UKC

is Diane Abbott. Satire is truly dead.......

In reply to Postmanpat:

Should keep the Friday night news quiz on R4 in material for a while longer.

In reply to summo:
I think the Friday news quiz already has a surfeit of material from the even dafter CPC. (Has there ever been anything in UK politics quite as daft, ever?)

In reply to Postmanpat:

I was having a laugh about UKIP and then I heard about that.

In reply to Postmanpat:

Presumably the rest of the shadow cabinet has yet to de selected.

In reply to Postmanpat:

You have got Johnson and Fox in your team, and we don't even need to mention the UKIP shower. But back to your OP, yes, Jesus wept.

In reply to Postmanpat:
It's Diane Abbott! youtube.com/watch?v=0EKHDVFjOb8&

In reply to DerwentDiluted:
Yes . And it looks like it's going to drag on for months. Well, two months. They're talking about 'cabinet elections' in ... November. I suppose, then, they'll start having discussions (and votes) on their policies. With Brexit probably bottom of the list ...

In reply to Removed User:


You haven't mentioned Leadsom !!

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:


So she is, in fact, unmentionable.

In reply to Postmanpat:

Mind you, with Shakra leaping up the shadow ladder too, the Tory government has never looked more secure since 1979.

Just when cobryn has a chance to build a strong labour opposition, he fills his posts with corbinistas.

In reply to summo:


>
OK, your starter for 10. What has Shami Chakrabati got in common with Nigel Farage?

In reply to Postmanpat:
More come backs than....

No idea..?

Got it, same kids private school?

In reply to summo:



Yup! Dulwich College.

You gotta larf

In reply to summo:

Shami has had an incredible rise through the ranks since joining the Labour Party in May: a peerage in September and now Shadow Attorney General in October. What's her secret?

In reply to Postmanpat:

Dulwich College happens to be a very fine school indeed (look up some of its alumni). It's a great pity that there are always one or two bad apples, just as there were at my school.

In reply to Postmanpat:

The only positive I can find in all this is that it shows how race and gender are becoming ever less important, which is a good thing.

A shame that credibility and ability are also loosing importance.

In reply to GrantM:

Quite extraordinary that you should be denigrating Shami Chakrabarti, given her outstanding, long track record at Liberty. The Times has called her "probably the most effective public affairs lobbyist of the past 20 years" (Wikipedia). I regard her as by far the highest calibre member of the Shadow Cabinet, and her 'promotion' there, something of a step down, if anything. The very last person I would sneer at.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

>
Yes, including several of my friends and family. You may be aware it moved temporarily to some school called Tonbridge in the war

But it's not the obvious place for a corbynite to send her children. Come to think of it, where did Diane send her son?

In reply to Postmanpat:
Yes, was fully aware of the links with Tonbridge, and yes, both my grandfather and (air speed record-breaking) great uncle went to Dulwich. I visited it recently to hear a lecture by A C Grayling. A wonderful place. I think as good as Tonbridge

PS. No idea about Diane's son. Haven't bothered to Google it.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

You're right, I left out one of her achievements: she chaired the inquiry that found that Labour was not over run by antisemitism in June. Soon afterwards she refused to comment on rumours that she was offered a peerage. She joined Labour on the day the inquiry started, paving the way for her peerage and shadow cabinet position. Did she know at that stage that her future within the party was assured? Joining the party would obviously compromise her independence, so it would have been a strange decision unless there was a quid pro quo. As we know, she has since enjoyed one of the fastest advancements in British party politics.

In reply to Postmanpat:

Ah well, look at it this way. At least she'll never be the 'real' home secretary. That's something left and right can both take comfort from.

In reply to GrantM:
Well,

Well, OK, and that's what's worried me, quite frankly, and why I said/implied in a previous post that I see this promotion as something of a fall from grace. I need to look into these recent facts more closely. It's certainly very disappointing ... but then you might be exaggerating.

PS. Quite frankly, I don't like the fact that she's dabbling, well, got herself knee-deep, in politics at all.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

Amazing thought that PG.Wodehouse and Raymond Chandler were practically class mates.

In reply to Postmanpat:

... and Shackleton ...

In reply to GrantM:


Multitasking.

Applying blanco with a 6" brush whilst simultaneously operating a stick with a tiny hand on it.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

Exaggerating?

16th May:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36304722
Explaining why she joined Labour on the day she was asked to lead the review, she said: "This is a party looking at itself in the mirror and I wanted to have the trust and confidence not just of the Labour leadership but of party members."

30 June:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36304722
The Labour Party is not overrun by anti-Semitism or other forms of racism but there is an "occasionally toxic atmosphere", an inquiry has found.

20 July:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/20/shami-chakrabarti-declines...
Shami Chakrabarti, who chaired Labour’s independent inquiry into antisemitism, has declined to say whether she was offered a peerage by the party.

5 August:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36672022
Labour's deputy leader has said it was a "mistake" for the party to nominate Shami Chakrabarti for a peerage as part of David Cameron's resignation honours.

6 October:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36983112
Ex-Liberty director Shami Chakrabarti is shadow attorney general while former director of public prosecutions Keir Starmer is shadow Brexit secretary.

In reply to GrantM:

But I hope you're unhappy for the same reasons as myself: that this undermines, retrospectively, Liberty, the very important 'advocacy group' that upholds human rights in the UK. Without that, we've got virtually nothing except Amnesty International.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:


Yes but that is a damning indictment of the class system that still prevails in this country. If you go to some posh public school you're much more likely to do well in this country, not because the school is good but because you're instantly part of the old school tie network.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:


That would be taking too far.

In reply to Rylstone_Cowboy:


I agree with most of that. Except: a school like Dulwich (or Tonbridge) is outstandingly good ... one could say, shockingly good, compared with most state schools. The old school tie network certainly applies in some professions, but not in all. I went into the film industry and, if anything, my public school accent was a slight handicap. But it was the freest and least prejudiced profession I've ever worked in. When I got into the film industry by a long struggle, I was told NEVER to mention the fact that I'd gone to film school (or university), so I didn't. So I got to where I did just like everyone else, starting at the very bottom, more or less as a teaboy. The fact that I'd been to a public school was totally irrelevant, and v occasionally the subject of some banter. Of course, the schooling I'd had had helped me in other ways.

I agree, though, that the inequality of our education system is appalling, and the standard of the worst schools is nothing like good enough. Strangely enough, the education system in both Scotland and Ireland seems to be a bit better than in England (purely my opinion, based on what I've seen) ... I don't know why.

In reply to Postmanpat:

Labour Cabinet re-shuffles are going to be cumbersome, the slow grinding wheels of selection by committee

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

Dress it up how you like, she is still a champagne socialist.

In reply to summo:
Do you suppose she's in it for the money? Or to promote her political ideals?

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

I went into the film industry and, if anything, my public school accent was a slight handicap. But it was the freest and least prejudiced profession I've ever worked in. When I got into the film industry by a long struggle, I was told NEVER to mention the fact that I'd gone to film school (or university), so I didn't.

Saying that your 'public school accent was a slight handicap' and being told 'NEVER to mention the fact that I'd gone to film school (or university)' sort of indicates that it wasn't as free from prejudice as you might have thought...

In reply to Pete Pozman:


I'd have though you ought to include "satisfy her ego" as a third option. That's a bigger driver than money or vocation for many politicians. Of course the three are not mutually exclusive and I can think of many politicians for whom all three might apply.

In reply to Pete Pozman:


Her husband does the money side, which is convenient .

In reply to Pete Pozman:


I don't know, only she does? But a corbinista who is supposedly all for equality, ex Liberty etc.. paying to send her kid/s to a private school does not seem to chime so well? It's typical of many of her ilk, do as I say, not as I do.

You'd think if she had anything about her, she would remain a Lady and Liberty worker where she can remain a little less bias, too late for that now.

In reply to Postmanpat:
The whole thing is weird with Diane Abbotts promotion as well.So what do we have as the top 4: Corbyn, Abbott, McDonell and Thornberry.

All London MP's.

Talk about failing to reach out beyond London, unreal.You would have thought they would have got the message.

To Andy Burnhams credit he has quietly and efficently baled out of the mess, and at least he realised that immigration was a bad issue for labour and said they should be talking about it.Looks a shoein for Manchester Mayor, alghtough his merseyside roots may be a stumbing block.

For all we knock the Tories, at least there appears to be a reasonable mixture of different views in the cabinet.

In reply to summo:

Amnesty and Liberty are full of public school types. Not many barristers come from state schools. Nor sure what Shami is doing accepting a peerage. She just pissed all over whatever she did at Liberty, nothing she says from here on has any credibility.

D

In reply to FactorXXX:


I've possibly exaggerated that, in that I only remember just one or two people saying that. And, yes, there was no doubt some completely understandable prejudice against someone who'd come into the industry from a well-educated background of higher education, who had not left school at 15 and worked their way up for many years from the bottom. On the best teams, the best movies, I ever worked on, there was precisely 0 prejudice ... e.g on The Shining - and this was surely a tribute to Stanley Kubrick himself, who treated his whole team as equals, each crew member being equally important. This was confirmed at a 35th anniversary reunion we had last year at (the remains of) Elstree Studios.

In reply to Dauphin:


Yes, sadly that is exactly how I feel about her right now. I hadn't realised the details of the recent machinations until gman2012 pointed them out.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
>
I'm intrigued by which professions you think the "old school tie network" still applies to. I would say it comes down to professional networks and university grades. The unfairness is that you need to get an internship and you are at an advantage getting an internship if your parents have the right professional contacts (and can provide accommodation) and you are more likely to get to the best universities if you goto the best schools.

But that is not about the old school tie.

In reply to Postmanpat:


That was Gerry Doncaster's comment, not mine, that I was replying to. I was conceding that in some professions (possibly in the city? e.g in law??) this might still be true ... but I don't know because I have no experience of it.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

Fair enough. Funnily enough the expereience of my offspring is that it's in the media world that who you know matters more than what you know, at least at the entry level.

In reply to Bobling:

Every time I hear her I name it I immediately hear that Andrew Neil impression.

In reply to Postmanpat:


Yes, that's very true. There's a huge amount of nepotism. Or was (don't know situation now.) But once you were in the industry, that didn't then help at all - because it's a rather vicious meritocracy. So you got the situation (when I was in the film industry - may longer be true) where some of those people remained stuck in very lowly grades, e.g, Second Assistant whatever, for their entire careers.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

Sounds like not much has changed! Actually most industries are too competitive nowadays to allow dead wood to rise on the basis of their background, although there will be "types" that get on better than others.

I remember an American boss of mine in the city asking "What is this Eton place you all talk about? Is that some kind of high school or something?" It probably wasn't top of his criteria when evaluating promotions

In reply to neilh:

>[...]


I guess it depends on your definition of "different views"

In reply to


Same goes for UKIP.........

In reply to Postmanpat:

I don't actually have a problem with someone from private school/Oxbridge going into politics to serve. If they have had advantages and want to share that, why not? In fact it's laudable.
Lots of people have gone to the Lords to try to make a difference as that happens to be our constitutional set up, so that is not controversial.
There is no doubt that the crassness of Corbyn's political operating is laughable, however.

In reply to TMM:
Didn't Abbot and Porttilio attend the same school?

-
Apparently not. Abbot went to all girls school and then Newnham College, so Portfolio definitely wasn't there.

D