Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Corbyn
Newbury Today Forum > Categories > Random Rants
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
TallDarkAndHandsome
Shouts a Corbynister outside the NEC meeting as Corbyn leaves. Yep 32 people sat round a table making a decision which affects the whole Country is far more democratic than a referendum involving 40 odd million people!!!!!😂

We need an opposition. This is a disaster.
TallDarkAndHandsome
QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Jul 12 2016, 09:12 PM) *
Shouts a Corbynister outside the NEC meeting as Corbyn leaves. Yep 32 people sat round a table making a decision which affects the whole Country is far more democratic than a referendum involving 40 odd million people!!!!!😂

We need an opposition. This is a disaster.


We also need a GE as May is also an unelected leader. Hopefully the Lib Dems may make a come back as I was never comfortable with them being made a scapegoat for volunteering to help the Country in its hour of need and working with the Tories.
x2lls
QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Jul 12 2016, 09:12 PM) *
Shouts a Corbynister outside the NEC meeting as Corbyn leaves. Yep 32 people sat round a table making a decision which affects the whole Country is far more democratic than a referendum involving 40 odd million people!!!!!😂

We need an opposition. This is a disaster.



It is a blessing. With the 'apparent' recession on the way (?,possibly, might be etc etc, scary premonitions), labour ALWAYS leaves us broke. I would love to see what a GE would do to them right now.
blackdog
QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Jul 12 2016, 09:12 PM) *
Shouts a Corbynister outside the NEC meeting as Corbyn leaves. Yep 32 people sat round a table making a decision which affects the whole Country is far more democratic than a referendum involving 40 odd million people!!!!!😂

We need an opposition. This is a disaster.

So 32 people decided to let the electorate decide - how undemocractic.
TallDarkAndHandsome
QUOTE (blackdog @ Jul 13 2016, 12:00 AM) *
So 32 people decided to let the electorate decide - how undemocractic.


That is incorrect. A very small % of Labour voters get to decide. Most of whom seem to be at the far end of the spectrum of the party.
blackdog
QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Jul 13 2016, 06:09 AM) *
That is incorrect. A very small % of Labour voters get to decide. Most of whom seem to be at the far end of the spectrum of the party.

No - all Labour voters get to decide - that is the electorate for a Labour leadership contest.
Berkshirelad
And you need to remember that those 32 have also changed the rules on membership to avoid another stuffing of the Party with Corbyn supporters at £3 apiece
Andy Capp
QUOTE (Berkshirelad @ Jul 13 2016, 12:21 PM) *
And you need to remember that those 32 have also changed the rules on membership to avoid another stuffing of the Party with Corbyn supporters at £3 apiece

And mischievous Tories exploiting the weakness in the system too.
Simon Kirby
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Jul 13 2016, 01:26 PM) *
And mischievous Tories exploiting the weakness in the system too.

It's possible, but I think you should assume good faith until you have good reason not to. I can't speak with any great experience but I believe the great majority of Labour members who, like me, are supporting Corbyn, do so because they support his politics for it's unapologetic social justice, and support Corbyn because of the way he goes about politics. For sure, if you prefer your politics selfish and your politicians shiny then Conservative is always going to be your vote, but there are rather a lot of people who find Corbyn's Labour very attractive.
TallDarkAndHandsome
QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Jul 13 2016, 10:35 PM) *
It's possible, but I think you should assume good faith until you have good reason not to. I can't speak with any great experience but I believe the great majority of Labour members who, like me, are supporting Corbyn, do so because they support his politics for it's unapologetic social justice, and support Corbyn because of the way he goes about politics. For sure, if you prefer your politics selfish and your politicians shiny then Conservative is always going to be your vote, but there are rather a lot of people who find Corbyn's Labour very attractive.


I agree. Though he will never win a GE. And surely that is the point of opposition? Please don't tell me he will. You know in your heart of hearts he won't.
On the edge
QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Jul 13 2016, 11:03 PM) *
I agree. Though he will never win a GE. And surely that is the point of opposition? Please don't tell me he will. You know in your heart of hearts he won't.


You never know; if WBC have anything to do with the count, he may very well!
blackdog
QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Jul 13 2016, 11:03 PM) *
I agree. Though he will never win a GE. And surely that is the point of opposition? Please don't tell me he will. You know in your heart of hearts he won't.

I don't see that any of the no accounts that are challenging him would do any better at a general election - but Corbyn hasn't been doing so badly at this opposition lark - the government has made a lot of U-turns on his watch.

On the edge
QUOTE (blackdog @ Jul 16 2016, 11:19 PM) *
I don't see that any of the no accounts that are challenging him would do any better at a general election - but Corbyn hasn't been doing so badly at this opposition lark - the government has made a lot of U-turns on his watch.


A pretty astute summary Blackdog!
GMR
QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Jul 13 2016, 10:35 PM) *
It's possible, but I think you should assume good faith until you have good reason not to. I can't speak with any great experience but I believe the great majority of Labour members who, like me, are supporting Corbyn, do so because they support his politics for it's unapologetic social justice, and support Corbyn because of the way he goes about politics. For sure, if you prefer your politics selfish and your politicians shiny then Conservative is always going to be your vote, but there are rather a lot of people who find Corbyn's Labour very attractive.


Of course there are a lot of people who find Corbyn's politics attractive; there is not argument there. However, not enough for him to form a government.

The Conservative are always going to be the politics of choice as long as the Labour keep moving left. Blair learnt that lesson and brought them back to the centre and won three elections.

Simon Kirby
QUOTE (GMR @ Jul 18 2016, 05:15 PM) *
Of course there are a lot of people who find Corbyn's politics attractive; there is not argument there. However, not enough for him to form a government.

The Conservative are always going to be the politics of choice as long as the Labour keep moving left. Blair learnt that lesson and brought them back to the centre and won three elections.

We've had the argument before - I'm not interested in winning elections, I'm interested in perusing social justice, and I'm not going to abandon those principles of social justice just because they're not broadly popular. You're entirely right, Conservatism always has the advantage - it plays to self-interest and a natural deference to authority and the establishment, and the best I can hope for is to challenge that orthodoxy and make the argument that acting equitably and collectively is the moral thing to do even though it means those with the advantage giving up some of what they have.

It's a mistake however to think that power is the only way to affect change, and a mistake too to think that politics is Westminster, because social activism is always available to the powerless and politics starts at home.
GMR
QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Jul 18 2016, 07:17 PM) *
We've had the argument before - I'm not interested in winning elections, I'm interested in perusing social justice, and I'm not going to abandon those principles of social justice just because they're not broadly popular. You're entirely right, Conservatism always has the advantage - it plays to self-interest and a natural deference to authority and the establishment, and the best I can hope for is to challenge that orthodoxy and make the argument that acting equitably and collectively is the moral thing to do even though it means those with the advantage giving up some of what they have. It's a mistake however to think that power is the only way to affect change, and a mistake too to think that politics is Westminster, because social activism is always available to the powerless and politics starts at home.





The trouble with your comments is that not even the Labour MPs believe that. The People across the country (who can get Labour into power) don't believe it. Nevertheless, you are entitled to your opinions; as the neo-Nazi's, Lib-Dems etc are entitled to their views (no matter how far they are out of sync with the rest of the country they are).

I also agree that there are other ways to change things; the Poll tax is a good example. But they are few and far between. Putting all that to one side; If Labour MPs don't believe in him, if traditional Labour voters (outside those that have signed up) don't believe in Corbyn then all you've got is your principles, and of course a continuous Tory Government. I am sure the Tory government and other parties (who hope to pick up disenchanted Labour voters) support your principles wholeheartedly. At least there won't be any changes in the near future.
TallDarkAndHandsome
QUOTE (GMR @ Jul 18 2016, 07:37 PM) *
I also agree that there are other ways to change things; the Pole tax is a good example.


I'm a brexiteer but having a separate tax just for the Polish? That's a bit far right wing, even for me!!!!😄
Simon Kirby
QUOTE (GMR @ Jul 18 2016, 07:37 PM) *
The trouble with your comments is that not even the Labour MPs believe that. The People across the country (who can get Labour into power) don't believe it. Nevertheless, you are entitled to your opinions; as the neo-Nazi's, Lib-Dems etc are entitled to their views (no matter how far they are out of sync with the rest of the country they are).

I also agree that there are other ways to change things; the Pole tax is a good example. But they are few and far between. Putting all that to one side; If Labour MPs don't believe in him, if traditional Labour voters (outside those that have signed up) don't believe in Corbyn then all you've got is your principles, and of course a continuous Tory Government. I am sure the Tory government and other parties (who hope to pick up disenchanted Labour voters) support your principles wholeheartedly. At least there won't be any changes in the near future.

The trouble with the Labour MPs, and I suspect a significant minority of the old-guard and party grandees, is that they don't believe in the values which Corbyn has awoken in the majority of the Labour Party membership.

I've heard the argument about a loss of support in the Labour heartlands and I don't accept it. Yes, I accept that Labour has lost support, but I reject the notion that Labour values of social justice are in any way defined by the views of the people who have traditionally benefited from that social justice. Specifically I've heard the argument that Labour, being the party of the working man, should take up whatever opinion that working man would advance, no matter how unjust and objectionable. That argument is bogus - Labour was never the party of the working man - Labour is the party of social justice, and it's in the nature of the thing that the beneficiary of that social justice has oftentimes been the labouring poor, but if "traditional" Labour voters are abandoning Labour then that's a tragedy for social justice but it's no argument to change what Labour's about.
Simon Kirby
QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Jul 18 2016, 08:37 PM) *
I'm a brexiteer but having a separate tax just for the Polish? That's a bit far right wing, even for me!!!!😄

laugh.gif
GMR
QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Jul 18 2016, 08:47 PM) *
The trouble with the Labour MPs, and I suspect a significant minority of the old-guard and party grandees, is that they don't believe in the values which Corbyn has awoken in the majority of the Labour Party membership.


Well, I can't argue with that. Unfortunately his "values" are minority values.




QUOTE
I've heard the argument about a loss of support in the Labour heartlands and I don't accept it. Yes, I accept that Labour has lost support, but I reject the notion that Labour values of social justice are in any way defined by the views of the people who have traditionally benefited from that social justice. Specifically I've heard the argument that Labour, being the party of the working man, should take up whatever opinion that working man would advance, no matter how unjust and objectionable. That argument is bogus - Labour was never the party of the working man - Labour is the party of social justice, and it's in the nature of the thing that the beneficiary of that social justice has oftentimes been the labouring poor, but if "traditional" Labour voters are abandoning Labour then that's a tragedy for social justice but it's no argument to change what Labour's about.


Social justice means different things to different people. You could argue that the Tories and mostly all parties believe in social justice. But saying that, parties must adapt to the future otherwise they will die. Look at the Tory history; they changed and adapted to modern society. What Labour wants (under Corbyn) is to take the party back to days gone-by. Corbyn's politics were annihilated in the 70s/ 80s. Remember the "longest suicide note in history"? He wants to bring that back. A good example of this was/ is the Trident option. It helped destroy them then, and it is destroying them now (Corbyn lost by 117 votes). Values are ok, but they have to be meaningful and achievable (especially in government). The BNP have values; you can argue everybody has values. But you can only achieve those values by being in Government, otherwise you are just heckling from the outside, watching the world go by. I agree we need to change the world, but that can only be achieved through Government or mass revolt (and Corbyn hasn't got mass revolt; only his party is revolting, and that is against him).

blackdog
QUOTE (GMR @ Jul 19 2016, 11:06 AM) *
Well, I can't argue with that. Unfortunately his "values" are minority values.


Not in the Labour party, which will re-elect him in September.

British politics needs an alternative to Thatcherism - at the moment Corbyn, SNP and the Greens are it.

Perhaps Labour will be unable to win power with these policies, but they were unable to win power with New Labour Thatcherism even after an unpopular coalition. Would Eagle or Smith win the next election? I doubt it. Would they do better than Corbyn? We can never know, but I doubt it.

GMR
QUOTE (blackdog @ Jul 19 2016, 11:19 AM) *
Not in the Labour party, which will re-elect him in September.


But which part of the Labour party? And I am sure that many people outside the Labour party will also hope that he is elected in September.

QUOTE
British politics needs an alternative to Thatcherism - at the moment Corbyn, SNP and the Greens are it.


Maybe they should join forces and create a new party.

QUOTE
Perhaps Labour will be unable to win power with these policies, but they were unable to win power with New Labour Thatcherism even after an unpopular coalition. Would Eagle or Smith win the next election? I doubt it. Would they do better than Corbyn? We can never know, but I doubt it.


I think first they must win back Scotland and the North of England to have a chance. But that has to be with a new leader.

Simon Kirby
QUOTE (GMR @ Jul 19 2016, 02:37 PM) *
I think first they must win back Scotland and the North of England to have a chance. But that has to be with a new leader.

Why the need to "win" anything? Scotland elected the SNP with a near total whitewash, and as far as I can tell the SNP represent Labour values in Scotland perfectly well so the best strategy for me is for Labour to withdraw totally from Scotland and leave it to the Scottish Conservatives to offer an alternative politics. Labour also need to invite the best and brightest of the SNP at westminster onto the Opposition front benches out of respect for the SNP's mandate to govern in Scotland.
On the edge
It isn't just about winning votes. The Blair idea of being more Tory than Tory might have worked for a while, but it's not sustainable. Having three conservative parties (four if you count UKIP) isn't democracy and brings it down to a choice of apples or apples. It also brings us to the managerial, 'free microwave' if you vote for me politics which boils down to the voters choice as being what colour their Ritlin dose should be.
On the edge
I heard now former lLabour Leader contender on the radio explaining how the MPs were actually in touch with public opinion. Apparently it's because like her, they hold very busy constituency surgeries, full of people who are begging them for help to mitigate the cuts. So, no matter what, nothing will stop her helping those people.

Indeed, very worthy I'm sure, but demonstrates what is wrong. That is, the bulk of the population see local and now national politicians as little more than social workers. Sadly, the politicians (who have actually encouraged this) see this as gathering public opinion.

The Queen gets on a train now and again, a train is public transport, ergo, the Queen is one of the people.
blackdog
QUOTE (On the edge @ Jul 19 2016, 08:10 PM) *
I heard now former lLabour Leader contender on the radio explaining how the MPs were actually in touch with public opinion. Apparently it's because like her, they hold very busy constituency surgeries, full of people who are begging them for help to mitigate the cuts. So, no matter what, nothing will stop her helping those people.


Perhaps she should go to a meeting of her constituency party - who are considering deselecting her.
blackdog
QUOTE (GMR @ Jul 19 2016, 02:37 PM) *
But which part of the Labour party?


The biggest part - that's how elections work.

I don't think Corbyn will win a general election, I don't think he's a great party leader - but I think his election to lead Labour is the best thinig that has happened in British politics for many years.
TallDarkAndHandsome
QUOTE (blackdog @ Jul 19 2016, 09:58 PM) *
The biggest part - that's how elections work.

I don't think Corbyn will win a general election, I don't think he's a great party leader - but I think his election to lead Labour is the best thinig that has happened in British politics for many years.


He may well now lose. Owen Smith. Ex BBC journalist..... wonder how the BBC will play that. laugh.gif

They'd have organism's (deliberate) if one of their own won the Labour leadership. ohmy.gif
On the edge
QUOTE (blackdog @ Jul 19 2016, 09:53 PM) *
Perhaps she should go to a meeting of her constituency party - who are considering deselecting her.


Quite so! Indeed, the growth in membership also underlines that.
GMR
QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Jul 19 2016, 03:28 PM) *
Why the need to "win" anything? Scotland elected the SNP with a near total whitewash, and as far as I can tell the SNP represent Labour values in Scotland perfectly well so the best strategy for me is for Labour to withdraw totally from Scotland and leave it to the Scottish Conservatives to offer an alternative politics. Labour also need to invite the best and brightest of the SNP at westminster onto the Opposition front benches out of respect for the SNP's mandate to govern in Scotland.





For a start Nicola Sturgeon is not Corbyn, nor was Alex Salmond. They were both more articulate than Corbyn. Also their SMPs backed their leader 100%, Corbyn doesn't get that and they also have PR, there isn't that in a general election. And finally the Scottish people deserted Labour for the SNP, while the Scottish Tories took second place. You can see where I am going here?

Another point; Labour doesn't support Scotland leaving the UK.

GMR
QUOTE (On the edge @ Jul 19 2016, 07:18 PM) *
It isn't just about winning votes. The Blair idea of being more Tory than Tory might have worked for a while, but it's not sustainable. Having three conservative parties (four if you count UKIP) isn't democracy and brings it down to a choice of apples or apples. It also brings us to the managerial, 'free microwave' if you vote for me politics which boils down to the voters choice as being what colour their Ritlin dose should be.


I disagree; you can have three centrist parties (or Tory as you call them). All parties have had to take the centre ground if they want to govern. Now that Labour have turned far-left they've become a minority party. Even in Scotland the SMP have moved to the centre ground. And that is the thoughts of the people (majority centre). But having three "Tory parties" doesn't mean three exact same policies. They can all cut their cloth accordingly.

Blair's ideas failed, not because of "more Tory," but because of the Iraq and most of his policies were just sound bites. And we also must forget that the Tories weren't electable at the time. Blair type Tory politics could have survived if they had a leader who knew what he was doing. The same applies for the actual Tory party. At the end of the day it has always boiled down to apples or apples, the question is, what variety of apples?

GMR
QUOTE (blackdog @ Jul 19 2016, 09:53 PM) *
Perhaps she should go to a meeting of her constituency party - who are considering deselecting her.





Who is considering deselecting her? According to the last polls I read she has about 85% popularity. I bet politicians would love that, and they are voted for.

On the edge
QUOTE (GMR @ Jul 20 2016, 04:37 PM) *
I disagree; you can have three centrist parties (or Tory as you call them). All parties have had to take the centre ground if they want to govern. Now that Labour have turned far-left they've become a minority party. Even in Scotland the SMP have moved to the centre ground. And that is the thoughts of the people (majority centre). But having three "Tory parties" doesn't mean three exact same policies. They can all cut their cloth accordingly.

Blair's ideas failed, not because of "more Tory," but because of the Iraq and most of his policies were just sound bites. And we also must forget that the Tories weren't electable at the time. Blair type Tory politics could have survived if they had a leader who knew what he was doing. The same applies for the actual Tory party. At the end of the day it has always boiled down to apples or apples, the question is, what variety of apples?


For me, that exactly sums up what's wrong with today's politics. It means there is no point in voting. I'm going to get an apple so why am I that concerned what type, particularly if I don't like apples and would rather have a bag of crisps.

What seems to be the biggest problem is the now well outdated segmentation. Labour; seen as the 'workers' party, the Tory's, the establishment. That leaves UKIP which is really Thatcherisim (Cobdenite Liberalisim) or LibDem as the Fabians bringing up the rear. We do need new groupings, big or small government.
On the edge
QUOTE (GMR @ Jul 20 2016, 04:39 PM) *
Who is considering deselecting her? According to the last polls I read she has about 85% popularity. I bet politicians would love that, and they are voted for.


Her constituency party; the 'feet on the ground' door knockers in her constituency. Must admit, given their lamentable performance at the General Election and now the referendum what credibility have they got left? Their ability to get an accurate result is as good as WBC!
GMR
QUOTE (On the edge @ Jul 20 2016, 06:46 PM) *
For me, that exactly sums up what's wrong with today's politics. It means there is no point in voting. I'm going to get an apple so why am I that concerned what type, particularly if I don't like apples and would rather have a bag of crisps.


But that is the thing, there is options. You can vote for extreme left or right. There are plenty of options, but the general public prefer more centrist thinking. So, yes there are bags of crisps on offer (you do have a choice), but, and as you have pointed out, it is about democracy, and most people prefer the centre ground. In other words, most people prefer apples. Isn't that truly democracy, or do you prefer forcing feeding people the crisps (isn't that communism ?).

QUOTE
What seems to be the biggest problem is the now well outdated segmentation. Labour; seen as the 'workers' party, the Tory's, the establishment. That leaves UKIP which is really Thatcherisim (Cobdenite Liberalisim) or LibDem as the Fabians bringing up the rear. We do need new groupings, big or small government.


I agree that we need a new grouping, but that grouping must put their troops on the centre ground to stand any chance of being in Government. And as the Tory being the "establishment"; yes, but that is only because the others have left the centre ground. Blair was wise enough to work that out and that is why he won three terms.

GMR
QUOTE (On the edge @ Jul 20 2016, 06:50 PM) *
Her constituency party; the 'feet on the ground' door knockers in her constituency. Must admit, given their lamentable performance at the General Election and now the referendum what credibility have they got left? Their ability to get an accurate result is as good as WBC!


I thought we were talking about the Queen here?

Simon Kirby
QUOTE (GMR @ Jul 20 2016, 04:37 PM) *
Now that Labour have turned far-left...

I've heard it said, but is it true? Corbyn isn't the party of course, but as your assertion is made in the context of a discussion of his leadership it's worth looking at what Jon Kelly of the BBC says Corbyn believes:

QUOTE (Jon Kelly for the BBC)
1. The deficit should be tackled - but not through spending cuts and not to an "arbitrary" deadline. Instead Corbyn would fund its reduction via higher taxes for the rich and a crackdown on tax avoidance and evasion while tackling "corporate welfare" and tax breaks for companies.

2. Britain's railways should be renationalised. He is also opposed to the HS2 rail scheme, saying it would turn northern cities into "dormitories for London businesses".

3. Far more allotments would be good for the UK. He has a plot near his constituency in north London and told the Commons in 2008 that councils and builders "should be doing their best to ensure that every new development includes some allotment space".

4. Talking to militant groups is necessary to win peace in the Middle East. Corbyn faced heavy criticism for using the word "friends" to describe Hamas and Hezbollah. He has responded by saying he had used the term in a "collective way" adding that while he does not agree with either organisation, a peace process means "you have to talk to people with whom you may profoundly disagree".

5. "Quantitative easing for people" could be used to invest in housing, energy, transport and digital projects. Unlike the £375bn issued electronically by the Bank of England between 2009 and 2012 to buy bonds, gilts and other debts, this would be "QE for people instead of banks", Corbyn says. Tax campaigner Richard Murphy argues these plans would stimulate the economy and boost employment. But Shadow Chancellor Chris Leslie attacked the proposal, saying it would lead to higher inflation and interest rates, hurting the poor most.

6. Replacing Trident would be a costly mistake. Corbyn, a long-term CND member, says plans to replace the nuclear missile system should be ditched. He believes the project's £100bn price tag could be better spent "on our national well-being".

7. A National Education Service modelled on the NHS should be established. Under Corbyn, state-funded academies and free schools would be forced to return to local authority control while university tuition fees would be scrapped and replaced with grants. Corbyn would look at ending the charitable status of public schools, although he accepts this would be complicated and might not happen immediately. He reportedly split up with one of his former wives following a disagreement over whether to send their son to a grammar school or a comprehensive. Asked recently if the break-up was over an "an issue of principle", Corbyn told the Guardian newspaper: "I feel very strongly about comprehensive education, yes."

8. Labour should not support air strikes against Islamic State in Syria. Corbyn, who is national chair of the Stop the War Coalition, believes innocent Syrians would suffer and the supply of arms and funds to the Islamic State group should be cut off instead. He opposed military action against the Assad regime in 2013 and was a prominent critic of the invasion of Iraq. His website says he wants to see "illegal wars" replaced with a "foreign policy that prioritises justice and assistance". Asked during a Sky News hustings whether there were any circumstances in which he would deploy UK military forces, Corbyn said: "I'm sure there are some but I can't think of them at the moment."

9. Rent controls should be re-introduced, linking private rents to local earnings, and more council houses should be built. He also believes that council tenants' right to buy their homes should be extended to private sector renters.

10. The Chagos islanders evicted from Diego Garcia should be allowed to return. Some 2,000 people were displaced from the British Indian Ocean territory between 1967 and 1971 to make way for a US air base. Corbyn has been a long-standing supporter of their campaign to go back.

11. The immigration debate has been "quite unpleasant". In an interview with Channel 4 News, Corbyn said the current discourse around the issue "fails to recognise the huge contribution migrants have made to this country". He added: "We should let people into this country who are desperate to get somewhere safe to live".

12. The dispute between the UK and Argentina over the Falkland Islands could be resolved with "some degree of joint administration". In an interview with the BBC in 2013 he said other territorial disputes had been settled in this way, and under such an arrangement the islanders' British nationality could be maintained. He added that during the 1982 Falklands conflict it had been in Margaret Thatcher's interests to "divert attention from her catastrophic economic issues". During the leadership campaign, a Corbyn spokesman said he supported "a long-term negotiated settlement" that took the islanders' views into account.

13. High property prices are leading to the closure of London pubs. In 2013, he said in the Commons that pub companies "make a great deal of money out of selling them" to developers.

14. An arms embargo should be imposed on Israel. Corbyn, who is a patron of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, said in August that Palestinian refugees should be given a "right of return". He supported a boycott of goods produced in Israeli settlements and of Israeli universities that engage in arms research.

15. Corbyn is a committed republican, but he would not seek to end the monarchy. He told the New Statesman: "It's not the fight I'm going to fight - it's not the fight I'm interested in."

16. Remaining in the European Union but with changes. Corbyn says he is not content with the EU as it stands, but wants to stay to fight for a "better Europe". He had previously refused to rule out campaigning to leave. He also opposes the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) deal.

17. Corbyn backs cycling. He does not own a car and declined to share one with the BBC's Chris Mason for an interview, saying: "I cycle all the time. Actually I've got a confession to make, a rather naughty secret - I've got two bikes." He is also a member of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Cycling.

18. Energy companies should be under public ownership. He says he would be "much happier" with a "regulated, publicly run service delivering energy supplies". He is "totally opposed" to fracking. However, he says deep-mine coal pits in the north of England could be reopened.

19. Ireland should be united. Corbyn has long supported British withdrawal from Northern Ireland and invited Sinn Fein President Gerry Adams to the House of Commons as far back as 1984. He was criticised for observing a minute's silence for eight IRA members killed by the SAS in 1987 and once employed Irish Republican Ronan Bennett as a member of staff at Westminster.

20. A national maximum wage should be introduced to cap the salaries of high earners. He would also introduce a windfall tax on former state assets such as the Royal Bank of Scotland, which he says were privatised too cheaply.

21. Every child should have the chance to learn a musical instrument or act on stage. Corbyn's arts policy also includes directing a greater proportion of funding to local projects, widening access and protecting the BBC.
Image copyright Getty Images

22. Private Finance Initiative deals with the NHS should be ended by using government funds to buy them out. Writing in the Guardian, Corbyn said they were a "mess" that were costing the health service billions.

23. A "serious debate about the powers of Nato" is needed, but Corbyn has said there is not "an appetite as a whole for people to leave". Corbyn has previously supported withdrawal and believes it should have been wound up in 1990 at the same time as the Warsaw Pact. He also said open eastward expansion of Nato would lead the Russian military to conclude that it had "to expand to counteract Nato".

24. The arms trade should be restricted. Corbyn would like to see the "brilliance and skill of those in the arms industry be converted for peaceful purposes".


I suggest if this assemblage of policy thinking is "far-left" then that's only because the middle ground of British politics has drifted so ridiculously rightwards.

And did you see No. 3? Can't help but love this guy. smile.gif
Simon Kirby
QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Jul 20 2016, 08:20 PM) *
I suggest if this assemblage of policy thinking is "far-left" then that's only because the middle ground of British politics has drifted so ridiculously rightwards.

And this is what passes without comment as moderate middle-of-the-road centrist Liberal Democracy - £thousands of public money spent on regalia, uniforms, flag poles, and a mayoral enthronement ceremony while there is not enough public money to pay for respite care for disabled children, public toilets, public libraries, adult mental health services, and public transport for school children.
GMR
QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Jul 20 2016, 08:20 PM) *
I've heard it said, but is it true? Corbyn isn't the party of course, but as your assertion is made in the context of a discussion of his leadership it's worth looking at what Jon Kelly of the BBC says Corbyn believes: I suggest if this assemblage of policy thinking is "far-left" then that's only because the middle ground of British politics has drifted so ridiculously rightwards. And did you see No. 3? Can't help but love this guy. smile.gif


So, it is about allotments'?

I don't believe that it has moved far-right, however, anything on the far-left sees anything away from that spot as far-left. However, if you are right, then it is because the people moved in that direction. And without the people, you haven't got anything. And don't you profess to support the people?

GMR
QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Jul 20 2016, 08:29 PM) *
And this is what passes without comment as moderate middle-of-the-road centrist Liberal Democracy - £thousands of public money spent on regalia, uniforms, flag poles, and a mayoral enthronement ceremony while there is not enough public money to pay for respite care for disabled children, public toilets, public libraries, adult mental health services, and public transport for school children.





You could look at it a different way. Such regalia attracts people from all over the world (tourists), and from this country. The money that is made on that alone outweighs the money spent on such regalia etc.

"The United Kingdom is the world's 8th biggest tourist destination, with 36.115 million visiting in 2015. US$22.072 billion was spent in the UK by foreign tourists. VisitBritain data shows that the US remains the most-valuable inbound market, with American visitors spending £2.1 billion in 2010." And why do they come? Because of our pomp and ceremony. Removing it could mean that you end up cutting your nose off to spite your face. All this money helps those that you have quoted.

Simon Kirby
QUOTE (GMR @ Jul 20 2016, 08:37 PM) *
I don't believe that it has moved far-right, however, anything on the far-left sees anything away from that spot as far-left. However, if you are right, then it is because the people moved in that direction. And without the people, you haven't got anything. And don't you profess to support the people?

It was your assertion that Labour is a party of the far-left, so go ahead, make that argument. I've given you the BBC's 24-point distillation of Corbynism so feel free to start from there, or not, it's your argument to make.
GMR
QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Jul 20 2016, 08:43 PM) *
It was your assertion that Labour is a party of the far-left, so go ahead, make that argument. I've given you the BBC's 24-point distillation of Corbynism so feel free to start from there, or not, it's your argument to make.





Wasn't it you that criticised the BBC for being biased in the past? Now it suits you, you use them.

I don't need to make the argument; their own MPs do that quite well. And it isn't my assertion; it is being said up and down the country. However, and saying that I do agree.

Simon Kirby
QUOTE (GMR @ Jul 20 2016, 08:42 PM) *
You could look at it a different way. Such regalia attracts people from all over the world (tourists), and from this country. The money that is made on that alone outweighs the money spent on such regalia etc.

"The United Kingdom is the world's 8th biggest tourist destination, with 36.115 million visiting in 2015. US$22.072 billion was spent in the UK by foreign tourists. VisitBritain data shows that the US remains the most-valuable inbound market, with American visitors spending £2.1 billion in 2010." And why do they come? Because of our pomp and ceremony. Removing it could mean that you end up cutting your nose off to spite your face. All this money helps those that you have quoted.

Ironically enough the idea that public money should be spent to prop-up an otherwise unsustainable economy is leftist, and my position - that the BID should pay for any promotional pomp that supports Newbury business, is rightist. I trust that none of those thousands of tourists visiting Newbury want to use a public toilet.
Simon Kirby
QUOTE (GMR @ Jul 20 2016, 08:59 PM) *
I don't need to make the argument...

Bwaaak bwk bwk bwk... wink.gif
On the edge
If all the parties did maintain a centrist approach, we'd never have had the Thatcher revolution. That essentially ended a period like today, where there was little real difference between the parties. Ironically a 'left wing' centre. Now, as there are growing numbers who see that state intervention in housing, public ownership of natural monopoly, the retention of an inclusive free at point of delivery health system etc, the call for change is growing ever stronger. It will need another catalyst to shake us out of our complacency; last time it was the greed and callousness of just a few Trades Union Leaders, substitute them for Business Leaders in a couple of years and the polarity of the centre will be changed alright.
GMR
QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Jul 20 2016, 09:05 PM) *
Bwaaak bwk bwk bwk... wink.gif





I said I didn't need to make a case because it has already been made. Made by Labour MPs and others.

GMR
QUOTE (On the edge @ Jul 20 2016, 09:28 PM) *
If all the parties did maintain a centrist approach, we'd never have had the Thatcher revolution. That essentially ended a period like today, where there was little real difference between the parties.


Of course we would have had Thatcher. Circumstances created her. When she came to power she was centrist (or played the centrist game to appease the "wets"). At the same time we were know as the "sick man of Europe". Labour was tearing themselves apart (as they are doing now) and this gave Thatcher her chance to start her changes. Remember; it took Thatcher three years to get the right people in Government (her people). Before that she had to put up with the "wets".

QUOTE
Ironically a 'left wing' centre. Now, as there are growing numbers who see that state intervention in housing, public ownership of natural monopoly, the retention of an inclusive free at point of delivery health system etc, the call for change is growing ever stronger. It will need another catalyst to shake us out of our complacency; last time it was the greed and callousness of just a few Trades Union Leaders, substitute them for Business Leaders in a couple of years and the polarity of the centre will be changed alright.


I agree that we need a catalyst to change things, but that change isn't here at the moment, and if it does come it will probably come when one party (properly Labour) moves too far to the left (making them redundant), which will give opportunity to the other party (probably Tory again) to implement those changes.

The only time we've had another party - other than the Tory's - that made a difference was Attlee's Labour party. The Tories wanted more of the same (the status quo) and this let Attlee in. The trouble is the Tory's have always been fast learners and encroached on their territory and replaced Labour in 1951 (after six years of Labour rule) and removed ration books, built mre houses and continued with the National Health service etc.

GMR
QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Jul 20 2016, 09:04 PM) *
Ironically enough the idea that public money should be spent to prop-up an otherwise unsustainable economy is leftist, and my position - that the BID should pay for any promotional pomp that supports Newbury business, is rightist. I trust that none of those thousands of tourists visiting Newbury want to use a public toilet.





Didn't they reverse the decision on public toilet closures?

On the edge
QUOTE (GMR @ Jul 21 2016, 09:34 AM) *
Of course we would have had Thatcher. Circumstances created her. When she came to power she was centrist (or played the centrist game to appease the "wets"). At the same time we were know as the "sick man of Europe". Labour was tearing themselves apart (as they are doing now) and this gave Thatcher her chance to start her changes. Remember; it took Thatcher three years to get the right people in Government (her people). Before that she had to put up with the "wets".



I agree that we need a catalyst to change things, but that change isn't here at the moment, and if it does come it will probably come when one party (properly Labour) moves too far to the left (making them redundant), which will give opportunity to the other party (probably Tory again) to implement those changes.

The only time we've had another party - other than the Tory's - that made a difference was Attlee's Labour party. The Tories wanted more of the same (the status quo) and this let Attlee in. The trouble is the Tory's have always been fast learners and encroached on their territory and replaced Labour in 1951 (after six years of Labour rule) and removed ration books, built mre houses and continued with the National Health service etc.


Go back further, the 1906 Liberal government was another massive sea change. However, these changes no matter how beneficial can only happen if there are real differences between political parties. In all of these examples, party policies were significantly different thus enabling the change. Ironically, we've tended to decline and stagnate when they are the same; the 'consensus' politics of the 60s and 70s, the national governments in the 1930s. That's why Labour really does need to be different.
GMR
QUOTE (On the edge @ Jul 21 2016, 09:58 AM) *
Go back further, the 1906 Liberal government was another massive sea change. However, these changes no matter how beneficial can only happen if there are real differences between political parties. In all of these examples, party policies were significantly different thus enabling the change. Ironically, we've tended to decline and stagnate when they are the same; the 'consensus' politics of the 60s and 70s, the national governments in the 1930s. That's why Labour really does need to be different.





I totally agree with you here; the only way that we can get change is if parties are fundamentally different. However, and saying that, in all those examples there was a real call for change in society (1906, 1945 & 1979). When there was fundamental differences one party (normally Labour) ended up trying to destroy itself. But is there real call for change now? I am not so sure.

This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2020 Invision Power Services, Inc.