politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Whoever started the briefing about a “revenge reshuffle” ha

Good morning all.

It might be worth reminding ourselves of what the ex-MP, Jeff Rooker, now a Labour Lord, said about the current Labour leadership following the Paris atrocities.

"My party leader cannot be accused, like the prime minister, of misleading anyone. He has never, to my knowledge, agreed to protect the realm, the British way of life, or western liberal democracies – and he won't."

The reshuffle changes show that, more clearly than before. I can have no confidence that a Corbyn-led Labour party would seek to protect me and mine from homicidal terrorists or those who seek to attack this country.

That's clear.

And to those who will huff and puff and say how unfair this is, too bad. This is the man Labour party members chose as their leader. This is Corbyn's default instinct - to side with or excuse or justify those who seek to attack us, those who hate us. A man who cannot accept what McFadden said, who cannot accept what Benn said when he described the contempt IS have for Parliamentary democracy is a man who is not fit to be the leader of a political party in Britain.

Righto. Back to work now.

Scott_P said:

@SophyRidgeSky: I understand the reshuffle isn't quite over yet. Jeremy Corbyn will be making a few more changes to his junior shadow ministerial team

Before or after the summer recess?

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. StClare, it's more like when the super class star destroyer plunged into the second Death Star.

Not a Dr Who fan, but I'll take your word for it Mr Dancer...!

TGOHF said:

But "remainers" cant tell us what services and rates the bank we are in will be demanding in 3 years time and if we stay we are locked in for another 30 years.

That's certainly an argument which the Leave side can and should use, but I think it's politically quite a weak one. Most voters have known nothing other than membership of the EU for their entire adult lives, and the sky hasn't fallen in. The status quo will still be seen as the status quo, and it will be extremely hard, bordering on impossible IMO, to persuade people that leaving is not a much greater uncertainty than staying.

[For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not commenting on the validlity or otherwise of these arguments, but their likely political potency].

New Year's Eve Cologne attack 'left me scarred for life'

One woman described how a firecracker put in her hood has left her scarred for life.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35239347

Lovely bit of BBC spin in there, see if you can spot it...

Good overall summary here, before resignations of the junior shadows expected today but otherwise a fair overview:

http://link.huffingtonpost.com/view/524aa3dc3227b874ccf803013hl46.8v/503a29d1

The basic issue is where to draw the line in dissent, given the objective fact that most PLP members are to the right of both the leader and most ordinary members. It's not human and certainly not "new politics" to expect everyone to be permanently muzzled, but equally it's not a viable strategy to have Shadows openly echoing attacks on the leadership. This is an issue for all parties in our fissiparous times - for instance, how far can a Minister campaigning for Leave cast doubt on the value of Cameron's negotiations, without undermining both Cameron and the party?

The underlying message that Corbyn seems to be trying to draw is that it's OK to have a different view from him but feeding a direct attack on him is sacking material. Benn's approach exemplifies it - he's been perfectly clear where he disagrees, but without a hint of personal attack. I suspect that reflects the view of the majority of even non-Corbyn members, though there's no doubt that the reshuffle and its aftermath is more bad publicity in the short term. Mike is correct that it will somewhat strengthen Corbyn's position, because he's separated the hardline critics from the people who simply have a different view on specific issues - the danger for him would be if people like Dugher and the resignees got together with people like Benn.

TGOHF said:

Oh

Robbie Travers ‏@RobbieTravers 9h9 hours ago
Both Labour Ministers sacked, Pat McFadden and Michael Dugher, were members of Labour Friends of Israel.

Why should that be a surprise. Stop the War did once call for war to be declared on Israel. Only some wars should be stopped, apparently.

Following on from discussion yesterday about lost sense of perspective in the media and on twitter...Classic example on Guardian homepage at the moment....I kid you not...

Fairly big bit with picture about sexist star wars monopoly game (Day 2 or 3 of that story they are pushing). Directly underneath small bit on events in Germany.

Which is more important. Stupid board game or women being attacked by gangs of up to a 1000 men in middle of one of German's most famous cities. Board game every time.

TCPoliticalBetting said:

DavidL said:

Scott_P said:

@paulwaugh: I'm told there will be at least four front bench Labour resignations today

Surely one will be Andy Burnham. That fine, upstanding man of principle whose campaign manager was sacked yesterday. Incredible he has not gone already really.

Ho ho ho, a cracker of a joke.

Thank you.

@LabourCND: Labour CND welcomes the appointment of @EmilyThornberry to the Shadow Defence post and we look forward to working with her

@PolhomeEditor: .@KevanJonesMP preparing to quit, I'm told. Here's his interview in The House from November https://t.co/yqkLNBDvts https://t.co/17kxkg2YJ6

I do hope the Corbyn Project isn't going to founder on the rocks today.

It's been a highly enjoyable wheeze, and I've had full value for my £3 stake, but it would be a shame to see it all end so quickly.

NickPalmer said:

Good overall summary here, before resignations of the junior shadows expected today but otherwise a fair overview:

http://link.huffingtonpost.com/view/524aa3dc3227b874ccf803013hl46.8v/503a29d1

The basic issue is where to draw the line in dissent, given the objective fact that most PLP members are to the right of both the leader and most ordinary members. It's not human and certainly not "new politics" to expect everyone to be permanently muzzled, but equally it's not a viable strategy to have Shadows openly echoing attacks on the leadership. This is an issue for all parties in our fissiparous times - for instance, how far can a Minister campaigning for Leave cast doubt on the value of Cameron's negotiations, without undermining both Cameron and the party?

The underlying message that Corbyn seems to be trying to draw is that it's OK to have a different view from him but feeding a direct attack on him is sacking material. Benn's approach exemplifies it - he's been perfectly clear where he disagrees, but without a hint of personal attack. I suspect that reflects the view of the majority of even non-Corbyn members, though there's no doubt that the reshuffle and its aftermath is more bad publicity in the short term. Mike is correct that it will somewhat strengthen Corbyn's position, because he's separated the hardline critics from the people who simply have a different view on specific issues - the danger for him would be if people like Dugher and the resignees got together with people like Benn.

Makes perfect sense.

So how come the impression universally is that this has been, indeed continues to be the most cack-handed reshuffle in history?

It's not the substance (although McDonnell's explanation of just what a free vote means on R4 this morning will be a set question in logic papers for generations to come), it's the incompetence at execution.

Mr. 63, on that, I agree. Some people saying they'll vote Remain because they don't want to satisfy Farage baffle me.

Anyway, it seems Labour, a once proud party, is now being reduced to a Jezlamic state.

Mortimer said:

Looking forward to Corbo's 'condemnation' of N Korea!

Has he got round to saying anything about the latest ISIS video yet?

Scott_P said:

@PolhomeEditor: .@KevanJonesMP preparing to quit, I'm told. Here's his interview in The House from November https://t.co/yqkLNBDvts https://t.co/17kxkg2YJ6

He really should have resigned in protest at the appointment of Livingstone - but better late than never, I guess

Mr. L, it's staggering. Livingstone saying Blair's Iraq invasion absolved the 7/7 bombers of responsibility was bad enough.

I do hope Labour gets a bloody grip. It's not good for the country to have an electoral choice between the Conservatives and a Labour party that's a unilateralist apologist for terrorism.

DavidL said:

JonCisBack said:

Late to this but has Pat McFadden really been sacked for saying that terror attacks are the fault of terrorists alone?

Does Corbyn think WE are to blame?!

o:0

Yep. Not only did he express such an outrageous opinion, he apparently challenged the well known views of his leader in doing so.

Chances of this coming up at PMQs today? 100% I would say.

And we all know how those on the Corbynite Hard Left love to have their views challenged. They don't live in a bubble of self-delusion at all. No. Not one bit.

watford30 said:

blackburn63 said:

watford30 said:

blackburn63 said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. 63, Cameron absolutely hasn't done that.

It can hardly be a confidence matter if the Cabinet has a free vote. And he's going whatever happens.

Mr Dancer I think you underestimate the ego of politicians, most especially PMs. Dave will see an Out vote as complete humiliation, hounded out of office because of a referendum he never wanted.

I maintain he should be ok, but I'm far less certain than I was 6 months ago, who knows what may happen between now and the vote itself, the date of which Dave is dithering over.

Dithering = Forever putting off the reporting of supposed voting irregularities, and 'loosened' wheel nuts to the police.

I clearly hit the spot there for you to deflect it to a non story about Farage.

It seems the Dithering Dave meme has legs judging by the defensive response.

The supposed 'Autoroute Assassination' is a non story? Glad to hear it was all nonsense.

As for Dithering Dave, can you come up with a nick name for Osborne too, as I loathe him more?

Odious Osborne ? Or just plain Oddborne.

As Corbyn lurches to a new fiasco, Owen Jones posts cat videos

https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/684696776650190848

The level of disgust I feel for Thornberry has risen following this. Her role as shadow defence secy is untenable.
http://order-order.com/2016/01/06/shadow-defence-secretary-took-cash-from-law-firm/

"she accepted thousands of pounds in donations from a law firm which was condemned over false legal claims made against British soldiers. In December 2014, Thornberry took £14,500 from Leigh Day & Co. The firm was blasted by the inquiry into allegations of torture against UK troops, which found the claims were “wholly and entirely without merit” and based on “deliberate and calculated lies”."

kle4 said:

NickPalmer said:

Good overall summary here, before resignations of the junior shadows expected today but otherwise a fair overview:

http://link.huffingtonpost.com/view/524aa3dc3227b874ccf803013hl46.8v/503a29d1

The basic issue is where to draw the line in dissent, given the objective fact that most PLP members are to the right of both the leader and most ordinary members. It's not human and certainly not "new politics" to expect everyone to be permanently muzzled, but equally it's not a viable strategy to have Shadows openly echoing attacks on the leadership. This is an issue for all parties in our fissiparous times - for instance, how far can a Minister campaigning for Leave cast doubt on the value of Cameron's negotiations, without undermining both Cameron and the party?

The underlying message that Corbyn seems to be trying to draw is that it's OK to have a different view from him but feeding a direct attack on him is sacking material. Benn's approach exemplifies it - he's been perfectly clear where he disagrees, but without a hint of personal attack. I suspect that reflects the view of the majority of even non-Corbyn members, though there's no doubt that the reshuffle and its aftermath is more bad publicity in the short term. Mike is correct that it will somewhat strengthen Corbyn's position, because he's separated the hardline critics from the people who simply have a different view on specific issues - the danger for him would be if people like Dugher and the resignees got together with people like Benn.

Seems mostly reasonable. I think things have been taken more bitter than necessary or reasonable, but both sides are to blame for that, but if there are not mass resignations then clearly it wasn't seen as an all out offensive by the leadership even if some people moan.

But McFadden didn't feed a direct attack on Corbyn. He made a perfectly valid point - and was sacked for it.

And yet NP is happy with that.

@Maomentum_: Nothing wrong with my good friend @emilythornberry being former SWP supporter. Some of my richest lawyer friends support the SWP.

@BenMonteith: Think a few people may come to regret citing "some public criticism" as a compelling reason to remove someone. https://t.co/PvLVgHSoqs

@rustinpeace00: Labour spokesman claims Dugher was sacked for 'incompetence' on media management, then cites an article published after he was sacked. Gold.

NickPalmer said:

Good overall summary here, before resignations of the junior shadows expected today but otherwise a fair overview:

http://link.huffingtonpost.com/view/524aa3dc3227b874ccf803013hl46.8v/503a29d1

The basic issue is where to draw the line in dissent, given the objective fact that most PLP members are to the right of both the leader and most ordinary members. It's not human and certainly not "new politics" to expect everyone to be permanently muzzled, but equally it's not a viable strategy to have Shadows openly echoing attacks on the leadership. This is an issue for all parties in our fissiparous times - for instance, how far can a Minister campaigning for Leave cast doubt on the value of Cameron's negotiations, without undermining both Cameron and the party?

The underlying message that Corbyn seems to be trying to draw is that it's OK to have a different view from him but feeding a direct attack on him is sacking material. Benn's approach exemplifies it - he's been perfectly clear where he disagrees, but without a hint of personal attack. I suspect that reflects the view of the majority of even non-Corbyn members, though there's no doubt that the reshuffle and its aftermath is more bad publicity in the short term. Mike is correct that it will somewhat strengthen Corbyn's position, because he's separated the hardline critics from the people who simply have a different view on specific issues - the danger for him would be if people like Dugher and the resignees got together with people like Benn.

To quote Roger yesterday, you are living in Narnia. McFadden said that terrorists are responsible for their actions. Corbyn sacked him for saying this. This isn't a matter of policy. It's a matter of knowing the difference between good and evil. And your man is on the wrong side of that divide.

@STJamesl: Some shadow minister rumoured to be quitting are not answering their phones....

FrancisUrquhart said:

Following on from discussion yesterday about lost sense of perspective in the media and on twitter...Classic example on Guardian homepage at the moment....I kid you not...

Fairly big bit with picture about sexist star wars monopoly game (Day 2 or 3 of that story they are pushing). Directly underneath small bit on events in Germany.

The sound of one brand flapping...

oxfordsimon said:

kle4 said:

NickPalmer said:

Good overall summary here, before resignations of the junior shadows expected today but otherwise a fair overview:

http://link.huffingtonpost.com/view/524aa3dc3227b874ccf803013hl46.8v/503a29d1

The basic issue is where to draw the line in dissent, given the objective fact that most PLP members are to the right of both the leader and most ordinary members. It's not human and certainly not "new politics" to expect everyone to be permanently muzzled, but equally it's not a viable strategy to have Shadows openly echoing attacks on the leadership. This is an issue for all parties in our fissiparous times - for instance, how far can a Minister campaigning for Leave cast doubt on the value of Cameron's negotiations, without undermining both Cameron and the party?

The underlying message that Corbyn seems to be trying to draw is that it's OK to have a different view from him but feeding a direct attack on him is sacking material. Benn's approach exemplifies it - he's been perfectly clear where he disagrees, but without a hint of personal attack. I suspect that reflects the view of the majority of even non-Corbyn members, though there's no doubt that the reshuffle and its aftermath is more bad publicity in the short term. Mike is correct that it will somewhat strengthen Corbyn's position, because he's separated the hardline critics from the people who simply have a different view on specific issues - the danger for him would be if people like Dugher and the resignees got together with people like Benn.

Seems mostly reasonable. I think things have been taken more bitter than necessary or reasonable, but both sides are to blame for that, but if there are not mass resignations then clearly it wasn't seen as an all out offensive by the leadership even if some people moan.

But McFadden didn't feed a direct attack on Corbyn. He made a perfectly valid point - and was sacked for it.

And yet NP is happy with that.

Good point. Mostly but not entirely reasonable. Although I suppose technically it was a direct attack on Corbyn, but on a point personally I think was reasonable to make and attach him on and Corbyn should not hold such a position which, though he would deny it, the instinctual nature of his interpretations means he does, implicitly.

Scott_P said:

@MrHarryCole: Lisa Nandy: "I don't know why Pat was sacked.. I agree with what he said"

Oh dear, Nandy will have to be careful. People have been sacked for less.

I thought genie lamps were only supposed to grant Dave 3 wishes... surely he has used them all by now?

Lisa Nandy denies McDonnel line on Hilary Benn speaking from backbenches

Richard_Nabavi said:

blackburn63 said:

You see your point is a double edged sword, I'm far more concerned with what happens if we stay than if we leave. I have complete confidence in us trading freely with the rest of the world as we did for decades, I'm surprised you don't share that confidence in our govt.

I was explaining the difficulty which the Leave side has in persuading those who are not already true believers.

This is SINDYREF Revisited.

A complete failure of its proponents to countenance an alternative point of view and to leap swiftly to impugning the intelligence, motives and morality of those who don't 'get it'.

It didn't work then, its not going to work now.....

What McFadden said and what Benn said about IS, about terrorism generally, are going to be on every Conservative poster and ad and social media feed from now until the next election. Coupled with the fact that the Labour leader does not agree.

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. 63, on that, I agree. Some people saying they'll vote Remain because they don't want to satisfy Farage baffle me.

"Don't want to satisfy Farage" is not the way I'd put it. What I would say is that many of the most prominent Leavers are among the people I'd least want to have more influence in the country. Grayling, for example, no more appeals to me as Prime Minister than Corbyn.

Also, the idea that the EU issue is of transcendent importance is not self-evident to everyone. If Leavers want us to view it that way, that's part of the case they need to make. (This can also be a problem for Remain, of course, if people choose to use the referendum to kick the Government.)

Scott_P said:

Fascinating comment from McDonnell on DP
"Jeremy put a condition to Hilary that Pat McFadden had to go"
So Pat's sacking was part of Hilary Benn's negotiation?

Hilary loses his backbone. He had no salary to lose by resigning.
Spineless.

Miss Plato, assuming you believe Mao. May be true. May not be. The back bench line has been contested, after all.

MikeK said:

No this is all about you, Mr Nabavi. You want Britain to stay in the EU because you, and many like you, have lost faith in Great Britain as a stand alone nation and want this once great and advanced nation to become a cog in a European Federation.

LOL! I'm flattered to hear that it's all about me, even if I'm bemused to hear that I want Britain to become a cog in a European Federation.

MarqueeMark said:

Scott_P said:

Fascinating comment from McDonnell on DP

"Jeremy put a condition to Hilary that Pat McFadden had to go"

So Pat's sacking was part of Hilary Benn's negotiation?

"Look, Hilary, I need a sacrificial donkey......"

That rather depends on whether you believe McDonnell is telling the truth. Saying something like this is a good way of getting your opponents to fight amongst themselves rather than you. So it seems somewhat convenient. I don't - based on what I have seen - have a high regard for the essential honesty of people like McDonnell, Livingstone, Corbyn et al.

Or simply throwing a dead cat on to the dining table.

Plato_Says said:

Throwing each other under the bus? Ewwwww

Scott_P said:

Fascinating comment from McDonnell on DP

"Jeremy put a condition to Hilary that Pat McFadden had to go"

So Pat's sacking was part of Hilary Benn's negotiation?

@VickiYoung01: Shadow Foreign Office minister @SDoughtyMP has just resigned on @daily_politics #reshuffle

Scott_P said:

@VickiYoung01: Shadow Foreign Office minister @SDoughtyMP has just resigned on @daily_politics #reshuffle

Just in time for the start of PMQs

Fun

Is something actually up? Juniors exposing their seniors here, in backbone terms

Harry Cole ‏@MrHarryCole

Holy shit... junior minister Stephen Doughty just resigned live on TV.

Richard_Nabavi said:

MikeK said:

No this is all about you, Mr Nabavi. You want Britain to stay in the EU because you, and many like you, have lost faith in Great Britain as a stand alone nation and want this once great and advanced nation to become a cog in a European Federation.

LOL! I'm flattered to hear that it's all about me, even if I'm bemused to hear that I want Britain to become a cog in a European Federation.

You may not want it Mr Nabavi. But the status quo is not really an option, is it? Ever closer union is. And something like a European Federation is what that will lead to.

The choice is not really between Leave - with all the very many uncertainties and difficulties that will entail - and what we have now but between Leave and further integration.

None of what we have been told Cameron has asked for will put a stop to further integration. So if we Remain that is what we will get.

Scott_P said:

Fascinating comment from McDonnell on DP

"Jeremy put a condition to Hilary that Pat McFadden had to go"

So Pat's sacking was part of Hilary Benn's negotiation?

Greater love hath no man than this, that he lay down his friends for his life

Remember back to the days of the 'omnishambles'....what would this be called?

Scott_P said:

@VickiYoung01: Shadow Foreign Office minister @SDoughtyMP has just resigned on @daily_politics #reshuffle

and the farce continues - should be an enjoyable PMQs at least.