotting Today for the same reason he ducked Andrew Neil, Jeremy Vine, and the debates. Boris hates scrutiny, being held to account, and even hard questions. It is a pattern we saw in the Conservative leadership hustings and as Mayor.
Stll don't understand what's happened do you? The people who will be holding this Conservative govt. to account are the voters. In May 2024. Not unceasingly by some self-selected sub-committee of the Blob, whose only interest is showing their dislike of Conservatives to other members of the Blob.
Government by a disapproving media sucking air through their teeth and tut-tutting died on Thursday.
I do understand what happened and have just told you. Boris is ducking scrutiny because Boris has always ducked scrutiny, and because he can. Sophistry about media bias is just that.
Is it your case that
1. media bias is not a thing which can exist or
2. it does sometimes exist, but not in this case?
And to condescend to specifics, do you think the decision to use the ice statue was the decision of a wanker, or of someone who was something other than a wanker? You may take into account the complete ineffectiveness of the ploy in answering this question.
There is media bias. Most of it was anti-Corbyn. Media bias does not explain why Boris is ducking scrutiny; that is just this week's excuse. Boris was ducking scrutiny a decade ago as Mayor; he even ducked Conservative Party hustings FFS.
And he won an 80 seat majority. He must be doing something right
Might it not be the case his opponent did very many things wrong instead?
Labour are facing the prospect of becoming irrelevant in UK politics, unless they can detach momentum
It has happened in Scotland and the earthquake last thursday has put them perilously close to the same in England and Wales, apart from London
If Boris does a SNP in England and Wales over the next five years, he could be looking at 15 years as PM
The SNP can always define itself against Westminster. Once we are out of the EU who will Johnson's bogeymen be? He controls it all.
According to my Facebook page....... which urgently needs a sort out ......... John Simpson says that Johnson is boycotting Today (not sure about Radio 4/BBC as a whole) because of the BBC's bias against the Conservatives.
Whereas in fact Boris is boycotting Today for the same reason he ducked Andrew Neil, Jeremy Vine, and the debates. Boris hates scrutiny, being held to account, and even hard questions. It is a pattern we saw in the Conservative leadership hustings and as Mayor.
Stll don't understand what's happened do you? The people who will be holding this Conservative govt. to account are the voters. In May 2024. Not unceasingly by some self-selected sub-committee of the Blob, whose only interest is showing their dislike of Conservatives to other members of the Blob.
Government by a disapproving media sucking air through their teeth and tut-tutting died on Thursday.
I do understand what happened and have just told you. Boris is ducking scrutiny because Boris has always ducked scrutiny, and because he can. Sophistry about media bias is just that.
Is it your case that
1. media bias is not a thing which can exist or
2. it does sometimes exist, but not in this case?
And to condescend to specifics, do you think the decision to use the ice statue was the decision of a wanker, or of someone who was something other than a wanker? You may take into account the complete ineffectiveness of the ploy in answering this question.
There is media bias. Most of it was anti-Corbyn. Media bias does not explain why Boris is ducking scrutiny; that is just this week's excuse. Boris was ducking scrutiny a decade ago as Mayor; he even ducked Conservative Party hustings FFS.
And he won an 80 seat majority. He must be doing something right
Might it not be the case his opponent did very many things wrong instead?
A lot of people seem to focus on decisions made by leaders when in fact they are nothing of the sort. What has become apparent for ages is that the quality (and indeed motivations) of the leadership backroom staff in Labour is hopeless. Talk about “Boris” ducking Andrew Neil. He didn’t. His back office wouldn’t let him, he wanted to.
Politicians have to be driven to some extent by political principle. It is the backroom job to win, or at least to win as many seats as possible. And devise a strategy to deliver that. You get the sense that the Labour backroom staff were more driven by ideology than some of the politicians that they were directing.
The SNP can always define itself against Westminster. Once we are out of the EU who will Johnson's bogeymen be? He controls it all.
According to my Facebook page....... which urgently needs a sort out ......... John Simpson says that Johnson is boycotting Today (not sure about Radio 4/BBC as a whole) because of the BBC's bias against the Conservatives.
Whereas in fact Boris is boycotting Today for the same reason he ducked Andrew Neil, Jeremy Vine, and the debates. Boris hates scrutiny, being held to account, and even hard questions. It is a pattern we saw in the Conservative leadership hustings and as Mayor.
Stll don't understand what's happened do you? The people who will be holding this Conservative govt. to account are the voters. In May 2024. Not unceasingly by some self-selected sub-committee of the Blob, whose only interest is showing their dislike of Conservatives to other members of the Blob.
Government by a disapproving media sucking air through their teeth and tut-tutting died on Thursday.
I do understand what happened and have just told you. Boris is ducking scrutiny because Boris has always ducked scrutiny, and because he can. Sophistry about media bias is just that.
Is it your case that
1. media bias is not a thing which can exist or
2. it does sometimes exist, but not in this case?
And to condescend to specifics, do you think the decision to use the ice statue was the decision of a wanker, or of someone who was something other than a wanker? You may take into account the complete ineffectiveness of the ploy in answering this question.
There is media bias. Most of it was anti-Corbyn. Media bias does not explain why Boris is ducking scrutiny; that is just this week's excuse. Boris was ducking scrutiny a decade ago as Mayor; he even ducked Conservative Party hustings FFS.
And he won an 80 seat majority. He must be doing something right
Might it not be the case his opponent did very many things wrong instead?
Given the unpopularity of both the government and Boris Johnson, that is evidently the correct conclusion. But they’re far too high on hubris to notice.
There is media bias. Most of it was anti-Corbyn. Media bias does not explain why Boris is ducking scrutiny; that is just this week's excuse. Boris was ducking scrutiny a decade ago as Mayor; he even ducked Conservative Party hustings FFS.
And he won an 80 seat majority. He must be doing something right
As PM he won't be able to duck. He'll be OK in the Commons for a couple of years, but then he'll come a cropper. Probably on TV, and quite possibly;ly over N Ireland.
Keep an eye on PMQs. I expect pressure from Number 10 to return to a fixed half-hour slot rather than the hour we became used to; even more blustering to run down the clock; plenty of summits arranged for Wednesdays so that a stand-in stands in for Boris.
Mr. Cadboll, thanks for posting about that Liberal policy. I'd never heard of it, but it's somewhat similar to my own views regarding an English Parliament.
I think Labour’s best bet for leader is Angela Rayner. I think the PLP won’t nominate anyone from the left of the party, it’ll be from the right to the soft left.
What makes you think that ? Corbyn's favoured candidate, Pidcock has been vanquished. That means the ground is even clearer for MacDonald's chosen Long Bailey. She only needs 20 more for nomination. She's been on the TV loads. I reckon she's on the ballot and then, favourite.
They'll speak only to who they want and polarise matters even further.
They'll speak to the voters. They won't speak to Channel 4 news. Because - what is the bloody point? There's no floating voters in the Channel 4 newsroom.
They’ll speak at the voters. Big difference.
We've had a period of the media speaking at the politicians.
Funnily enough I can’t remember Blair being overly interested at doing interviews when he was in power. He certainly turned down election debates. I know he popped up on Frost/Marr a fair bit though.
We probably compare pretty favourably with a lot of countries with the conventional mechanisms we use to scrutinise our leaders, like PMQs. Of course some PMs have tried to play around with that a bit - Blair turning it into a weekly rather than twice weekly slot and Brown ducking it whenever he could find a good excuse, for instance.
I agree that Boris’ natural tendency is to try and avoid this sort of thing, but I’m not sure he is the very first one to do so.
Indeed; even Mrs Thatcher's favourite interviewer was Jimmy Young (a Radio 2 DJ; the equivalent perhaps of This Morning with Philip Schofield and Holly Willoughby today). Nonetheless, she did face Robin Day before elections, in the Andrew Neil slot. Here is her 1987 pre-election interview. https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2xkttj
There is media bias. Most of it was anti-Corbyn. Media bias does not explain why Boris is ducking scrutiny; that is just this week's excuse. Boris was ducking scrutiny a decade ago as Mayor; he even ducked Conservative Party hustings FFS.
And he won an 80 seat majority. He must be doing something right
As PM he won't be able to duck. He'll be OK in the Commons for a couple of years, but then he'll come a cropper. Probably on TV, and quite possibly;ly over N Ireland.
Keep an eye on PMQs. I expect pressure from Number 10 to return to a fixed half-hour slot rather than the hour we became used to; even more blustering to run down the clock; plenty of summits arranged for Wednesdays so that a stand-in stands in for Boris.
Yet the point isn’t made very often. Blair never did the Today programme. Didn’t do election debates. Would never have done Andrew Neil. Cut down PMQs from twice to once a week...
Was he a “coward”? It was just political calculation, quite probably something where the decisions were taken by Campbell and Mandleson, not Blair himself.
They'll speak only to who they want and polarise matters even further.
They'll speak to the voters. They won't speak to Channel 4 news. Because - what is the bloody point? There's no floating voters in the Channel 4 newsroom.
They’ll speak at the voters. Big difference.
Nope - they won't speak to those in the press whose minds are closed tight against them. For the same reason most people stopped responding to your Brexit stuff on here. No point. Like Thornbery you just don't get it.
They'll speak only to who they want and polarise matters even further.
They'll speak to the voters. They won't speak to Channel 4 news. Because - what is the bloody point? There's no floating voters in the Channel 4 newsroom.
They’ll speak at the voters. Big difference.
We've had a period of the media speaking at the politicians.
No more.
Boris Johnson is drawing his inspiration from the governments of Hungary and Poland. Britain is to have the veneer of democracy without any of the substantive apparatus required to make a democracy work. Independent scrutiny is the first thing that must be squelched.
It’s been very successful there for its operators so I can see why the model appeals.
My legendary modesty forbids me from mentioning I tipped Burgon at 100/1
Is he bacon, or is he a burger?
He is a flavourless meat-substitute, of a rather slimy texture.
"Try our newly formulated Burgon (TM), made in laboratories by vegan-friendly gluten-free Korean chemists. No calories! No carbs! No caffeine! No sugars! No taste! No odour!"
There is media bias. Most of it was anti-Corbyn. Media bias does not explain why Boris is ducking scrutiny; that is just this week's excuse. Boris was ducking scrutiny a decade ago as Mayor; he even ducked Conservative Party hustings FFS.
And he won an 80 seat majority. He must be doing something right
As PM he won't be able to duck. He'll be OK in the Commons for a couple of years, but then he'll come a cropper. Probably on TV, and quite possibly;ly over N Ireland.
Keep an eye on PMQs. I expect pressure from Number 10 to return to a fixed half-hour slot rather than the hour we became used to; even more blustering to run down the clock; plenty of summits arranged for Wednesdays so that a stand-in stands in for Boris.
I think the new speaker will take a more sensible approach than his egotistical predecessor.
I think Labour’s best bet for leader is Angela Rayner. I think the PLP won’t nominate anyone from the left of the party, it’ll be from the right to the soft left.
What makes you think that ? Corbyn's favoured candidate, Pidcock has been vanquished. That means the ground is even clearer for MacDonald's chosen Long Bailey. She only needs 20 more for nomination. She's been on the TV loads. I reckon she's on the ballot and then, favourite.
Yep, it would be interesting enough to see what the 'make-up' of the PLP remaining now is.
There must be not many 'Blarites' left. I would say its probably 50/50 soft-left, and more Corbynite/harder left now, but thats just a guy feeling.
It's going to come down quickly to who can get organised first, and if the 'soft left' can get some organisation and form around someone or a 'new team' they can push quickly.
My money is going on RLB for sure, as she will be pushed, and already is by many in the current shadow cabinet.
Labour are facing the prospect of becoming irrelevant in UK politics, unless they can detach momentum
It has happened in Scotland and the earthquake last thursday has put them perilously close to the same in England and Wales, apart from London
If Boris does a SNP in England and Wales over the next five years, he could be looking at 15 years as PM
The SNP can always define itself against Westminster. Once we are out of the EU who will Johnson's bogeymen be? He controls it all.
According to my Facebook page....... which urgently needs a sort out ......... John Simpson says that Johnson is boycotting Today (not sure about Radio 4/BBC as a whole) because of the BBC's bias against the Conservatives.
Whereas in fact Boris is boycotting Today for the same reason he ducked Andrew Neil, Jeremy Vine, and the debates. Boris hates scrutiny, being held to account, and even hard questions. It is a pattern we saw in the Conservative leadership hustings and as Mayor.
Stll don't understand what's happened do you? The people who will be holding this Conservative govt. to account are the voters. In May 2024. Not unceasingly by some self-selected sub-committee of the Blob, whose only interest is showing their dislike of Conservatives to other members of the Blob.
Government by a disapproving media sucking air through their teeth and tut-tutting died on Thursday.
I do understand what happened and have just told you. Boris is ducking scrutiny because Boris has always ducked scrutiny, and because he can. Sophistry about media bias is just that.
Is it your case that
1. media bias is not a thing which can exist or
2. it does sometimes exist, but not in this case?
And to condescend to specifics, do you think the decision to use the ring this question.
There is media bias. Most of it was anti-Corbyn. Media bias does not explain why Boris is ducking scrutiny; that is just this week's excuse. Boris was ducking scrutiny a decade ago as Mayor; he even ducked Conservative Party hustings FFS.
And he won an 80 seat majority. He must be doing something right
Might it not be the case his opponent did very many things wrong instead?
That explains a win, but probably not this big a win.
to quite a large extent I think that Britain is better-served by politicians who simply say frankly what they believe is right. If they're actually right, their time will come. If they're wrong, then it's a good thing that they don't win.
There's a lot to be said for that, but unfortunately it interacts incredibly badly with our electoral system, which provides the electorate with only two serious choices for the next government. A major party leader who advocates policies they believe to be right but which are unpopular is not merely producing an electoral loss for their chosen causes, but also blocking the 'slot' for that entire wing of the political spectrum, which doesn't even get a chance to test whether some other variation of that-wing policy might be the idea whose time has come.
There is an obvious solution for Johnson to the various infrastructure discussions above.
Britain is in rather desperate need to spend gazillions bringing our transport and communications infrastructure up to the levels of other modern major economies. But we don't have the technical know-how and we don't have the skilled tradespeople to actually build them.
So Johnson launches a new wave of City Technology Colleges. "We're going to Build it In Britain" or some Johnsonian waffle. Make it a patriotic task to not only build new roads and railways and deliver fibre broadband, but to incentivise people to learn the skills needed to deliver them.
And if Johnson is smart he will find a modern day version of "the White Heat of Technology" to warp this all together. Throw billions at wind power. Not for wooly environmental reasons. But because newly won Teesside and Grimsby seats are going to hugely prosper from this new industry.
A lot of people seem to focus on decisions made by leaders when in fact they are nothing of the sort. What has become apparent for ages is that the quality (and indeed motivations) of the leadership backroom staff in Labour is hopeless. Talk about “Boris” ducking Andrew Neil. He didn’t. His back office wouldn’t let him, he wanted to.
Politicians have to be driven to some extent by political principle. It is the backroom job to win, or at least to win as many seats as possible. And devise a strategy to deliver that. You get the sense that the Labour backroom staff were more driven by ideology than some of the politicians that they were directing.
That's a very interesting point which deserves wider consideration, and helps bridge the gap I was discussing between principle and pragmatism.
If the unlikely event that anyone lost a bet on overall turnout by less than 2,000 votes, you may have won it after all. The turnout in the Middlesbrough constituency was 2,000 votes higher than reported by most of the media because they're accidentally reporting that the Brexit Party got 216 votes when they actually polled 2,168 votes.
The SNP can always define itself against Westminster. Once we are out of the EU who will Johnson's bogeymen be? He controls it all.
According to my Facebook page....... which urgently needs a sort out ......... John Simpson says that Johnson is boycotting Today (not sure about Radio 4/BBC as a whole) because of the BBC's bias against the Conservatives.
Whereas in fact Boris is boycotting Today for the same reason he ducked Andrew Neil, Jeremy Vine, and the debates. Boris hates scrutiny, being held to account, and even hard questions. It is a pattern we saw in the Conservative leadership hustings and as Mayor.
Stll don't understand what's happened do you? The people who will be holding this Conservative govt. to account are the voters. In May 2024. Not unceasingly by some self-selected sub-committee of the Blob, whose only interest is showing their dislike of Conservatives to other members of the Blob.
Government by a disapproving media sucking air through their teeth and tut-tutting died on Thursday.
I do understand what happened and have just told you. Boris is ducking scrutiny because Boris has always ducked scrutiny, and because he can. Sophistry about media bias is just that.
Is it your case that
1. media bias is not a thing which can exist or
2. it does sometimes exist, but not in this case?
And to condescend to specifics, do you think the decision to use the ring this question.
There is media bias. Most of it was anti-Corbyn. Media bias does not explain why Boris is ducking scrutiny; that is just this week's excuse. Boris was ducking scrutiny a decade ago as Mayor; he even ducked Conservative Party hustings FFS.
And he won an 80 seat majority. He must be doing something right
Might it not be the case his opponent did very many things wrong instead?
That explains a win, but probably not this big a win.
Perhaps, it is subjective and unknowable. Just pointing out in a two horse contest there is no guarantee the winner performed well.
I’d be interested in hearing Laura Pidcock’s take. She normally has so much to say, but I don’t think we’ve heard a thing from her. I think her internet connection must have gone down about 10 pm on Thursday, and it’s not been restored since ...
Lisa Nandy has confirmed for the first time that she might stand as the next Labour leader.
Asked by Andrew Marr, the MP for Wigan says: "Well, the honest answer is I'm seriously thinking about it.
"The reason I'm thinking about it is because we've just had the most shattering defeat where you really felt in towns like mine that the Earth was quaking".
She says we've watched the entire Labour base "crumble beneath our feet".
She adds: "I think I definitely have a contribution to make" but the party needs to take some time to think about how to "take that very hard road back to power and who is best placed to fix it".
Good news. I think her softer approach, compared to RLB and AR, is more likely to be successful.
Comments
These would I think have been votewinners and more important highly effective if packaged and sold properly in the Labour manifesto. Instead, they went on broadband and railway renationalisation - which were, to put it mildly, neither.
Social media allows them to stay in their silos of similarity without having exposure to alternative views. Block, block, block. Well, you can do that on social media. But there is a much bigger world where it doesn't quite work like that.
Anyway, hedged my Leicester to be winners without Liverpool/Manchester City. Will leave things as they are unless another team looks hedgeable.
There is a real capacity gap in big civil engineering companies. I was in a meeting with our Cheif Executive the other week discussing our £450 million rebuild as one of the 6 approved "new hospitals". He intends to have our plans signed off sharpish, as there are simply not that many building firms capable of such projects, after the failure of Carillion.
All this spending, and no tax rises is going to make for a very Gordon Brown style budget. What could possibly go wrong?
No people wont immediately get why they lost, but someone who immediately goes to blaming all those horrible people for not doing as they should and voting correctly, well, are they ever going to get it?
I hope the majority in Labour do end up getting it. There will be complexities to get but more of them need to grasp the simple first step, as some things are far from unclear
It was a catastrophic misjudgment, committed in a fit of rage against the electorate, and there is every reason to imagine that something similar will happen again this time.
A continuity Corbyn candidate will make the Labour shortlist, and the members will elect them by a landslide. Watch.
Have other politicians been boycotting? I do hope so.
1. media bias is not a thing which can exist or
2. it does sometimes exist, but not in this case?
And to condescend to specifics, do you think the decision to use the ice statue was the decision of a wanker, or of someone who was something other than a wanker? You may take into account the complete ineffectiveness of the ploy in answering this question.
But that sort of mental gymnastics does allow them to pretend they haven't lost the argument. They haven't been rejected. They've been denied any chance because of the evil media, the stupid uneducated voters, the influence of the wealthy, the unfair voting system.
Their faith remains intact, untroubled by contact with reality.
Excellent. Can't wait.
The issue is scale of that complex when set against what theyve achieved and what the public think. Cameron, Blair, Thatcher and Churchill at least won to fuel any messiah complex. Corbyn's is unblemished despite never winning.
"We asked, but a Government Minister was not available....."
Based on my experience as an engineer graduating about 10 years ago the traditional engineering employers can't compete on salaries and a significant number of graduates will go off to work in other sectors. Whilst the gap does seem to close a bit at more senior levels, by that point you've lost a lot of talent permanently to KPMG, Deloitte, McKinsey and others. It's not just training that's the problem, it's also retention.
Time for the LibDems to come to terms with the fact that people quite like the idea of them repairing roads, running schools and other local services but wouldn't trust them to run the country with a bargepole. Thankfully unless Boris f*cks up, there will not be another Labour government until I am well and truly retired, if ever. We can have IndyRef2 in 2030 which will be a generation after 2014 and then we can have them every 16 years thereafter and make a national holiday out of them so people can have a piss up and some fun. The SNP should look to Canada and follow what happened in Quebec.
I would never have thought it ever to come to pass but a Liberal policy from the 1970s is surely the way ahead, namely a federal UK with a tiny Westminster parliament dealing with major issues like foreign affairs and strong national assemblies in the 4 countries dealing with all the things which really matter to most people in their daily lives.
Takes all sorts!!
The nibbles on the desk? Fortnums? Harrods?
Nope. The Co-op.
Jess Phillips is as close to the answer as I can get, she could give Johnson a run for his money. Long-Bailey it is then! Well I suppose anything is better than magic grandpa! Good night!
Long-Bailey and Burgon will be the one's they'll push for here.
https://twitter.com/BackBurgon/status/1205550317913432064
My legendary modesty forbids me from mentioning I tipped Burgon at 100/1
There's (a) being sure you're right and (b) recognising that voters disagree and modifying your policies to the extent necessary to get a majority.
VERY few people (politicians or anyone else) respond to an adverse election (let alone a bad poll) by saying "Ah, I see my policies were not just unpopular but actually wrong and I need to rethink what I believe". To a greater or lesser extent, they say "In order to achieve most of my good policies, I need to compromise with the voters by adopting some things I don't really agree with".
Disagreeing with that, rather than a messianic strain, is what really drives Corbyn. He is very reluctant to even pretend that he's going to do something he thinks is wrong - at best one can get him to shut up and go along with it (keeping Trident, not abolishing the monarchy). In other respects, he feels one needs to simply argue the case for what one thinks (after proper discussion) is the right thing to do. If you win, great. If not, keep trying.
Most of us have a streak of "Oh well, if the voters want X, we'd better include it in our manifesto, so we can get a majority for our good stuff (and our Ministerial jobs) even though we privately think it's empty rhetoric/pointless/low priority/undesirable". A lot of the discussion on this forum is like that, and some here have openly advocated real cynicism - fake news, cunning rhetoric, and so on - in order to win. There's a case for it if you think it's crucial to win, but it's also something that drives public cynicism, and to quite a large extent I think that Britain is better-served by politicians who simply say frankly what they believe is right. If they're actually right, their time will come. If they're wrong, then it's a good thing that they don't win.
Has anybody crated an excel spreadsheet of all the results?
If so is there a link, please
It is likely to have a greater influence on people's lives if it is lobbying for changes from a base of many thousands of councillors, rather than a dozen MPs.
Whenever the next lot of mad or leftie students want a riot or an occupation, these are the people who crawl out of the woodwork in support, and then McMao makes a speech supporting 'liberation' or similar.
A no, not 'slaves' or six to a room.
Asked by Andrew Marr, the MP for Wigan says: "Well, the honest answer is I'm seriously thinking about it.
"The reason I'm thinking about it is because we've just had the most shattering defeat where you really felt in towns like mine that the Earth was quaking".
She says we've watched the entire Labour base "crumble beneath our feet".
She adds: "I think I definitely have a contribution to make" but the party needs to take some time to think about how to "take that very hard road back to power and who is best placed to fix it".
I have nothing to say about this fact. Just accept it, and perhaps construct some kind of mindfulness meditation around it.
We probably compare pretty favourably with a lot of countries with the conventional mechanisms we use to scrutinise our leaders, like PMQs. Of course some PMs have tried to play around with that a bit - Blair turning it into a weekly rather than twice weekly slot and Brown ducking it whenever he could find a good excuse, for instance.
I agree that Boris’ natural tendency is to try and avoid this sort of thing, but I’m not sure he is the very first one to do so.
Politicians have to be driven to some extent by political principle. It is the backroom job to win, or at least to win as many seats as possible. And devise a strategy to deliver that. You get the sense that the Labour backroom staff were more driven by ideology than some of the politicians that they were directing.
Corbyn's favoured candidate, Pidcock has been vanquished. That means the ground is even clearer for MacDonald's chosen Long Bailey. She only needs 20 more for nomination. She's been on the TV loads.
I reckon she's on the ballot and then, favourite.
No more.
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2xkttj
Was he a “coward”? It was just political calculation, quite probably something where the decisions were taken by Campbell and Mandleson, not Blair himself.
It’s been very successful there for its operators so I can see why the model appeals.
"Try our newly formulated Burgon (TM), made in laboratories by vegan-friendly gluten-free Korean chemists. No calories! No carbs! No caffeine! No sugars! No taste! No odour!"
No point.....
There must be not many 'Blarites' left. I would say its probably 50/50 soft-left, and more Corbynite/harder left now, but thats just a guy feeling.
It's going to come down quickly to who can get organised first, and if the 'soft left' can get some organisation and form around someone or a 'new team' they can push quickly.
My money is going on RLB for sure, as she will be pushed, and already is by many in the current shadow cabinet.
Britain is in rather desperate need to spend gazillions bringing our transport and communications infrastructure up to the levels of other modern major economies. But we don't have the technical know-how and we don't have the skilled tradespeople to actually build them.
So Johnson launches a new wave of City Technology Colleges. "We're going to Build it In Britain" or some Johnsonian waffle. Make it a patriotic task to not only build new roads and railways and deliver fibre broadband, but to incentivise people to learn the skills needed to deliver them.
And if Johnson is smart he will find a modern day version of "the White Heat of Technology" to warp this all together. Throw billions at wind power. Not for wooly environmental reasons. But because newly won Teesside and Grimsby seats are going to hugely prosper from this new industry.