Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » All the Labour deputy leader candidates say they will serve

SystemSystem Posts: 3,967
edited August 2015 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » All the Labour deputy leader candidates say they will serve under Corbyn

Looking at the front page of the Independent on Sunday, I suspect most of the focus will be on Jeremy Corbyn’s plans to bring back clause IV, but the most interesting aspect of that front page for me is all of the deputy leader candidates saying they will serve under Jeremy Corbyn if he becomes Labour leader.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 15,516
    1st?
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,974
    Angela Eagle, virtue signalling..
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 5,721

    Angela Eagle, virtue signalling..

    Its interesting how that little phrase sums up so much of the left nowadays.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,139
    They'd be mad not to say they would serve under Corbyn, given the way things are going.

    However, it also occurs to me that should there be a successful coup, the person with the unenviable task of clearing up the mess would be the deputy leader as the acting leader. Angela Eagle wouldn't be up to that (to misquote Lloyd George, she's not bad as Mayor of Liverpool in a lean year). Watson might enjoy himself though - banging heads together and pretending he is in charge of events is the sort of thing he loves doing.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 15,516
    Given that Cooper and Burnham are trying their best to say nothing and Kendall seems to have given up completely, all the evidence is surely saying that Corbyn could actually be about to win this!!
  • We have a fascinating few years ahead of us, it seems: Labour ceasing to exist as a serious political party and the UK just ceasing to exist. In the great scheme of things the former will be no great loss; the latter, though, will be of major consequence. I wonder how we and the rest of the world will react when it happens.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 5,721
    Sandpit said:

    Given that Cooper and Burnham are trying their best to say nothing and Kendall seems to have given up completely, all the evidence is surely saying that Corbyn could actually be about to win this!!

    Didnt i read somewhere that the other candidates had agreed to take a break from campaigning for a few weeks for family holidays etc?

    If they have and allowed Corbyn a free run, then they utterly deserve to lose.
  • Sandpit said:

    Given that Cooper and Burnham are trying their best to say nothing and Kendall seems to have given up completely, all the evidence is surely saying that Corbyn could actually be about to win this!!

    There seems to be little doubt about that now.

  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited August 2015
    Catching up and I see Comrade Corbyn is thoroughly enjoying himself - Clause 4?!? And Derek Hatton can rejoin the fold.

    Well that's the ultimate Blairite fetish right there, and Jezza wants to resurrect it. Can't think of a bigger Jog On to the Progress segment of the Party.

    What will JC announce next - he's got a couple of days left... closed shops? Union bloc votes?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,139

    Sandpit said:

    Given that Cooper and Burnham are trying their best to say nothing and Kendall seems to have given up completely, all the evidence is surely saying that Corbyn could actually be about to win this!!

    There seems to be little doubt about that now.

    Bluntly, Corbyn has campaigned better, shown he wants it, been willing to speak out, and has taken risks in order to promote himself. He is well organised and has a huge number of enthused volunteers to make up for what he appears to lack in funding. He also has a highly seductive message, regardless of its merits.

    Kendall has done most of that, but unfortunately she has been telling Labour some hard truths that they appear simply unwilling to hear at this stage.

    Burnham and Cooper - the most charitable thing that can be said about them is that they don't appear to care who wins.

    This leadership election has been a humiliating shambles for the Labour party - made worse by the fact that many people within the party appear to be living in the naive hope that it is galvanising politics in their favour.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 15,410
    Plato said:

    Catching up and I see Comrade Corbyn is thoroughly enjoying himself - Clause 4?!? And Derek Hatton can rejoin the fold.

    Well that's the ultimate Blairite fetish right there, and Jezza wants to resurrect it. Can't think of a bigger Jog On to the Progress segment of the Party.

    What will JC announce next - he's got a couple of days left... closed shops? Union bloc votes?

    What would UNITE most like to hear?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,139
    Plato said:

    Catching up and I see Comrade Corbyn is thoroughly enjoying himself - Clause 4?!? And Derek Hatton can rejoin the fold.

    Well that's the ultimate Blairite fetish right there, and Jezza wants to resurrect it. Can't think of a bigger Jog On to the Progress segment of the Party.

    What will JC announce next - he's got a couple of days left... closed shops? Union bloc votes?

    If he were to announce an en bloc repeal of the union legislation enacted since 1980, that wouldn't be a huge surprise. But would he make a pledge about secret strike balloting - or does he not realise how important that is?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 15,410
    "this is proving to be a fascinating election and very difficult to predict."

    I predict that by September, a sizeable minority of the Labour Party will be in despair that the membership did/didn't vote for Jeremy as leader....
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 5,721

    Sandpit said:

    Given that Cooper and Burnham are trying their best to say nothing and Kendall seems to have given up completely, all the evidence is surely saying that Corbyn could actually be about to win this!!

    There seems to be little doubt about that now.

    Serious question SO, if corbyn wins, do you think your own politics view will be closer to him, or to the tories?
  • ydoethur said:

    Sandpit said:

    Given that Cooper and Burnham are trying their best to say nothing and Kendall seems to have given up completely, all the evidence is surely saying that Corbyn could actually be about to win this!!

    There seems to be little doubt about that now.

    Bluntly, Corbyn has campaigned better, shown he wants it, been willing to speak out, and has taken risks in order to promote himself. He is well organised and has a huge number of enthused volunteers to make up for what he appears to lack in funding. He also has a highly seductive message, regardless of its merits.

    Kendall has done most of that, but unfortunately she has been telling Labour some hard truths that they appear simply unwilling to hear at this stage.

    Burnham and Cooper - the most charitable thing that can be said about them is that they don't appear to care who wins.

    This leadership election has been a humiliating shambles for the Labour party - made worse by the fact that many people within the party appear to be living in the naive hope that it is galvanising politics in their favour.

    As I have been saying for a while now, Labour is the Stupid Party. Everything you say is correct. And the overall effect will be to ensure everything all Labour politicians say they want to achieve does not happen.

  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I think it's quite a lot to do with the Right feeling more confident and calling out ThinkOfTheChildreeeen!!! and WASCIST.

    Gordon's Legacy has the Left stuck with no money to spend, and a lot of empty rhetoric/posturing. The virtue signalling that's occupied so much of the Left's language of superiority is now identified for what it is.

    A good thing it is too.

    Angela Eagle, virtue signalling..

    Its interesting how that little phrase sums up so much of the left nowadays.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,139
    edited August 2015
    Typical of the problem: here's Cooper saying why she wants to win:

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/08/yvette-cooper-interview-labour-party-strong-extreme

    The one small thing she forgot to say is what she would do if she did win. 'Vote for me, I'm a woman and I want to be Prime Minister' is not really a convincing pitch.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 15,516
    ydoethur said:

    Sandpit said:

    Given that Cooper and Burnham are trying their best to say nothing and Kendall seems to have given up completely, all the evidence is surely saying that Corbyn could actually be about to win this!!

    There seems to be little doubt about that now.

    Bluntly, Corbyn has campaigned better, shown he wants it, been willing to speak out, and has taken risks in order to promote himself. He is well organised and has a huge number of enthused volunteers to make up for what he appears to lack in funding. He also has a highly seductive message, regardless of its merits.

    Kendall has done most of that, but unfortunately she has been telling Labour some hard truths that they appear simply unwilling to hear at this stage.

    Burnham and Cooper - the most charitable thing that can be said about them is that they don't appear to care who wins.

    This leadership election has been a humiliating shambles for the Labour party - made worse by the fact that many people within the party appear to be living in the naive hope that it is galvanising politics in their favour.
    Agree with every word of that. Sadly.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966

    ydoethur said:

    Sandpit said:

    Given that Cooper and Burnham are trying their best to say nothing and Kendall seems to have given up completely, all the evidence is surely saying that Corbyn could actually be about to win this!!

    There seems to be little doubt about that now.

    Bluntly, Corbyn has campaigned better, shown he wants it, been willing to speak out, and has taken risks in order to promote himself. He is well organised and has a huge number of enthused volunteers to make up for what he appears to lack in funding. He also has a highly seductive message, regardless of its merits.

    Kendall has done most of that, but unfortunately she has been telling Labour some hard truths that they appear simply unwilling to hear at this stage.

    Burnham and Cooper - the most charitable thing that can be said about them is that they don't appear to care who wins.

    This leadership election has been a humiliating shambles for the Labour party - made worse by the fact that many people within the party appear to be living in the naive hope that it is galvanising politics in their favour.

    As I have been saying for a while now, Labour is the Stupid Party. Everything you say is correct. And the overall effect will be to ensure everything all Labour politicians say they want to achieve does not happen.

    Fear not, Mr 124 will be along shortly to tell you how the public will have moved decisively to the left by 2020 and PM Corbyn will lead the Labour Party to a famous victory.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    O_o
    Kids Company 'paid private school fees for daughter of toppled boss's chauffeur': Charity chiefs launch probe into claim pupil was bankrolled

    Kids Company closed this week amid claims donations were misspent
    Among allegations is one about Camila Batmanghelidjh's chauffeur
    Ex employees claim charity paid for Jeton Cavolli's daughter's school fees
    She is said to have attended £28,000-a-year Dauntsey's School in Wiltshire


    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3190596/Kids-Company-paid-private-school-fees-daughter-toppled-boss-s-chauffeur-Charity-chiefs-launch-probe-claim-pupil-bankrolled.html#ixzz3iIS5T5eR
  • Sandpit said:

    Given that Cooper and Burnham are trying their best to say nothing and Kendall seems to have given up completely, all the evidence is surely saying that Corbyn could actually be about to win this!!

    There seems to be little doubt about that now.

    Serious question SO, if corbyn wins, do you think your own politics view will be closer to him, or to the tories?

    Neither. I will be stuck. I have a very simple philosophy: capitalism works, but it only works sustainably for the majority when there is a strong state (ie, an elected government) that recognises its inherent flaws, works to control its excesses and ensures equality of opportunity through a degree of wealth redistribution. I won't get that from either the Tories or Corbyn Labour. What I will get from the Tories, though, is a degree of pragmatism and the possibility of a centre left revival. Under Corbyn, I get total destruction.

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 15,410
    edited August 2015

    Angela Eagle, virtue signalling..

    Angela Eagle, drowning not virtue signalling....
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,139
    edited August 2015

    Sandpit said:

    Given that Cooper and Burnham are trying their best to say nothing and Kendall seems to have given up completely, all the evidence is surely saying that Corbyn could actually be about to win this!!

    There seems to be little doubt about that now.

    Serious question SO, if corbyn wins, do you think your own politics view will be closer to him, or to the tories?

    Neither. I will be stuck. I have a very simple philosophy: capitalism works, but it only works sustainably for the majority when there is a strong state (ie, an elected government) that recognises its inherent flaws, works to control its excesses and ensures equality of opportunity through a degree of wealth redistribution. I won't get that from either the Tories or Corbyn Labour. What I will get from the Tories, though, is a degree of pragmatism and the possibility of a centre left revival. Under Corbyn, I get total destruction.

    You're not going to be alone either SO. It's going to be extremely painful for the many Labour MPs who share your views. If Corbyn wins I wouldn't be surprised to see some really peculiar contortions from them as they try to work out whether they are better served staying and trying to salvage what they can, or leaving. That's assuming of course, following @david_herdson's piece yesterday, that they are not slung out.

    EDIT: some contortions like this uncharacteristically muddled piece from Frank Field:

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/09/frank-field-jeremy-corbyn-immigration-nhs-tough-questions
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 15,516
    Plato said:

    O_o

    Kids Company 'paid private school fees for daughter of toppled boss's chauffeur': Charity chiefs launch probe into claim pupil was bankrolled

    Kids Company closed this week amid claims donations were misspent
    Among allegations is one about Camila Batmanghelidjh's chauffeur
    Ex employees claim charity paid for Jeton Cavolli's daughter's school fees
    She is said to have attended £28,000-a-year Dauntsey's School in Wiltshire


    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3190596/Kids-Company-paid-private-school-fees-daughter-toppled-boss-s-chauffeur-Charity-chiefs-launch-probe-claim-pupil-bankrolled.html#ixzz3iIS5T5eR
    If true as written (rather than an embellishment on the part of the newspaper or their source) that is surely a clear cut case of fraud?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 40,070
    edited August 2015
    Good morning, everyone.

    Miss Plato, sounds like a negative media spiral to me. Ahem.

    After researching to find out what Clause 4 was (I'd heard of it being abolished around 1994 or so, but not what it actually was) it appears to be communism.

    This is extremely bad news. The UK needs an active, competent opposition which isn't Syriza with a beard.

    Edited extra bit: and don't underestimate the damage this'll do even if he's leader but never has a shot at being PM. Miliband's idiotic energy price freeze harmed industry, and this would be far worse.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 15,516
    ydoethur said:

    Sandpit said:

    Given that Cooper and Burnham are trying their best to say nothing and Kendall seems to have given up completely, all the evidence is surely saying that Corbyn could actually be about to win this!!

    There seems to be little doubt about that now.

    Serious question SO, if corbyn wins, do you think your own politics view will be closer to him, or to the tories?

    Neither. I will be stuck. I have a very simple philosophy: capitalism works, but it only works sustainably for the majority when there is a strong state (ie, an elected government) that recognises its inherent flaws, works to control its excesses and ensures equality of opportunity through a degree of wealth redistribution. I won't get that from either the Tories or Corbyn Labour. What I will get from the Tories, though, is a degree of pragmatism and the possibility of a centre left revival. Under Corbyn, I get total destruction.

    You're not going to be alone either SO.
    +1 for that. A choice of two non-bonkers parties to vote for in 2020 would be a good start, that won't be the case if Corbyn is elected.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited August 2015
    Len's Manifesto... well he won't need to do this if Jezza wins. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/unite-union-boss-len-mccluskey-threatens-to-launch-party-to-rival-labour-9231266.html
    “I’ve always taken the traditional position of being opposed to PR,” Mr McCluskey said. “That’s because I thought that Labour would never get into power [under PR] and we’d never get a socialist Valhalla. “I’ve given up on my socialist Valhalla, so I’m now rethinking my position on PR. If a new party emerged, a new Workers’ Party, then you may well find that I’m in favour of PR.”

    Among the ideas he said would command popular support are nationalisation of the train operating companies and a sharp increase in the national minimum wage. It is understood that the provisional plan in the event of an election defeat would involve Unite, the country’s biggest union, and the GMB, the third-biggest union, cutting their ties with Labour simultaneously. They would join forces with the RMT rail union – which disaffiliated under the leadership of the late Bob Crow. The combined membership of the three unions is almost 2.1 million.

    “Within Unite’s rules we are affiliated to the Labour Party and cannot give financial support to any other party, so the rules would have to be changed,” he said.

    “Can I ever envisage a rules conference voting to disaffiliate from Labour? I can, and that’s a challenge to Ed Miliband. Because I believe the Labour Party is at a cross roads. Labour has to demonstrate that it is our voice.

    Plato said:

    Catching up and I see Comrade Corbyn is thoroughly enjoying himself - Clause 4?!? And Derek Hatton can rejoin the fold.

    Well that's the ultimate Blairite fetish right there, and Jezza wants to resurrect it. Can't think of a bigger Jog On to the Progress segment of the Party.

    What will JC announce next - he's got a couple of days left... closed shops? Union bloc votes?

    What would UNITE most like to hear?
  • Sandpit said:

    Given that Cooper and Burnham are trying their best to say nothing and Kendall seems to have given up completely, all the evidence is surely saying that Corbyn could actually be about to win this!!

    There seems to be little doubt about that now.

    Serious question SO, if corbyn wins, do you think your own politics view will be closer to him, or to the tories?

    Neither. I will be stuck. I have a very simple philosophy: capitalism works, but it only works sustainably for the majority when there is a strong state (ie, an elected government) that recognises its inherent flaws, works to control its excesses and ensures equality of opportunity through a degree of wealth redistribution. I won't get that from either the Tories or Corbyn Labour. What I will get from the Tories, though, is a degree of pragmatism and the possibility of a centre left revival. Under Corbyn, I get total destruction.

    I fail to see any contradiction between your philosophy and current Tory practice.
  • ydoethur said:

    Sandpit said:

    Given that Cooper and Burnham are trying their best to say nothing and Kendall seems to have given up completely, all the evidence is surely saying that Corbyn could actually be about to win this!!

    There seems to be little doubt about that now.

    Serious question SO, if corbyn wins, do you think your own politics view will be closer to him, or to the tories?

    Neither. I will be stuck. I have a very simple philosophy: capitalism works, but it only works sustainably for the majority when there is a strong state (ie, an elected government) that recognises its inherent flaws, works to control its excesses and ensures equality of opportunity through a degree of wealth redistribution. I won't get that from either the Tories or Corbyn Labour. What I will get from the Tories, though, is a degree of pragmatism and the possibility of a centre left revival. Under Corbyn, I get total destruction.

    You're not going to be alone either SO. It's going to be extremely painful for the many Labour MPs who share your views. If Corbyn wins I wouldn't be surprised to see some really peculiar contortions from them as they try to work out whether they are better served staying and trying to salvage what they can, or leaving. That's assuming of course, following @david_herdson's piece yesterday, that they are not slung out.

    EDIT: some contortions like this uncharacteristically muddled piece from Frank Field:

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/09/frank-field-jeremy-corbyn-immigration-nhs-tough-questions

    Politics is not my career and thankfully my petsonal situation is such that whoever is in power makes little practical difference, so I imagine that once Corbyn gets in I'll just watch and wait and end up being proved right (along with many, many others) about how damaging to Labour he ends up being.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,139


    After researching to find out what Clause 4 was (I'd heard of it being abolished around 1994 or so, but not what it actually was) it appears to be communism.

    This is extremely bad news. The UK needs an active, competent opposition which isn't Syriza with a beard.

    A slight exaggeration re clause 4 Mr Dancer. It's full-blooded socialism and the destruction of private enterprise, but it isn't calling for the abolition of money (if anything, rather the reverse).

    The second point I completely agree with, along with @Sandpit's point. Democracy can't function if there is effectively only one party. We've been trying that since 1979 and it hasn't worked well - in fact, it's been hugely damaging to the entire political system and the very fabric of our country.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I saw a clip of her on Sky earlier and didn't notice a thing she said either. I honestly can't think of a single policy she's advocated as part of her campaign.
    ydoethur said:

    Typical of the problem: here's Cooper saying why she wants to win:

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/08/yvette-cooper-interview-labour-party-strong-extreme

    The one small thing she forgot to say is what she would do if she did win. 'Vote for me, I'm a woman and I want to be Prime Minister' is not really a convincing pitch.

  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited August 2015
    And the DNV will vote in large enough numbers to wipe out all loses to others/replace the Labour voters who will now sit on their hands instead.

    Factoring in the DNV segment into your winning strategy strikes me as very silly. If you get them, it's icing on the cake, not the cake itself.
    Indigo said:

    ydoethur said:

    Sandpit said:

    Given that Cooper and Burnham are trying their best to say nothing and Kendall seems to have given up completely, all the evidence is surely saying that Corbyn could actually be about to win this!!

    There seems to be little doubt about that now.

    Bluntly, Corbyn has campaigned better, shown he wants it, been willing to speak out, and has taken risks in order to promote himself. He is well organised and has a huge number of enthused volunteers to make up for what he appears to lack in funding. He also has a highly seductive message, regardless of its merits.

    Kendall has done most of that, but unfortunately she has been telling Labour some hard truths that they appear simply unwilling to hear at this stage.

    Burnham and Cooper - the most charitable thing that can be said about them is that they don't appear to care who wins.

    This leadership election has been a humiliating shambles for the Labour party - made worse by the fact that many people within the party appear to be living in the naive hope that it is galvanising politics in their favour.

    As I have been saying for a while now, Labour is the Stupid Party. Everything you say is correct. And the overall effect will be to ensure everything all Labour politicians say they want to achieve does not happen.

    Fear not, Mr 124 will be along shortly to tell you how the public will have moved decisively to the left by 2020 and PM Corbyn will lead the Labour Party to a famous victory.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,139
    edited August 2015
    Plato said:

    I saw a clip of her on Sky earlier and didn't notice a thing she said either. I honestly can't think of a single policy she's advocated as part of her campaign.

    ydoethur said:

    Typical of the problem: here's Cooper saying why she wants to win:

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/08/yvette-cooper-interview-labour-party-strong-extreme

    The one small thing she forgot to say is what she would do if she did win. 'Vote for me, I'm a woman and I want to be Prime Minister' is not really a convincing pitch.

    Some are mentioned in passing in the report on the interview - but she didn't actually talk about them in it. It's really strange - the reductio ad absurdum of New Labour, where it is only the messenger and not the message that matters. No wonder she can't get people to back her!
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    ydoethur said:

    They'd be mad not to say they would serve under Corbyn, given the way things are going.

    However, it also occurs to me that should there be a successful coup, the person with the unenviable task of clearing up the mess would be the deputy leader as the acting leader. Angela Eagle wouldn't be up to that (to misquote Lloyd George, she's not bad as Mayor of Liverpool in a lean year). Watson might enjoy himself though - banging heads together and pretending he is in charge of events is the sort of thing he loves doing.

    Tom Watson is not suitable as leader, but Stella may run him a close second and be in a good position to take over if Corbyn does not go the distance for whatever reason. 33/1 for leading Labour at the next election with Ladbrokes.

    Corbyn is planning to bury New Labour and then dance on its grave. Their reaction will be interesting. Will they organise a fightback or will they slink away with their tails between their legs?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 40,070
    Mr. Doethur, the destruction of private enterprise is quite sufficient to earn my contempt!

    It may be a golden opportunity for Farron (less so Farage, whose hokey-cokey nonsense has damaged him).
  • Sandpit said:

    Plato said:

    O_o

    Kids Company 'paid private school fees for daughter of toppled boss's chauffeur': Charity chiefs launch probe into claim pupil was bankrolled

    Kids Company closed this week amid claims donations were misspent
    Among allegations is one about Camila Batmanghelidjh's chauffeur
    Ex employees claim charity paid for Jeton Cavolli's daughter's school fees
    She is said to have attended £28,000-a-year Dauntsey's School in Wiltshire


    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3190596/Kids-Company-paid-private-school-fees-daughter-toppled-boss-s-chauffeur-Charity-chiefs-launch-probe-claim-pupil-bankrolled.html#ixzz3iIS5T5eR
    If true as written (rather than an embellishment on the part of the newspaper or their source) that is surely a clear cut case of fraud?

    Why did she need a chauffeur in the first place?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,139


    Tom Watson is not suitable as leader, but Stella may run him a close second and be in a good position to take over if Corbyn does not go the distance for whatever reason. 33/1 for leading Labour at the next election with Ladbrokes.

    Corbyn is planning to bury New Labour and then dance on its grave. Their reaction will be interesting. Will they organise a fightback or will they slink away with their tails between their legs?

    If she wins the deputy leadership, those odds would look tempting to me (although if she wins and is deputy to Corbyn, surely they will shorten rapidly if only given his age).

    As for the second, if New Labour want to fight back, they need to do it by winning this contest as they will not get a second chance once they lose control of the party machine to Corbyn. They have not merely failed to contest it properly, they have been totally outmanoeuvered. No wonder Blair himself has sounded both panicky and furious recently!
  • RogerRoger Posts: 8,527

    Sandpit

    "If true as written (rather than an embellishment on the part of the newspaper or their source) that is surely a clear cut case of fraud? "

    Pretty disgraceful of that rag to publicise a story like that-even using a pixilated photo of the young girl-with the obvious distress it will cause. There really is no limit to the Mail's malevolence.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 2,652



    This is extremely bad news. The UK needs an active, competent opposition which isn't Syriza with a beard.

    Edited extra bit: and don't underestimate the damage this'll do even if he's leader but never has a shot at being PM. Miliband's idiotic energy price freeze harmed industry, and this would be far worse.

    Quite - this is the scary bit. Even if the political consensus is that Corbyn will get absolutely smashed in a General election, the Private Sector will not be able to be so sanguine and will have to take decisions recognising the possibility that he could be in power within 5 years.

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 15,516

    ydoethur said:

    They'd be mad not to say they would serve under Corbyn, given the way things are going.

    However, it also occurs to me that should there be a successful coup, the person with the unenviable task of clearing up the mess would be the deputy leader as the acting leader. Angela Eagle wouldn't be up to that (to misquote Lloyd George, she's not bad as Mayor of Liverpool in a lean year). Watson might enjoy himself though - banging heads together and pretending he is in charge of events is the sort of thing he loves doing.

    Tom Watson is not suitable as leader, but Stella may run him a close second and be in a good position to take over if Corbyn does not go the distance for whatever reason. 33/1 for leading Labour at the next election with Ladbrokes.

    Corbyn is planning to bury New Labour and then dance on its grave. Their reaction will be interesting. Will they organise a fightback or will they slink away with their tails between their legs?
    How will the likes of Kendall, Jarvis, Umunna and a few others feel able to stay in Corbyn's Labour party?

    All large parties are by definition broad churches, but surely the views of this particular group are much much closer to Cameron's Conservatives than Corbyn's Labour?
  • ydoethur said:

    They'd be mad not to say they would serve under Corbyn, given the way things are going.

    However, it also occurs to me that should there be a successful coup, the person with the unenviable task of clearing up the mess would be the deputy leader as the acting leader. Angela Eagle wouldn't be up to that (to misquote Lloyd George, she's not bad as Mayor of Liverpool in a lean year). Watson might enjoy himself though - banging heads together and pretending he is in charge of events is the sort of thing he loves doing.

    Tom Watson is not suitable as leader, but Stella may run him a close second and be in a good position to take over if Corbyn does not go the distance for whatever reason. 33/1 for leading Labour at the next election with Ladbrokes.

    Corbyn is planning to bury New Labour and then dance on its grave. Their reaction will be interesting. Will they organise a fightback or will they slink away with their tails between their legs?

    Stella Creasy, Liz Kendall, Gloria del Piero and Caroline Flint all have interesting things to say and effective communication skills. I don't agree with all of them all of the time, but a sensible party would be giving them prominent roles and listening to them. I expect they'll all sink without trace once the Jezza collective is in charge.

  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Hmmm.... "The school’s chairman of governors, Richard Handover, is also the vice-chairman of Kids Company’s board of trustees"
    Sandpit said:

    Plato said:

    O_o

    Kids Company 'paid private school fees for daughter of toppled boss's chauffeur': Charity chiefs launch probe into claim pupil was bankrolled

    Kids Company closed this week amid claims donations were misspent
    Among allegations is one about Camila Batmanghelidjh's chauffeur
    Ex employees claim charity paid for Jeton Cavolli's daughter's school fees
    She is said to have attended £28,000-a-year Dauntsey's School in Wiltshire


    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3190596/Kids-Company-paid-private-school-fees-daughter-toppled-boss-s-chauffeur-Charity-chiefs-launch-probe-claim-pupil-bankrolled.html#ixzz3iIS5T5eR
    If true as written (rather than an embellishment on the part of the newspaper or their source) that is surely a clear cut case of fraud?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 40,070
    edited August 2015
    Miss Plato, a remarkable coincidence.

    Miss DiCanio, cheaper than four palanquin-bearers?

    Edited extra bit: in trivial news, just listening to Absolute 70s. Didn't realise The Corrs had covered Fleetwood Mac when they did Dreams.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 28,044
    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    They'd be mad not to say they would serve under Corbyn, given the way things are going.

    However, it also occurs to me that should there be a successful coup, the person with the unenviable task of clearing up the mess would be the deputy leader as the acting leader. Angela Eagle wouldn't be up to that (to misquote Lloyd George, she's not bad as Mayor of Liverpool in a lean year). Watson might enjoy himself though - banging heads together and pretending he is in charge of events is the sort of thing he loves doing.

    Tom Watson is not suitable as leader, but Stella may run him a close second and be in a good position to take over if Corbyn does not go the distance for whatever reason. 33/1 for leading Labour at the next election with Ladbrokes.

    Corbyn is planning to bury New Labour and then dance on its grave. Their reaction will be interesting. Will they organise a fightback or will they slink away with their tails between their legs?
    How will the likes of Kendall, Jarvis, Umunna and a few others feel able to stay in Corbyn's Labour party?

    All large parties are by definition broad churches, but surely the views of this particular group are much much closer to Cameron's Conservatives than Corbyn's Labour?
    Even if true, it's amazing how far tribal loyalty can go - "I'm labour/Tory and that's that", no matter if an objective assessment of policy offers says otherwise, would hold out for nearly all in such a situation I suspect. Corbyns stuck around this whole time waiting to get his party back, they'd do the same I'm sure.

    When was the last labour to Tory switcher? Has there ever been one for MPs?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,139


    Stella Creasy, Liz Kendall, Gloria del Piero and Caroline Flint all have interesting things to say and effective communication skills. I don't agree with all of them all of the time, but a sensible party would be giving them prominent roles and listening to them. I expect they'll all sink without trace once the Jezza collective is in charge.

    As you say SO. Ordinary people like Stella Creasy, for example, for the absolutely superb work she did on payday loans (regardless of party, that was a true public service and even more impressive given it was achieved from opposition). It was something that really cut through, because everyone hates Wonga. So a party that could include her and a group on the centre left, plus Corbyn, is a broad church and can attract a broad range of voters.

    But if Corbyn only promotes those on the far left, as seems probable given what he has said, he can only attract votes on the far left, as Iain Duncan Smith could only attract them on, if not the far right, at least beyond the centre-right. There simply are not enough people who identify with those groups to win a general election or even come close to doing so.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    She didn't drive and was too fat to walk far enough to use public transport apparently.

    Sandpit said:

    Plato said:

    O_o

    Kids Company 'paid private school fees for daughter of toppled boss's chauffeur': Charity chiefs launch probe into claim pupil was bankrolled

    Kids Company closed this week amid claims donations were misspent
    Among allegations is one about Camila Batmanghelidjh's chauffeur
    Ex employees claim charity paid for Jeton Cavolli's daughter's school fees
    She is said to have attended £28,000-a-year Dauntsey's School in Wiltshire


    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3190596/Kids-Company-paid-private-school-fees-daughter-toppled-boss-s-chauffeur-Charity-chiefs-launch-probe-claim-pupil-bankrolled.html#ixzz3iIS5T5eR
    If true as written (rather than an embellishment on the part of the newspaper or their source) that is surely a clear cut case of fraud?
    Why did she need a chauffeur in the first place?

  • Sandpit said:

    Given that Cooper and Burnham are trying their best to say nothing and Kendall seems to have given up completely, all the evidence is surely saying that Corbyn could actually be about to win this!!

    There seems to be little doubt about that now.

    Serious question SO, if corbyn wins, do you think your own politics view will be closer to him, or to the tories?

    Neither. I will be stuck. I have a very simple philosophy: capitalism works, but it only works sustainably for the majority when there is a strong state (ie, an elected government) that recognises its inherent flaws, works to control its excesses and ensures equality of opportunity through a degree of wealth redistribution. I won't get that from either the Tories or Corbyn Labour. What I will get from the Tories, though, is a degree of pragmatism and the possibility of a centre left revival. Under Corbyn, I get total destruction.

    I fail to see any contradiction between your philosophy and current Tory practice.

    For me, the wealth redistribution should be from rich to poor, not vice versa. Cutting incomes for the poorest while maintaing subsidies for wealthy pensioners, for example, does not cut the mustard.

  • RogerRoger Posts: 8,527
    Ydoethur

    'Vote for me, I'm a woman and I want to be Prime Minister' is not really a convincing pitch."

    Why not? It's a two horse race so drawing attention to her USP against Cameron is as good a pitch as any.

    She could have gone on to say she was state educated and not born with a silver spoon but those would be USPs shared with the other three Labour hopefuls so not useful
  • alex.alex. Posts: 2,652
    Plato said:

    I saw a clip of her on Sky earlier and didn't notice a thing she said either. I honestly can't think of a single policy she's advocated as part of her campaign.

    ydoethur said:

    Typical of the problem: here's Cooper saying why she wants to win:

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/08/yvette-cooper-interview-labour-party-strong-extreme

    The one small thing she forgot to say is what she would do if she did win. 'Vote for me, I'm a woman and I want to be Prime Minister' is not really a convincing pitch.

    To be fair to her, there were many people arguing before the election that Labour were making a big mistake in having a leadership election so soon. Because what they needed to do first was to conduct an extensive policy review (not necessarily to a level of extreme detail, but to establish broadly the agenda on which the Labour Party was going to pitch its tent in future) and then elect a leader best placed to sell that to the Country. Then the election (with a necessarily restricted field) could concentrate on picking the best leader. Just like in US Presidential primaries, we know that policies pitched to the Labour Party electorate are not necessarily policies that are going to appeal to the country, and a candidate who is thinking about the latter really wants to commit as little as possible.

    The problem for Labour is that Corbyn is creating chaos (because he wants to announce as many policies as possible to give him the greatest possible mandate to change the Labour Party back to where he wants it to be, and hang the country), and leaving the others with no where to go except to compete in announcing policies on the path to electoral oblivion.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,139
    kle4 said:


    When was the last labour to Tory switcher? Has there ever been one for MPs?

    Reg Prentice in 1977.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reg_Prentice
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 40,070
    Mr. Roger, because possession of ovaries is as impressive as possession of testicles, and just as relevant.

    Mr. Observer, I think that's a perfectly valid view, unlike the communist tripe spouted by the man who might be your leader.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,139
    Roger said:

    Ydoethur

    'Vote for me, I'm a woman and I want to be Prime Minister' is not really a convincing pitch."

    Why not? It's a two horse race so drawing attention to her USP against Cameron is as good a pitch as any.

    She could have gone on to say she was state educated and not born with a silver spoon but those would be USPs shared with the other three Labour hopefuls so not useful

    She was comprehensive educated, but not really from a poor background. Her father was a senior union boss and very well off. Saying she was 'not born with a silver spoon' would be like Miliband's unconvincing attempts to portray himself as coming from a 'normal' background. Generally, people don't mind wealth as a background but they don't like people who rewrite their past to try to hide it (Blair being the dazzling exception).
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,241
    Roger said:

    Ydoethur

    'Vote for me, I'm a woman and I want to be Prime Minister' is not really a convincing pitch."

    Why not? It's a two horse race so drawing attention to her USP against Cameron is as good a pitch as any.

    She could have gone on to say she was state educated and not born with a silver spoon but those would be USPs shared with the other three Labour hopefuls so not useful

    Her dad was a bigwig
    She's Oxford PPE - the cradle of spin
    and Harvard - the birthplace of the financial crisis

    looks a bit silver spoony from where I'm sitting.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,139
    alex. said:


    To be fair to her, there were many people arguing before the election that Labour were making a big mistake in having a leadership election so soon. Because what they needed to do first was to conduct an extensive policy review (not necessarily to a level of extreme detail, but to establish broadly the agenda on which the Labour Party was going to pitch its tent in future) and then elect a leader best placed to sell that to the Country. Then the election (with a necessarily restricted field) could concentrate on picking the best leader. Just like in US Presidential primaries, we know that policies pitched to the Labour Party electorate are not necessarily policies that are going to appeal to the country, and a candidate who is thinking about the latter really wants to commit as little as possible.

    The problem for Labour is that Corbyn is creating chaos (because he wants to announce as many policies as possible to give him the greatest possible mandate to change the Labour Party back to where he wants it to be, and hang the country), and leaving the others with no where to go except to compete in announcing policies on the path to electoral oblivion.

    That would indeed have been the wiser course Alex. But as by far the most senior surviving member of the Shadow Cabinet - why did she not argue for that herself? If she had urged the policy review first, backed up by a few senior backbenchers (hard to imagine that Field wouldn't have helped, if asked) it would have been difficult for Harman and Benn as the nominal leadership to refuse it.

    So although you're right that it's made her life more difficult, it doesn't really argue for her strategic nous. But again, Corbyn has not so much thrown a spanner in the works as a steam hammer, and I can well believe she didn't foresee that!
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Plato said:

    Hmmm.... "The school’s chairman of governors, Richard Handover, is also the vice-chairman of Kids Company’s board of trustees"

    Sandpit said:

    Plato said:

    O_o

    Kids Company 'paid private school fees for daughter of toppled boss's chauffeur': Charity chiefs launch probe into claim pupil was bankrolled

    Kids Company closed this week amid claims donations were misspent
    Among allegations is one about Camila Batmanghelidjh's chauffeur
    Ex employees claim charity paid for Jeton Cavolli's daughter's school fees
    She is said to have attended £28,000-a-year Dauntsey's School in Wiltshire


    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3190596/Kids-Company-paid-private-school-fees-daughter-toppled-boss-s-chauffeur-Charity-chiefs-launch-probe-claim-pupil-bankrolled.html#ixzz3iIS5T5eR
    If true as written (rather than an embellishment on the part of the newspaper or their source) that is surely a clear cut case of fraud?
    Interesting that the chauffer's daughter apparently got a bursary. I think private schools have to have these to justify charitable status. I hope that they have a robust system for deciding these...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,139


    Interesting that the chauffer's daughter apparently got a bursary. I think private schools have to have these to justify charitable status. I hope that they have a robust system for deciding these...

    Those that are charities, of course (which this one is, so your point stands).

    Normally they would be based on competitions or examinations based on specific sorts of aptitude (sport, music, maths, art etc.) Different schools have different focuses (e.g. Princethorpe in Coventry is big on sport - Ian Bell was a beneficiary of that).

    It is of course possible that she was/is a very talented child encouraged to be put in for the exam after coming to this trustee's attention. But if charitable money was used to support her place - well, as Plato says, at the very least it looks bad.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    According to the story - this young lady was also a client of Kid's Company. How cosy.
    ydoethur said:


    Interesting that the chauffer's daughter apparently got a bursary. I think private schools have to have these to justify charitable status. I hope that they have a robust system for deciding these...

    Those that are charities, of course (which this one is, so your point stands).

    Normally they would be based on competitions or examinations based on specific sorts of aptitude (sport, music, maths, art etc.) Different schools have different focuses (e.g. Princethorpe in Coventry is big on sport - Ian Bell was a beneficiary of that).

    It is of course possible that she was/is a very talented child encouraged to be put in for the exam after coming to this trustee's attention. But if charitable money was used to support her place - well, as Plato says, at the very least it looks bad.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 40,070
    This Clause 4 nonsense gives Burnham/Cooper the opportunity to strike back, if they have the wits to do it.

    Condemn it, without reserve, and those who aren't bonkers communists devoid of numeracy will flock to the one who plants their banner in the opposing ranks.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 15,516
    edited August 2015

    Plato said:

    Hmmm.... "The school’s chairman of governors, Richard Handover, is also the vice-chairman of Kids Company’s board of trustees"

    Sandpit said:

    Plato said:

    O_o

    Kids Company 'paid private school fees for daughter of toppled boss's chauffeur': Charity chiefs launch probe into claim pupil was bankrolled

    Kids Company closed this week amid claims donations were misspent
    Among allegations is one about Camila Batmanghelidjh's chauffeur
    Ex employees claim charity paid for Jeton Cavolli's daughter's school fees
    She is said to have attended £28,000-a-year Dauntsey's School in Wiltshire


    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3190596/Kids-Company-paid-private-school-fees-daughter-toppled-boss-s-chauffeur-Charity-chiefs-launch-probe-claim-pupil-bankrolled.html#ixzz3iIS5T5eR
    If true as written (rather than an embellishment on the part of the newspaper or their source) that is surely a clear cut case of fraud?
    Interesting that the chauffer's daughter apparently got a bursary. I think private schools have to have these to justify charitable status. I hope that they have a robust system for deciding these...
    I have heard of stories of super bright children in 'care' being sent to boarding school to get them away from whatever bad influences were around them, but only with the involvement of physiologists and careful consideration of how much it was costing the public purse. That to me seems like a great idea, if a kid can end up at university rather than prison aged 18 and have a chance to make something of their life.

    This story doesn't look like that though, it looks like a favour using the charity's money to an employee. That's not what a charity should be doing.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,130

    It would be funny if Suzanne Evans took over from Farage and Jezza became Labour leader with Watson as deputy. I suspect Labour would still accuse Ukip of misogyny without recognising the hypocrisy.

    Especially as Yvette has been complaining about the Tories trying to even up the ratio of peers in the HoL.

    Do they not notice the hypocrisy or do they think we won't? I find it insulting.

    Come on, Labour, I haven't lost faith in you completely. You can still elect Liz, she has the requisite number of ovaries.
  • saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,143
    edited August 2015
    Roger said:


    Sandpit

    "If true as written (rather than an embellishment on the part of the newspaper or their source) that is surely a clear cut case of fraud? "

    Pretty disgraceful of that rag to publicise a story like that-even using a pixilated photo of the young girl-with the obvious distress it will cause. There really is no limit to the Mail's malevolence.

    What's your opinion of that filthy rag, the Mirror, lying about the UKIP, candidate which resulted in the loss of his job and home?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 18,252

    Sandpit said:

    Given that Cooper and Burnham are trying their best to say nothing and Kendall seems to have given up completely, all the evidence is surely saying that Corbyn could actually be about to win this!!

    There seems to be little doubt about that now.

    Serious question SO, if corbyn wins, do you think your own politics view will be closer to him, or to the tories?

    Neither. I will be stuck. I have a very simple philosophy: capitalism works, but it only works sustainably for the majority when there is a strong state (ie, an elected government) that recognises its inherent flaws, works to control its excesses and ensures equality of opportunity through a degree of wealth redistribution. I won't get that from either the Tories or Corbyn Labour. What I will get from the Tories, though, is a degree of pragmatism and the possibility of a centre left revival. Under Corbyn, I get total destruction.

    I fail to see any contradiction between your philosophy and current Tory practice.
    You are not well Monica, when he said redistribution he did not mean from the 97% to the 3% rich, he was thinking of it the other way round.
  • Miss Plato, a remarkable coincidence.

    Miss DiCanio, cheaper than four palanquin-bearers?

    Edited extra bit: in trivial news, just listening to Absolute 70s. Didn't realise The Corrs had covered Fleetwood Mac when they did Dreams.

    Four bearers wouldn't be enough, a rugby fifteen might just about manage for short range freight.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 40,070
    Well, there you are, Miss DiCanio. Even better value for money.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Ditto, I'm in favour of State boarding schools if they'd break a destructive home cycle and the child wanted to try it.

    This doesn't appear to be the case.
    Sandpit said:

    Plato said:

    Hmmm.... "The school’s chairman of governors, Richard Handover, is also the vice-chairman of Kids Company’s board of trustees"

    Sandpit said:

    Plato said:

    O_o

    Kids Company 'paid private school fees for daughter of toppled boss's chauffeur': Charity chiefs launch probe into claim pupil was bankrolled

    Kids Company closed this week amid claims donations were misspent
    Among allegations is one about Camila Batmanghelidjh's chauffeur
    Ex employees claim charity paid for Jeton Cavolli's daughter's school fees
    She is said to have attended £28,000-a-year Dauntsey's School in Wiltshire


    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3190596/Kids-Company-paid-private-school-fees-daughter-toppled-boss-s-chauffeur-Charity-chiefs-launch-probe-claim-pupil-bankrolled.html#ixzz3iIS5T5eR
    If true as written (rather than an embellishment on the part of the newspaper or their source) that is surely a clear cut case of fraud?
    Interesting that the chauffer's daughter apparently got a bursary. I think private schools have to have these to justify charitable status. I hope that they have a robust system for deciding these...
    I have heard of stories of super bright children in 'care' being sent to boarding school to get them away from whatever bad influences were around them, but only with the involvement of physiologists and careful consideration of how much it was costing the public purse. That to me seems like a great idea, if a kid can end up at university rather than prison aged 18 and have a chance to make something of their life.

    This story doesn't look like that though, it looks like a favour using the charity's money to an employee. That's not what a charity should be doing.

  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Speaking of the HoL - or not, Danny Alexander and Vince have been offered knighthoods according to the Indy.
    CD13 said:


    It would be funny if Suzanne Evans took over from Farage and Jezza became Labour leader with Watson as deputy. I suspect Labour would still accuse Ukip of misogyny without recognising the hypocrisy.

    Especially as Yvette has been complaining about the Tories trying to even up the ratio of peers in the HoL.

    Do they not notice the hypocrisy or do they think we won't? I find it insulting.

    Come on, Labour, I haven't lost faith in you completely. You can still elect Liz, she has the requisite number of ovaries.

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 18,252
    Plato said:

    Speaking of the HoL - or not, Danny Alexander and Vince have been offered knighthoods according to the Indy.

    CD13 said:


    It would be funny if Suzanne Evans took over from Farage and Jezza became Labour leader with Watson as deputy. I suspect Labour would still accuse Ukip of misogyny without recognising the hypocrisy.

    Especially as Yvette has been complaining about the Tories trying to even up the ratio of peers in the HoL.

    Do they not notice the hypocrisy or do they think we won't? I find it insulting.

    Come on, Labour, I haven't lost faith in you completely. You can still elect Liz, she has the requisite number of ovaries.

    the piggies need to get back to the trough, how could anybody ever vote for the odious unprincipled , money grubbing Lib Dems. They are beneath contempt.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,139
    CD13 said:


    It would be funny if Suzanne Evans took over from Farage and Jezza became Labour leader with Watson as deputy. I suspect Labour would still accuse Ukip of misogyny without recognising the hypocrisy.

    Especially as Yvette has been complaining about the Tories trying to even up the ratio of peers in the HoL.

    Do they not notice the hypocrisy or do they think we won't? I find it insulting.

    Come on, Labour, I haven't lost faith in you completely. You can still elect Liz, she has the requisite number of ovaries.

    I think you have to be unselfaware to a certain extent to get on in politics - as Sir Humphrey said, 'an enviable intellectual suppleness and moral manoeuverability'. Otherwise, you can't bend with the wind to gain support over a long period of time. But it has to be said that New Labour took irony to a new level. I did laugh when in 2011 Ed Miliband criticised the coalition for being 'all spin and no substance'.
  • malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    Given that Cooper and Burnham are trying their best to say nothing and Kendall seems to have given up completely, all the evidence is surely saying that Corbyn could actually be about to win this!!

    There seems to be little doubt about that now.

    Serious question SO, if corbyn wins, do you think your own politics view will be closer to him, or to the tories?

    Neither. I will be stuck. I have a very simple philosophy: capitalism works, but it only works sustainably for the majority when there is a strong state (ie, an elected government) that recognises its inherent flaws, works to control its excesses and ensures equality of opportunity through a degree of wealth redistribution. I won't get that from either the Tories or Corbyn Labour. What I will get from the Tories, though, is a degree of pragmatism and the possibility of a centre left revival. Under Corbyn, I get total destruction.

    I fail to see any contradiction between your philosophy and current Tory practice.
    You are not well Monica, when he said redistribution he did not mean from the 97% to the 3% rich, he was thinking of it the other way round.
    When's Sturgeon going to exercise her power to increase income tax in Scotland to fight Tory austerity? Please hold your breath.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 8,527
    Alanbrooke.

    I suppose a silver spoon is relative but it doesn't sound very silver spoony to me.

    Think Whites of St James's or the Bullingdon.

    We're not talking Normanton Pontefract and Castleford Rotarians
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,112
    Plato said:

    O_o

    Kids Company 'paid private school fees for daughter of toppled boss's chauffeur': Charity chiefs launch probe into claim pupil was bankrolled

    Kids Company closed this week amid claims donations were misspent
    Among allegations is one about Camila Batmanghelidjh's chauffeur
    Ex employees claim charity paid for Jeton Cavolli's daughter's school fees
    She is said to have attended £28,000-a-year Dauntsey's School in Wiltshire


    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3190596/Kids-Company-paid-private-school-fees-daughter-toppled-boss-s-chauffeur-Charity-chiefs-launch-probe-claim-pupil-bankrolled.html#ixzz3iIS5T5eR
    The outfit looks more and more like a tarted up youth club-cum scam. Self-referral of clients sounds like even more of a scam. Children with mental health issues need proper treatment not so-called support from untrained volunteers.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,139
    edited August 2015
    Roger said:

    Alanbrooke.

    I suppose a silver spoon is relative but it doesn't sound very silver spoony to me.

    Think Whites of St James's or the Bullingdon.

    We're not talking Normanton Pontefract and Castleford Rotarians

    It's not you it has to convince Roger - it's people who might vote for Labour but didn't do so last time around.

    PS - at the moment Cooper is of course not running against Cameron, but against Corbyn and Burnham. Corbyn's background is pretty similar to hers - Burnham's was rather less privileged. So it wouldn't be a wise move to emphasise it in an egalitarian party.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,241
    Roger said:

    Alanbrooke.

    I suppose a silver spoon is relative but it doesn't sound very silver spoony to me.

    Think Whites of St James's or the Bullingdon.

    We're not talking Normanton Pontefract and Castleford Rotarians


    I used to dream of being in Pontefract Rotarians, the Ludlow Cowmuck Guild doesn't have quite the same cachet.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 8,527
    Saddened

    "What's your opinion of that filthy rag, the Mirror, lying about the UKIP, candidate which resulted in the loss of his job and home?"

    I don't know the story. I'm trying to live the life of the bon viveur now that Labour have imploded so I'm not too in touch. I'll google.....

    ......But the Mail story is certain to cause a young girl enormous (and possibly lasting) distress through no fault of her own so the UKIP story would have to be pretty awful to compete
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 20,623
    malcolmg said:

    Plato said:

    Speaking of the HoL - or not, Danny Alexander and Vince have been offered knighthoods according to the Indy.

    CD13 said:


    It would be funny if Suzanne Evans took over from Farage and Jezza became Labour leader with Watson as deputy. I suspect Labour would still accuse Ukip of misogyny without recognising the hypocrisy.

    Especially as Yvette has been complaining about the Tories trying to even up the ratio of peers in the HoL.

    Do they not notice the hypocrisy or do they think we won't? I find it insulting.

    Come on, Labour, I haven't lost faith in you completely. You can still elect Liz, she has the requisite number of ovaries.

    the piggies need to get back to the trough, how could anybody ever vote for the odious unprincipled , money grubbing Lib Dems. They are beneath contempt.
    Two things. Firstly, knighthoods do not, as far as I'm aware, come with salaries. Secondly, anyone can be offered a knighthood: that is totally different from *accepting* a knighthood.
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 1,804
    In terms of the campaign I find Yvette Cooper's performance the most disppointing of all 4 in terms of setting out with clarity her vision of the world.She has seemed to be the most reactive too,rather than setting the agenda.When she tried to steal a march on child poverty,she shot herself in the foot by not opposing the benefit cap, which as her own Labour party research showed, will increase it.The triangulation and the clever soundbites that typify the centrist position didn't work for Clegg and they are not working for her.Maybe things will change,but the notion of Labour's 1st woman leader has not yet pressed the buttons of the leadership electorate.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,139
    O/T, If anyone wants to see a study in confusion, see this article on the way changes to exams are causing general muddle:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/teenagers-forced-to-study-fewer-alevels-in-squeeze-on-public-spending-says-exam-boss-10446807.html

    I have to say though, I can't get het up over the idea of linear exams and three A-levels. That's what I did, after all, and I never saw any clear evidence the new system was an improvement. (Don't necessarily believe universities when they say the new system helped decide places - the Pre-U course, a linear two year model, was brought in because they thought AS and A levels were (A) much too high pressure and exam focussed and (B) not very effective at stretching the brightest candidates.)
  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 2,581
    If you read the text he didn't say he would bring back Clause 4, as much as the headline sounds good.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,112
    On topic, I am with SO on this. I cannot get past Corbyn's support for those who use violence, glory in it, who explicitly want to overthrow democracy and replace it by a theocracy, who loathe liberal values.

    These were not the values of Old Labour either.

    If the Labour Party choose him as leader, then they are sending the clearest possible signal that they are not a serious political party, they are not even like Syriza but more like Golden Dawn, they are no longer liberal, they are no longer progressive - in the true meanings of those words. If the Deputy Leader candidates serve under him, then they associate themselves with those views. They ought to have more self-respect and more respect for those voters who would like to have a sensible social democratic alternative in this country.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 18,252

    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    Given that Cooper and Burnham are trying their best to say nothing and Kendall seems to have given up completely, all the evidence is surely saying that Corbyn could actually be about to win this!!

    There seems to be little doubt about that now.

    Serious question SO, if corbyn wins, do you think your own politics view will be closer to him, or to the tories?

    Neither. I will be stuck. I have a very simple philosophy: capitalism works, but it only works sustainably for the majority when there is a strong state (ie, an elected government) that recognises its inherent flaws, works to control its excesses and ensures equality of opportunity through a degree of wealth redistribution. I won't get that from either the Tories or Corbyn Labour. What I will get from the Tories, though, is a degree of pragmatism and the possibility of a centre left revival. Under Corbyn, I get total destruction.

    I fail to see any contradiction between your philosophy and current Tory practice.
    You are not well Monica, when he said redistribution he did not mean from the 97% to the 3% rich, he was thinking of it the other way round.
    When's Sturgeon going to exercise her power to increase income tax in Scotland to fight Tory austerity? Please hold your breath.
    We pay enough tax to fund London without having to pay twice so we can eat.
  • saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,143
    Roger said:

    Saddened

    "What's your opinion of that filthy rag, the Mirror, lying about the UKIP, candidate which resulted in the loss of his job and home?"

    I don't know the story. I'm trying to live the life of the bon viveur now that Labour have imploded so I'm not too in touch. I'll google.....

    ......But the Mail story is certain to cause a young girl enormous (and possibly lasting) distress through no fault of her own so the UKIP story would have to be pretty awful to compete

    It took two years for them to print this apology, shame he had already lost his job and home by then.
    http://www.mirror.co.uk/for-the-record/alex-wood-an-apology-6209529
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,241

    In terms of the campaign I find Yvette Cooper's performance the most disppointing of all 4 in terms of setting out with clarity her vision of the world.She has seemed to be the most reactive too,rather than setting the agenda.When she tried to steal a march on child poverty,she shot herself in the foot by not opposing the benefit cap, which as her own Labour party research showed, will increase it.The triangulation and the clever soundbites that typify the centrist position didn't work for Clegg and they are not working for her.Maybe things will change,but the notion of Labour's 1st woman leader has not yet pressed the buttons of the leadership electorate.

    I find myself wondering if YC actually wants the job atm or is just saving herself for the next contest in 2020 when the chance of being PM in 2025 may be better.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 18,252
    rcs1000 said:

    malcolmg said:

    Plato said:

    Speaking of the HoL - or not, Danny Alexander and Vince have been offered knighthoods according to the Indy.

    CD13 said:


    It would be funny if Suzanne Evans took over from Farage and Jezza became Labour leader with Watson as deputy. I suspect Labour would still accuse Ukip of misogyny without recognising the hypocrisy.

    Especially as Yvette has been complaining about the Tories trying to even up the ratio of peers in the HoL.

    Do they not notice the hypocrisy or do they think we won't? I find it insulting.

    Come on, Labour, I haven't lost faith in you completely. You can still elect Liz, she has the requisite number of ovaries.

    the piggies need to get back to the trough, how could anybody ever vote for the odious unprincipled , money grubbing Lib Dems. They are beneath contempt.
    Two things. Firstly, knighthoods do not, as far as I'm aware, come with salaries. Secondly, anyone can be offered a knighthood: that is totally different from *accepting* a knighthood.
    Still pathetic , a pair of losers getting baubles.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,139

    In terms of the campaign I find Yvette Cooper's performance the most disppointing of all 4 in terms of setting out with clarity her vision of the world.She has seemed to be the most reactive too,rather than setting the agenda.When she tried to steal a march on child poverty,she shot herself in the foot by not opposing the benefit cap, which as her own Labour party research showed, will increase it.The triangulation and the clever soundbites that typify the centrist position didn't work for Clegg and they are not working for her.Maybe things will change,but the notion of Labour's 1st woman leader has not yet pressed the buttons of the leadership electorate.

    I find myself wondering if YC actually wants the job atm or is just saving herself for the next contest in 2020 when the chance of being PM in 2025 may be better.
    She may have thought that at the start - but if she thinks after five years of Corbyn there would be anything left of Labour but a smoking ruin, she's an idiot and deserves to lose.
  • Roger said:

    Saddened

    "What's your opinion of that filthy rag, the Mirror, lying about the UKIP, candidate which resulted in the loss of his job and home?"

    I don't know the story. I'm trying to live the life of the bon viveur now that Labour have imploded so I'm not too in touch. I'll google.....

    ......But the Mail story is certain to cause a young girl enormous (and possibly lasting) distress through no fault of her own so the UKIP story would have to be pretty awful to compete

    Roger said:

    Saddened

    "What's your opinion of that filthy rag, the Mirror, lying about the UKIP, candidate which resulted in the loss of his job and home?"

    I don't know the story. I'm trying to live the life of the bon viveur now that Labour have imploded so I'm not too in touch. I'll google.....

    ......But the Mail story is certain to cause a young girl enormous (and possibly lasting) distress through no fault of her own so the UKIP story would have to be pretty awful to compete

    So if Cameron sent his son to Eton and The Mirror reported on and criticized that decision, you'd be outraged.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 28,044
    malcolmg said:

    rcs1000 said:

    malcolmg said:

    Plato said:

    Speaking of the HoL - or not, Danny Alexander and Vince have been offered knighthoods according to the Indy.

    CD13 said:


    It would be funny if Suzanne Evans took over from Farage and Jezza became Labour leader with Watson as deputy. I suspect Labour would still accuse Ukip of misogyny without recognising the hypocrisy.

    Especially as Yvette has been complaining about the Tories trying to even up the ratio of peers in the HoL.

    Do they not notice the hypocrisy or do they think we won't? I find it insulting.

    Come on, Labour, I haven't lost faith in you completely. You can still elect Liz, she has the requisite number of ovaries.

    the piggies need to get back to the trough, how could anybody ever vote for the odious unprincipled , money grubbing Lib Dems. They are beneath contempt.
    Two things. Firstly, knighthoods do not, as far as I'm aware, come with salaries. Secondly, anyone can be offered a knighthood: that is totally different from *accepting* a knighthood.
    Still pathetic , a pair of losers getting baubles.
    A grand tradition for the defeated, sacked or forcibly retired. Alexander was a very loyal member of the coalition, so not surprised he'd be offered one, but I guess Cable gets one as reward for being a former Cabinet Minister? Davey and the rest will feel left out.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,112
    Cyclefree said:

    On topic, I am with SO on this. I cannot get past Corbyn's support for those who use violence, glory in it, who explicitly want to overthrow democracy and replace it by a theocracy, who loathe liberal values.

    These were not the values of Old Labour either.

    If the Labour Party choose him as leader, then they are sending the clearest possible signal that they are not a serious political party, they are not even like Syriza but more like Golden Dawn, they are no longer liberal, they are no longer progressive - in the true meanings of those words. If the Deputy Leader candidates serve under him, then they associate themselves with those views. They ought to have more self-respect and more respect for those voters who would like to have a sensible social democratic alternative in this country.

    Edit: Old Labour for all its faults would not have supported terrorists either.

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 20,623
    Does the Labour Party have a new clause 4? Or does the constitution flit from clause 3 to clause 5?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,139
    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    rcs1000 said:

    malcolmg said:

    Plato said:

    Speaking of the HoL - or not, Danny Alexander and Vince have been offered knighthoods according to the Indy.

    CD13 said:


    It would be funny if Suzanne Evans took over from Farage and Jezza became Labour leader with Watson as deputy. I suspect Labour would still accuse Ukip of misogyny without recognising the hypocrisy.

    Especially as Yvette has been complaining about the Tories trying to even up the ratio of peers in the HoL.

    Do they not notice the hypocrisy or do they think we won't? I find it insulting.

    Come on, Labour, I haven't lost faith in you completely. You can still elect Liz, she has the requisite number of ovaries.

    the piggies need to get back to the trough, how could anybody ever vote for the odious unprincipled , money grubbing Lib Dems. They are beneath contempt.
    Two things. Firstly, knighthoods do not, as far as I'm aware, come with salaries. Secondly, anyone can be offered a knighthood: that is totally different from *accepting* a knighthood.
    Still pathetic , a pair of losers getting baubles.
    A grand tradition for the defeated, sacked or forcibly retired. Alexander was a very loyal member of the coalition, so not surprised he'd be offered one, but I guess Cable gets one as reward for being a former Cabinet Minister? Davey and the rest will feel left out.
    Maybe a sign that Alexander doesn't intend to return to politics (as 71-year-old Cable surely won't)? The others might well fight their seats again.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 8,527
    Moniker

    "So if Cameron sent his son to Eton and The Mirror reported on and criticized that decision, you'd be outraged."

    It's rather worse than that. If a newspaper reported that Cameron had robbed a charity to send his child to Eton (pixilated photo of young Cameron) plus photos of well heeled pupils in their lavish surroundings then yes I'd be equally outraged
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,139
    rcs1000 said:

    Does the Labour Party have a new clause 4? Or does the constitution flit from clause 3 to clause 5?

    It has a new clause IV with some very NuLabourSpeak about 'values' which don't actually mean much and wouldn't have looked out of place on the EdStone.

    http://labourlist.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Rule-Book-2013.pdf
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 5,443
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    On topic, I am with SO on this. I cannot get past Corbyn's support for those who use violence, glory in it, who explicitly want to overthrow democracy and replace it by a theocracy, who loathe liberal values.

    These were not the values of Old Labour either.

    If the Labour Party choose him as leader, then they are sending the clearest possible signal that they are not a serious political party, they are not even like Syriza but more like Golden Dawn, they are no longer liberal, they are no longer progressive - in the true meanings of those words. If the Deputy Leader candidates serve under him, then they associate themselves with those views. They ought to have more self-respect and more respect for those voters who would like to have a sensible social democratic alternative in this country.

    Edit: Old Labour for all its faults would not have supported terrorists either.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/1896217/Ken-Livingstone-defends-his-extremist-backer.html
    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/jul/27/july7.religion
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    With the so called intelligentsia of the Labour party preparing to accept Corbyn and so committing sepuku of their party, the thinking rank and file will have nowhere to go except UKIP.

    Bringing back clause 4 shows that Corbyn wants a defenceless Britain with open borders to it's many enemies, who state openly that they want to destroy Britain and democracy from within. But then the new fuhrer, Corbyn, has already stated that he is best of friends with Hisbolah (Iran), and Hamas (Iran and ISIS): by his friends shall he be known.
  • notmenotme Posts: 2,316
    ydoethur said:

    Plato said:

    Catching up and I see Comrade Corbyn is thoroughly enjoying himself - Clause 4?!? And Derek Hatton can rejoin the fold.

    Well that's the ultimate Blairite fetish right there, and Jezza wants to resurrect it. Can't think of a bigger Jog On to the Progress segment of the Party.

    What will JC announce next - he's got a couple of days left... closed shops? Union bloc votes?

    If he were to announce an en bloc repeal of the union legislation enacted since 1980, that wouldn't be a huge surprise. But would he make a pledge about secret strike balloting - or does he not realise how important that is?
    I was always puzzled by how much Labour and the unions hated the trade union legislation, after hearing a diatribe at a public meeting about Fatcher's fascist anti trades union laws, i went and read it.

    From memory the most important part was that a strike needed to be called by a secret ballot of all the members in the workplace. Shock horror. Say it isnt so....
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,974
    @Plato - this young lady was also a client of Kid's Company. How cosy.

    What was KC’s criteria for being a ‘client’ one wonders? – A father in full time employment earning £40K PA would suggest neither single mother/broken home status or financially destitute. – It does rather bring into question the validity of Batman’s 36,000 claim and no doubt many more inconsistences like these will be reported in the press before this sorry episode is put to bed.
  • saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,143
    MikeK said:

    With the so called intelligentsia of the Labour party preparing to accept Corbyn and so committing sepuku of their party, the thinking rank and file will have nowhere to go except UKIP.

    Bringing back clause 4 shows that Corbyn wants a defenceless Britain with open borders to it's many enemies, who state openly that they want to destroy Britain and democracy from within. But then the new fuhrer, Corbyn, has already stated that he is best of friends with Hisbolah (Iran), and Hamas (Iran and ISIS): by his friends shall he be known.

    You'll forgive me if I don't take the opinion of a man who was genuinely predecting in excess of 30 UKIP MP's at the last election too seriously.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 20,623
    MikeK said:

    With the so called intelligentsia of the Labour party preparing to accept Corbyn and so committing sepuku of their party, the thinking rank and file will have nowhere to go except UKIP.

    Bringing back clause 4 shows that Corbyn wants a defenceless Britain with open borders to it's many enemies, who state openly that they want to destroy Britain and democracy from within. But then the new fuhrer, Corbyn, has already stated that he is best of friends with Hisbolah (Iran), and Hamas (Iran and ISIS): by his friends shall he be known.

    I think UKIP, the LibDems and the Conservatives would all benefit from a Corbyn victory. In UKIP's case, it would might open up swathes of the North where Labour had been a one party state for so long. In the case of the LibDems, it might mean they got a certain portion of their tactical votes back in places like South West London.

    The obvious losers would be the Greens, as now there would be two parties going after the batshit cray vote.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,112

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    On topic, I am with SO on this. I cannot get past Corbyn's support for those who use violence, glory in it, who explicitly want to overthrow democracy and replace it by a theocracy, who loathe liberal values.

    These were not the values of Old Labour either.

    If the Labour Party choose him as leader, then they are sending the clearest possible signal that they are not a serious political party, they are not even like Syriza but more like Golden Dawn, they are no longer liberal, they are no longer progressive - in the true meanings of those words. If the Deputy Leader candidates serve under him, then they associate themselves with those views. They ought to have more self-respect and more respect for those voters who would like to have a sensible social democratic alternative in this country.

    Edit: Old Labour for all its faults would not have supported terrorists either.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/1896217/Ken-Livingstone-defends-his-extremist-backer.html
    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/jul/27/july7.religion
    Ken is like Corbyn. Beyond the pale. I'm thinking of Callaghan, Crosland, Wilson, Healey etc: proper Old Labour.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    saddened said:

    MikeK said:

    With the so called intelligentsia of the Labour party preparing to accept Corbyn and so committing sepuku of their party, the thinking rank and file will have nowhere to go except UKIP.

    Bringing back clause 4 shows that Corbyn wants a defenceless Britain with open borders to it's many enemies, who state openly that they want to destroy Britain and democracy from within. But then the new fuhrer, Corbyn, has already stated that he is best of friends with Hisbolah (Iran), and Hamas (Iran and ISIS): by his friends shall he be known.

    You'll forgive me if I don't take the opinion of a man who was genuinely predecting in excess of 30 UKIP MP's at the last election too seriously.
    Not my opinion, me old mate, but the opinion and belief of your new fuhrer, Corbyn.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 2,546

    Sandpit said:

    Given that Cooper and Burnham are trying their best to say nothing and Kendall seems to have given up completely, all the evidence is surely saying that Corbyn could actually be about to win this!!

    There seems to be little doubt about that now.

    Serious question SO, if corbyn wins, do you think your own politics view will be closer to him, or to the tories?

    Neither. I will be stuck. I have a very simple philosophy: capitalism works, but it only works sustainably for the majority when there is a strong state (ie, an elected government) that recognises its inherent flaws, works to control its excesses and ensures equality of opportunity through a degree of wealth redistribution. I won't get that from either the Tories or Corbyn Labour. What I will get from the Tories, though, is a degree of pragmatism and the possibility of a centre left revival. Under Corbyn, I get total destruction.

    I fail to see any contradiction between your philosophy and current Tory practice.

    For me, the wealth redistribution should be from rich to poor, not vice versa. Cutting incomes for the poorest while maintaing subsidies for wealthy pensioners, for example, does not cut the mustard.

    SO

    The one good thing from the total demise of the Labour Party and the Lib Dems.
    Is that the Conservative party has total power, and no effective opposition in England.

    New Labours main opposition was the press.
    The Conservatives will not face that problem.
    So the opposition will come from elsewhere.
    This will eventually lead to change in the FPTP system, as it becomes irrelevant to the majority.
    At some point even partisans except the need for change, before opposition goes onto the streets instead of the ballot box.
Sign In or Register to comment.