UKC

That's it. Labour should have wiped the floor last night. They failed. He's toast - or should be.

Agreed. As a former Labour supporter I will not vote for them again so long as he remains

Labour gained my vote because of Corbyn's leadership. I think his leadership is also the reason for the surge in labour party members to become Europe's largest political party.

The idea is to be in power and change things for the better, not to have the largest fan club. 

As did many people. He's the only chance to actually change the shit system we have of voting for the least crap party.

Considering the media shitstorm Labour have been subjected to I'm surprised they did so well, like the last election almost a full month of Labour bashing and still they pull through. It's quite heartening to see most people are immune to the BS.

It's not about a fan club or even Corbyn to be honest, it's about his ideas and where we want to go next.

His "ideas" are popularity grabbing financially unobtainable pipe dreams and his plans for Britain's defence would be suicidal. He is also totally untrustworthy as he showed in his lacklustre performance during the run up to the Referendum - I can never forgive him for that.

You're surprised they did so well when you consider how awful and weak the Tories currently are? divided over Brexit, Windrush scandal, underfunding NHS etc....why did Labour fail to take advantage? and in local elections of all things! 

I think Corbyn and Momentum are toxic. They have forgotten that its the middle ground where they last had success. I don't think they are up for learning from these mistakes either TBH

I think the Conservatives have been subjected to a media shitstorm more than equal to anything Labour have endured, and still they are not whitewashed in the votes.

As a swing voter I would vote Labour if they dumped him and JMD.

They completely seem to have forgotten the middle ground ( well not all of them, there are alot of Labour supporters who keep telling them this).

His ideas are nothing new and a rehash of the 70's which are best left dead and buried.

"The idea is to be in power and change things for the better, not to have the largest fan club. ", blimey that reminds me of the old "new labour" mantra against "principles without power".  Turn that on it's head and where does it get you? oh yes Bliar and selling the future - welcome to perpetual debt young people.

By being one of two crap parties which benefit from the first past the post status quo?

Because people don't put two and two together, my local hospital is closing down, the roads are falling apart, and we've lost most of the bus services we had.

The Tory candidate, suggested his fight to stop his party from closing the hospital was a reason we should vote for him.

He got rid of some gypsies, not the police of course.

And he fought against loosing the bus service, we lost.

And yet he still got voted in, because I live in a Tory stronghold.

People don't join up the dots, the fight to keep our hospital is the most blatant example, it's been on the cards for sometime and yet the Tory councillors and the public don't see the connection between the Tories and it actually closing.

Well i voted green for the first time rather than labour in local elections. I figure the environmental issues facing us need focusing and the main parties will only do so if they see votes going in that direction.

But that's simply not true, when East Coast Rail was in  government hands it worked and it was profitable.

What's wrong with having the option of buying our energy from a British nationalised industry, rather than another nations industry?

We don't need to nationalism the whole of industry, which isn't what's being suggested, it's about having a choice of buying from a British supplier.

Tuition fees have made the country poorer, and it hasn't worked out like we were told it would do, "up to £9K" when everyone's charging £9K!!

All that's happened is more is being creamed off for Chancellors pay etc. The quality of teaching hasn't got any better.

Isn't it time you looked at what we have now and where we're going, and make that change.

Congratulations on joining Europe's largest pressure group.

Politics about is about power and I don't think Jeremy actually wants it. His position is to carp from the sidelines (well that was his position for overwhelming time he has been a Labour MP).

Momentum have hijacked the Labour party by gaming its rules.

Only Teresa May's utter incompetence and arrogance stopped him being wiped out at the last general election. He is presented with series of open goals every week at PMQ's and he fails to properly skewer the PM despite the abundance of ammunition.

We live in an era of political pygmies.

Well, they do give the impression of being a bunch of incompetent, hate-filled ideological zealots keen to bring Chavez-style ruin on the nation. 

No, it gets you Theresa May and brexit. 

It’s his pro-Brexit stance that’s a problem for me. 

That's why on the radio he was praising the 'activists' (not supporters, voters etc.) who helped a win in Plymouth. A front man sucking up to his masters. 

Just because someone let's you play with their train set for a weekend doesn't mean you have the skills to maintain it long term, or the willingness to keep investing it at the levels needed to keep it functioning. 

All politicians have ideas, all would like to improve things. It comes down to if people think a particular politician is capable of delivering on those ideas. 

What are the chances of Corbyn and his shadow cabinet delivering when they can't even counter the current shambles of a government, that must be the weakest for 40 years or more?

So who were you voting for before?

Looks like every vote like yours gained was 2 or 3 others lost

You only have to be aware of some of the thinking in the other parties ( including theT ory Party )to understand that there is some pretty bold political ideas out there  for young voters. Try looking at what David Willets is saying in the Resolution Foundation. Even the Guardian had a big piece on this earlier this week.

Labour could win in 2022, if they got shot of Corbyn now. It would give them time to sort out a new leader and shadow cabinet, then get established with credible performances on mainstream political programmes by the actual party leader. The longer they dither, it just means 2027 is there next likely hope. 

This thread isn't about the Tories, who we all know are a complete disaster, it's about Corbyn, Labour's crap leader who if he became PM would make a bad situation even worse. There was a time when I felt some hope with Labour, but under their current leadership no way.

As others have said this country desperately needs a strong middle of the road party to challenge the extreme Right and extreme Left

The east coast mainline is still entirely served by trains designed, built and purchased by British Rail 30 or more years ago. A third of the engines are Intercity 125s, a train designed in 1970.  During 25 years of private management replacement of this rolling stock on this line has been repeatedly postponed. I would say long term investment is just about the weakest possible argument against nationalisation.

I can’t imagine what Malcolm Tucker would call the current govt., but the fact that even in that context Labour couldn’t command a majority in the last election means that we’re past Peak Corbyn, and possibly past Peak Labour for the forseeable future. Jezza is a career backbench MP with an MO of criticising everything and offering nothing, so Momentum and hence Labour are his ideal pressure group with no hope of power.

Andy  Burnham seems to be acting well as Mayor of Manchester, and looks more and more like the best leader Labour never had. Even Harriet Harman would have been a better bet than Alfie Smith.

Plans for defence? Our armed services are woefully underequipped and understaffed  under the Tories.Nukes really are a waste of money.For the last attack on Syria,we had a vast air fleet of 6 jets on Cyprus.Utter joke.

Me too, but his apparent inability to offer any serious opposition in other areas, or to call out the many Tory lies and contradictions in any telling way, certainly doesn't help gain confidence in his ability as an effective leader.

It's obvious why labour didn't win more seats, it's supporters didn't insult enough people! Dear god, where were the choruses of ; "If you vote for the Tories or Brexit, then you're a Daily Mail reading xenophobic, racist, Little Englander!!"

It should have been shouted all over the shires. 

Before high horses get mounted, and denials start, only yesterday...

 Robert Durran -  on 15:12 Thu

Yes, and now we are cutting and running just when Europe needs to stand together against the ugly rising head of nasty populist nationalism of which small minded little Englanders are a symptom and Brexit one of the first wounds.

I have far more of a problem with Corbyn himself, and Momentum than I do with his policies. In the election campaign I do think they got carried away and promised too much, but I think a shift to the left would be a good thing. Widespread renationalisation would be too expensive or damaging, but since the UK government has to underwrite just about every major infrastructure project; from Hinkley Point to a wind farm, the London super sewer to HS2, I have no problem with many of these projects being run by the government. Time and time again we nationalise the losses and privatise the profits.

At least there weas one laugh out loud moment:

But general secretary Paul Oakley said it was "not all over at all" for the Eurosceptic party, which has suffered since the Brexit vote in 2016.

"Think of the Black Death in the Middle Ages," Mr Oakley said.

"It comes along and it causes disruption and then it goes dormant, and that's exactly what we are going to do."

The trouble is UKIP  have not simply disrupted they have completely smashed the country.

Melodrama much?

Don't you realise that 'centrist' is the fashionable smear label these days? https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/17/centrists-attack-left...

I'm looking for a sane left alternative myself. No Stalinists, a handle on the political economy of our techno-future (the challenges of AI innovations and platform capitalism and so on) rather than a fixation on '70s ideas of state socialism. 

Finance , not build . Most infrastructre projects are built these days on time  etc etc. You do not want the public sector building these things.

Which of Labour's policies do you regard as extreme left?

To gain power political parties need to reach out beyond their core demographic and capture swing voters from the centre ground.

JC is great at preaching to the choir. Sadly this will be enough for him to grow the size of the Labour party membership and remain its leader but it will not be enough to win a parliamentary majority.

I just cannot get my head around a political class that has JC, Diane Abbot, John McDonald, Liam Fox, Jeremy Hunt, Boris Johnson and Lynne Truss in front bench/cabinet roles. These people are aresehats of highest order.

There are some pragmatic talents our there from all parties who would serve this country better. Kier Starmer from Labour and Sarah Woolaston from the Conservatives both offer a view that feels more acceptable to centre ground, national interest politics.

So two thirds of stock have been upgraded? 

125s.. are they still pulling old coaches too? Or is it just the engines that are dirty diesels? 

Ps. Either way, it's pretty grim most of Europe are replacing their first generation of electrics, and the UK is still running 60s designed engineering!! 

Winning mid term Council elections is no guarantee of anything. I always find it hard to compare at local level a council mp with their parliamentary equivalents anyway.   Different agendas different concerns.  

Not always a good barometer of anything given they often revert to type once national election day is here no matter what the result.

No, two thirds were upgraded by British rail in the late 1980s. As I said, no new engines since British rail.  

Silly Owen's still purveying his particular brand of nonsense...

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/04/momentum-campaigning-...

That's a good question...

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/12/why-jeremy-corbyn-s-...

Are you their last supporter Big? It wasn't me who claimed that UKIP was the Black Death. It's their own proud boast. 

The big problem is with Corbyn that whilst he has deepened his core support (which makes him harder to shift) he had failed to broaden it by shedding the “spectre” of hard left and incompetence of Diane Abbot for centrist/floating voters.

what is also clear is that Brexit is still high on minds of many voters, particularly the “I don’t f*****g care about Irish border, EU trade b*****ks JUST GET US OUT NOW” crowd

And what's the biggest difference between the UK and most west European railways?  

(yes I know they're not nationalised monoliths any more, but the inter city passenger services are still nearly all provided by the 'national railway')

Westminster politics is entertaining. It hasn't got enough seats, people bray and cannot clap. People dress in wierd clothing and its staffed by, quite frankly, odd people who often have bizarre views. 

However, it is bad politics and leads to poor political decision making and an unrepresented population. 

I live in Scotland. The Scottish parliament has its critics. However, it has sensible government structures, created in the 1990's, that were influenced by modern European assemblies. It's committees have more scrutinising power. It means that Scotland is being governed by compromise across parties, currently the SNP and Greens but also involves the other parties on committees. It generally leads to better decision making. And you can clap.

English people do not have much of a choice at Westminster (I know these were local elections). A lot of Labour policies would be good for the country but I don't think Corbyn has the leadership qualities to convince enough people to get him elected. 

If Westminster had a different parliamentary system people would not feel they had to make such a binary choice between a bitterly divided Conservative party or a poorly led Labour party.

Corbyn is a long way from being toast. Now if David Milliband had beaten his brother.....

Nope.

Yes, but I think your comment that "they have completely smashed the country." is exceedingly melodramatic, and bears no relevance to the Black Death quote.

You mean there's another one still out there somewhere?

We'd have Blair mk2.

They retained 3 seats, so one would assume so.

Surely one of their big problems is how they sort out a new (centreground) leader?

With the momentum power base pulling a lot of strings and encouraging very left wing politics, especially to younger voters, I fear there would be more of the same.

Strange, I always had you down as a Tory, willing to turn a blind eye to the ridiculousness and lack of compassion in many of their policies for reasons unclear, rather than one of the kippers, who seem to be keen on shouting ridiculousness and lack of compassion from the rooftops.

As the Black Death was a disease I think UKIP are bang on in identifying as the black death. Among the symptoms is an aggressive ignorance which has infected the very highest levels of our government. 

I always had you down as one of those sad acts who is more concerned with insulting the poster, rather than engaging in debate.

Grow up.

Nice.

and along comes another one.

Seriously folks, as I highlighted above, if you have nothing to offer but cheap childish insult, is it any wonder your political preference gets nowhere. 

I know there are some here, left leaning, (Jon S for example,) who can actually debate the topic without resorting to child like playground taunts, but if I were still left-wing inclined I'd be despairing of the showing of puerile garbage which passers for some left wing debate here.

So who do you suggest leads the Labour party. I didn't vote for him in the initial leadership election. But I voted for him when the pathetic challenge came.

Suggest a better leader and I will listen but bearing in mind that less than a year ago the pundits reckoned a whitewash for May I think he has done alright. I actually want some vaguely socialist policies I don't want to be every so slightly left of centre and sometimes barely distinguishable from the Tories, I want clear ground.

All well and good but policies alone are useless without an election victory. You surely must agree that it would be a whole lot better to have such policies and also to have a leader who didn't make John Major look charismatic and Boris Johnson look clever?

The problem is, he isn't.

He's not doing anything to halt Brexit or get us a final vote.  His party did sod all to support electoral reform.  It's up to the Lib Dems to be radical about this and other issues such as drug law reform and its associated law and order/criminalisation issues. 

I really can't think of anything revolutionary he brings other than more bitching and moaning from the sidelines and potentially a home secretary less capable than anyone the Tories have.

I say that as someone who actually quite likes the guy, as a person.  And I'm happy for him to remain leader.  I just don't think the Labour party offers anything.

So fair enough John, suggest a Labour leader. Owen Smith was a waste of space, Corbyn light at best. And a back stabbing challenge.

As I said I didn't vote for Corbyn initially and probably wouldn't if there was a credible alternative. But there isn't.

We all know who introduced tuition fees, don't we?

What, better, fairer, more socially democratic policies than the current lot? 

Right now I'd vote for any party that offered a credible opportunity to introduce an AV(/+) voting system. That way, this trap of "it's either Tory or Labour in their current manifestation, no other option is meaningful" would be a non issue and there might even be space for political leadership on the middle ground.

Keir Starmer.

Yeah. Taxation. You pay for it either way. Some have both private and public train services running on the same lines. The problem I have is how Labour tell you they will improve and invest in everything at no cost to the end user, be it renationalising industry, or health, education etc.. 

Meet the new boss, same as the old Blair

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Miliband#Business_interests

I'm not sure anyone who's in front line politics has actually promised increased investment at zero cost. Net benefit maybe. However, I haven't been making detailed notes on political promises, so feel free to enlighten me .

I didn't see an awful lot there to get too agitated about ... until I got to "non-executive director of Sunderland", at which point I started to wonder whether he really would have the right judgement for the top job at Labour after all!

Although, having said that, maybe Graeme might reconsider his lack of suitable candidates for the role, in light of this new information

Not strictly true either. No franchise fees, hence the figures looked healthier.

Not that this means I'm a supporter of the franchise system. After all when my winning franchise bid for Bellie Express, means I get the franchise from Krikorail... All I do is take over lease on the rolling stock and give them a lick of paint. Give the same staff a new uniform, oh and promise the earth to the government. Nothing much changes either way... Just figures juggled around to please.

I don't think there is much to worry about,and may be doing the man a disservice. 

Not wishing to state the obvious, but in effect the UK parliament is driven now by compromise because just like the Scottish parliament nobody has a clear majority. Despite all the load and noisey posturing most things at the moment are steered through after much negotiating.

All this talk of the east coast line

West coast line is excellent with Virgin.

Not all franchises are poor

Labour manifesto last year. All utilities and rail renationalised, remove tuition fees, more spending and wages increases for NHS, education and the existing public sector  etc. Etc.. All without tax increases for 95% of the population..  so yes 5% will pay more you are correct. However the maths just didn't add up they'd be borrowing endlessly, as you couldn't fund those kind of aspirations on the uks low level of taxation. 

Ill be sure to pass on your praise to my mate... West Coast is his job.

Worth noting that much of the problem with the East Coast was the bid projections were based on goverments promises over the line upgrades. Which havent materialsed.

John Curtice has it that based on the voting pattern Labour would win a GE.

I say this as someone who doesn't support Corbyn, but I think it's unfair to say that numbers you don't agree with equates to "at no cost to the end user". I'm not trying to be needlessly pernickety you understand; I just think it's important to be accurate in our criticisms of politicians .

On the general subject, the BBC's model of the House of Commons based on this week's elections puts Labour on 283 seats, the Tories on 280.

Does this mean I think Corbyn is doing a good job? No. However, I don't think these local election results are going to weaken his grip on power right now.

No Blair and Cameron got us May and Brexit, who do you think the leave voters wanted to punish?

Granted Corbyn was f**king useless in this regard but to quote my brexit voting neighbour, "it's sad, it's the wrong result, I just wanted to give them a bloody nose, I never wanted to actually leave".

In the televised "Windrush" debate I thought Yvette Cooper MP (the Chairperson of the Home Afairs Select Committee) did very well.

Yes, another one of a list of potential leaders, also including David Miliband and Andy Burnham, who I think would have been far more effective in opposition than Corbyn, and certainly could have been far more electable to a wider range of potential Labour voters, had unions and momentum not been so effective in scuppering their chances in favour of their preferred candidate - even though their choice was almost certainly not that of the labour-voting populace as a whole. None of them saints, obviously, but we aren't measuring them against a particularly high benchmark.

'Suicidal'? How so?

He probably wouldn't do 'sensible' things like have wars for oil, sell arms to despots or tell us that the guy from Porton Down said it was definitely the Russians.. Very dangerous indeed! 

Maybe not.
Then again, he'll probably never do anything remotely aggressive.  Ever, no matter what the circumstances are.

Well the real life Malcolm Tucker said this;

“We are really clutching at straws,” he said. “If I see one more person from the Momentum side saying: ‘These are the best results since 1971’. What planet are they on? These are bad results.

“You’re talking here about the government, which is possibly the worst government in living memory. You’ve had Windrush, you’ve had Grenfell, you’ve had the Brexit negotiations going from bad to worse, you’ve had the National Health Service under more pressure than it’s been for a long, long time, serial incompetence day after day after day, yet the public do not seem in nearly sufficient numbers remotely interested in supporting the Labour party.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/05/alastair-campbell-berates-...

Splendid. Who's the marmalade?

T.

Just in case you've forgotten, these were Local elections to elect Local Councillors for Local people about Local matters.  Not really global UK matters.

And just in case you missed it, Tories lose Trafford, their flagship Northern Council
Not a single Tory council in Greater Manchester!

Is that the sum total of Corbyn's success since taken over the leadership of Labour?
Awe inspiring stuff...

Er, no.  He destroyed the Conservative's majority at the last general election.  The one that they called when the opinion polls were giving them anything up to a 21 point lead.

Or is your memory really that short?

Corbyn/Labour came second in the last General Election.
Or, as it's otherwise known: 'First Loser'.
As others have said, Labour can't seem to take any advantage of the shambles that is the current Conservative Government - that is almost entirely down to Corbyn's ineptitude and no glossing over the facts can hide that.

The only way Corbyn will be replaced is if he resigns.
Or, in the case of a re-election, more people join the Labour Party that are anti-Corbyn and therefore out vote all the ones that joined to make Corbyn leader.
I can't see either of those happening...

Edit: There is actually another way and that is to reverse the voting procedure introduced by Miliband.  Not sure if Corbyn would go along with that though!

No. UKIP's core backers wanted a referendum. They got it. They won it. And, with that vote, UKIP's reason to exist disappeared. What the referendum did is expose the deep divisions in our society - especially over the validity and legitimacy of the European Union. Those divisions still remain. UKIP and the referendum brought the division to light; they did not create it. The demise of UKIP is not the same as the demise of the sentiment that gave rise to the leave vote. If anything, the behaviour of the establishment parties post referendum may have hardened those sentiments. 

If thinking that's what makes you happy, fill yer boots Tory boy.
Roll on the next snap GE. Labour WILL be the next Government.  Get used to it

Ah right, if you don't support Corbyn you must be a Tory Boy - typical Momentum type logic...
Anyway, just what has Corbyn achieved apart from removing the Conservatives from Manchester Councils?

But they still lost?

Ps. Corbyn didn't win or destroy anything. The Tories destroyed themselves and Labour continues to fail to capitalise on it. 

If only we could wake up to the fact that the country is at "Breaking Point" ; to the dangers inherent in becoming a "Vassal State" ; to understand the significance that the judiciary are "Enemies of the People" ; to appreciate the intellect capable of remembering and reciting "the Road to Mandalay" in a Burmese temple ; to understand that the country has "had enough of experts" , then you're probably right Big we could all relax into your warm bath of sensible, adult optimism for the future. 

In 2017 Labour faced the most inept campaign in modern political terms, May was not as Foot was a good orator selling an unacceptable basket of policies to your opponents, she was an absence on the campaign and trying to sell toxic policies to those likely to be her own party's supporters.

May will not lead the Conservatives into the next GE.

And remember this was against the back drop of a fairly shambolic government, anaemic economic performance, wage stagnation and so on.

Labour had the benefit of only having one direction of travel i.e. up and there being such a low expectation of them that their policies did not receive the scrutiny that they would if they were expected too stand a chance.

Labour also benefited from a perception that they would be a 'good home' for the centre ground remainers who did not want to vote Lib Dem, they won't get this twice.

Then there's the anti-Semitism thing, I don't think that the actual degree of anti-Semitism within Labour will harm them per se, but what will bite is that Corbyn has been shown that he cannot manage well what is a party issue  and this will cut across issues other than anti-Semitism.

In 2021/22

Brexit (in what ever form it takes) will have happened,

The Lib Dems will have a new leader and a new focus (and the stain of the coalition will have faded)

The Tories will have a new leader and a new policy agenda (and will as they always do) unite around that new leader.

Corbyn will be 73/74, there will be no new agenda, the 'moderates' and grown ups will all have gone, the party cannot unite under his leadership and the country has never voted in a government as far to the left as his policies are.

These elections were primarily in Labour areas and the result was roughly a tie, usually the opposition creams the government in the first mid-term election, in the comparable election in 1998 when Labour ha just won a landslide, the tories were in disarray after 18 years in power, the party was split asunder over Europe (plus ca change) mired in the remains of the various 'sleaze allegations' William Hague polled 32% gained 256 councillors and Blair polled 36% an lost 88.

No opposition has taken the keys to Number 10 without being the largest party in government.

There is no point getting 85% of the votes in a ward / seat you already hold, you need to win in the marginals and the chances of Corbyn doing that are, well very marginal.

We need effective opposition and sadly Corbyn is not it.

What makes you think I've "forgotten"? You really should give some context to what you are replying to, otherwise it's rather meaningless. Please show or quote my comment which makes you think I have "forgotten" something.

Nope, didn't miss that.

and?

If only you could stop putting words in people's mouths, and refrain from insulting people, then you may be able to be taken seriously as a political movement.

Totally agree. Labour is driven by a small minority of activists it won't change in the near future. 

I wonder if the new Trafford Labour council will tackle the big issue there which is grammar schools. Be interesting to see .

The big issues according to my mates who live there is the state of the roads, the £40 extra charge to have your green garden bin emptied and housing.

Grammar schools are part of the landscape from Stretford to Sale to Hale and it's not an issue locally (this is a mixture of folk who have kids in the Comps, KD's, AGS, St Ambose, MGS etc).

About time they went. Just appeals to the elitism that is rife there .

£40 is cheap for your green bins being emptied . £60 in Warrington. 

I think I've been on about aggressive ignorance.  I quoted four different Brexiteers to illustrate my point about their aggressive ignorance. Somehow you've managed to be offended. I'm not wanting to be a political movement. I'm just a bloke standing in front of a situation asking for politics to be normal again. 

I think I've been on about aggressive ignorance.  I quoted four different Brexiteers to illustrate my point about their aggressive ignorance. Somehow you've managed to be offended. I'm not wanting to be a political movement. I'm just a bloke standing in front of a situation asking for politics to be normal again. 

I'm not offended, I finds it laughable that the pious left think they can insult and belittle people with different views, and somehow this will make Labour more popular.

It is.

All those insults were made by brexiteers!! That's why they were in inverted comnas in Petes post

All those "insults", I believe, were taken out of context by Pete, and reduced to meaningless soundbites, no one here has said such things.

You believe wrong. Try reading the news. Boris, for example 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2017/sep/30/bor...

Or Mogg

https://amp.theguardian.com/books/2018/feb/02/word-of-the-week-steven-poole...

No doubt you will now rail against brexiteers insulting people. Or not...

Nice edit once you realised how ill informed you are !! 

I edited it straight away, once I realised I was in the wrong, it's a good thing to do..

Can you tell me what Boris Johnson reciting Kipling in Myanmar has to do with Brexit?

Can you also tell me what part of Mogg's concept of the UK being "vassal state" to the EU you find insulting.

Nothing particularly beyond Johnson. I didn't suggest it did

I don't (it's bonkers, however). It was you who seemed to find it insulting when Pete used it before you realised its origin..

So why did you add that totally irrelevant link to BJ quoting Kipling? What was your purpose?

Nope, I didn't find it insulting, apart from an insult to the intelligence. What I found insulting was his earlier post aimed at me, calling me, and I quote; "Are you their (UKIP) last supporter Big? "

He cannot catch a break, can he?

The EU is reportedly launching a fresh drive to shore up its free market policies after Brexit amid fears that Jeremy Corbyn’s plans could undermine European firms.

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/foreign-affairs/brexit/news/94946/brus...

Labour peers launched an attack on the party leadership last night, accusing it of “paralysis” and “cowardice” over Brexit policy, as bitter recriminations over disappointing local election results burst into the open.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/05/labour-peers-accuse-corbyn...

I'll be the devil's advocate here, even as a staunch remainer who is likely to be eternally bitter about our decision to Brexit.

A brexit-eer is indeed likely ignorant of their agressive ignorance.  But so sadly are Remainers.  That is the issue with ignorance.

Remainers have been forever explaining away the Brexit (and Trump) phenomena as almost entirely a result of stupidity on the side of the voters.  They completely overlook that these voters have entirely valid reasons for doing so, even if uncomfortably inward-looking in their justifications and perhaps miss-placed.  We frequently claim reasons for their vote that they themselves do not, or refuse to acknowledge the factors that give rise to them viewing the world a certain way.  We give no credit to their experiences, to the impact our desired lives have on them and that they are experiencing cultural shifts that we are not.

Even if your reply is on the verge of being slightly insulting, I think you are definitely on the right lines.

I was having a Ding dong argument with a close relative the other day who was still citing the straight banana thing at me as an example of EU oppressive regulations, the sort we are going to be free from when we leave. I said "have you ever seen a straight banana?" it's the same thing with people who are sick of all the east Europeans taking all the council housing . First off : have you ever seen an East European? (apart from me of course ) Second off : when did you last see a council house?

This is the thing with Big. He is telling me to move on and cheer up when I am having real conversations with people about nonsense that has been sold to them by the press and posh politicians who know better but, for their own ends , are fostering a climate of aggressive ignorance . 

I was walking in the north pennines over the weekend and came across lots of little signs on stiles informing me that the stile was partially funded by the EU . No doubt, from, one point of view, that's an example of EU interference; of English people being forced to go out walking...

No wonder I'm permanently glum. And Big, I know you are against the EU because of your high principles and not because you dislike foreigners  But don't try telling me that Leavers are well informed . They are ignorant. And proud. 

Lies and fantasy, all in one very silly paragraph. You excel yourself.

More fantasy.

Lies, ignorance, mind reading and prejudice, all in one go. No wonder your side lost the argument if that's the sort of hand you play from. The reason you are "permanently glum" is that you inflict these fantasies on yourself, which are nothing more than figments of your own imagination. If you stopped doing that you'd be a lot more happy.

You really are a fragile petal aren't you? 

Given your typical posting style, a gross hypocrite too. (No doubt that will start another tantrum about insults). 

Big, mate, you're not the debater you were when you were down under. What changed, I wonder? 

Do you not see the irony in that reply?

No 

Has he lost weight?

Can you leave the Brexit thing and personal slights / insults to another forum?

This shows the problem for Labour.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43992681

This was an election in largely the Labour heartlands and was effectively 35% all.

The Tories LOST 33 seats and Labour gained 77, of course this is a loss!!

They consolidated their position and proved the last election results weren't a fluke, as we were told they were. Of course things could have been better but, there's just been over a month's free advertising telling everyone how shit and how racist a party Labour is. There was no comparable news when 4 Tory MPs were kicked out for racism or sexism, one for tweeting "He was sweating like a Jew in an attic" where was the "NEWS" about that?

A little bit of realism wouldn't go a miss.

The Tory attitude to the Grenfell fire tells us all we need to know about  who should govern.

Do you honestly think this is a good result for Labour? I don't think you are being at all objective.  At absolute best it's an incremental advance in an environment where Labour should be wiping out the Tories.

And regarding the media and reporting, the Tories are in the news daily about their incompetence and infighting over Brexit, and have just lost another cabinet minister.  It's hardly been plain sailing for them.

Here's a picture

https://www.facebook.com/611740532365188/photos/a.685742444964996.107374182...

It was basically a little change election result. This allows the Left of the Labour party to spin the results as a victory and hence strengthen JC's position as leader while the Right of the party have characterised it as a disaster and are thus agitating for a new leader.

Historically when a party has been in opposition it has seen a swing towards it in local elections of about 5%. This year Labour managed 1%. Make of that what you will.

Yes, but this particular government is doing such a wonderful job, is clearly socially responsible, has put the NHS on a secure footing and has managed to limit the drop in economic growth rate within the G7 to only 6 places in one year, so it's understandable that people won't be looking to change such a winning formula!

Yes and compared with every other historic result this was a sh*t showing, even little William Hague by comparison knocked spots off these results.

As for the disgusting comments by some Tories, the party took swift and decisive action against them and unlike Labour (and this wasn't an MP it was a councillor / council candidate) there was no mealy mouthed equivocation.

As for the news about the Tory MP who used the phrase '.... in a woodpile', or Boris being Boris, or the allegations of sexual misconduct, they were all over the press for days if not weeks.

Your less then honest deflection of the issue of anti-Semitism speaks volumes about you and your deeply held views.

I think that's the nub of it.  This is the worst government on any metric: without an ounce of charisma, the absence of a coherent policy agenda, riven by splits and division, foreign policy adventures that almost make Suez look well considered and yet even though the elections were heavily focused in Labour's heartlands they scraped a score draw at best.

Panglossian optimism is fine when you're backing a horse at 33:1 or a teenage boy hoping against hope for that hot date, but for Labour this self delusion is going to end badly for them and that means it will end badly for the country as a good government needs a good opposition.

It's being reported that the Labour NEC discussing the party response to anti-Semitism have made the only Jewish delegate wait outside the room and not allowed the affiliated JLM into the meeting.

Without re-opening the debate on are they aren't they, it is this sort of incident, crap management and absent leadership which demonstrates why Corbyn has to go.

The start of a purge? Hmm Debbie Abrhams going is a bit of a harbinger resignations in sympathy could make matters interesting, all part of a Blairite MSM plot of course. 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/08/debbie-abrahams-loses-labo...

And they've all got their jobs back now, so they got sacked for precisely two weeks!!

Regardless, of what they said and what action was taken, it was not widely reported.

Why does it, why is it a binary thing?

East Coast Rail has been a resounding success when nationalised, and other countries are making a profit on running our rail network. For somebody who talks about the need for people in the UK to realise they need to pay more tax if they want to have a nice country to live in, I'm surprised you (seem to) support other nations making a profit on running the UK's infrastructure?

It's a good way of having a pop at corbyn (I don't think he'll get into power), but it's seemingly at odds with what you often say about tax...

Dishonest nonsense.

The councillor in Pendle was suspended for 11 months (compare and contrast to Naz Shah, Ken Livingston etc etc etc) not two weeks.

As for the lack of coverage, what's this, a wall of silence?

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6226397/tory-racist-councillor-row/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44022663

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tory-councillor-racist-joke-...

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tories-urged-to-act-in-row-over-ra...

I don't think that she should have been reinstated, but that's a side issue.

While I think that the idea of a national rail service is superficially attractive the profits extracted are marginal in % terms and also I don't think that the government is well placed to run something as complex as the railway system (who are they going to get to do it other than those already there) and if nationalised then the system becomes an easy target when government wants to cut the costs.

It being an easy target might seem to be why there was a lack of investment when it was BR. I couldn't say off the top of my head who else would run things, but to do with the profits being only a certain percentage, if one extrapolates from the rail network and thinks about other public utilities which are run for a profit in a similar way, it begins to add up - meaning that the general populace has to pay more to be able to afford to live. That it shouldn't be nationalised because our own governments can't be trusted to not be too short sighted and only focus on balancing the books in the short term, doesn't say much that is cheery either... essentially we've got to pay more because our governments can't be trusted.  Which sets me wondering how other countries manage to make nationalised rail networks work...?

It is one thing to support another country running an efficient, clean, modern and cheap semi-nationalised rail service, but it is not the same as believing a Corbyn led, union driven, Labour party could deliver a similar service for the uk taxpayers.

Where does tax come into it. It's about leadership and managerial competence of the Labour party should they ever be in charge of more than their own lunch money.

Ps. Per passenger sweden subsidises less than most in Europe and prices are still at least 50% of UK costs, despite a huge number of track miles to maintain and relatively sparse population. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_subsidies

Perhaps management is key... Corbyn and sage management are not words often associated together.

Or it could be our country, if East Coast was replicated?

It's clear you don't think much of them. I was thinking along the lines of, if we pay towards the profit for shareholders, in the long term it has to be better value (should things be effectively run) for more tax to be paid instead, which if spread across the population in a fair way, would hopefully mean cheaper ticket prices and less of a financial hit on the poorest more broadly. One either pays when buying a ticket, or pays for the investment, and I gather that we have some of the highest ticket prices in Europe.

Yes, management is key. 

Plus there's the argument that the low paid should not subsidise the higher paid who are the bulk of the regular rail commuters further than they do.

I cannot conceive of how difficult it is to manage the railways and I'm involved in strategic and operational management in a company with a turnover of £35m, the one thing I am certain of however is Corbyn and his team couldn't even set the short term let alone strategic management of the railways.

You fail to appreciate that the cost of disbursing profit may be less than the efficiency gains / improvements / innovation which can flow from the private sector.

BT has paid huge dividends but become more efficient, provided more and better and different services, innovated and driven sectoral change.  I cannot think anyone with a straight face could say that any of that would have happened under the Post Office.

It would depend on the detail. 

Conversely, energy prices have gone up. A friend who was involved in the privatisation of German railway infrastructure didn't seem to think it made financial sense for the tax payers, he's a financial guru in London, but you might be right though, I'm not about to start to dig my heels in and look for things to support my point of view to back up what I've already posted. It depends on the specifics, as it always does. 

OK so energy prices have gone up, but what are the drivers of that? The move away from coal, new infrastructure, subsides for renewables (not a bad thing BTW) wholesale price changes, I've no idea but I think that the profit margin increasing hugely / dividend payouts barely registers as a factor.

The Labour lords have rebelled, can he put the genie back in the bottle or will the party in the commons now follow suit (particularly in the light of the sacking of Debbie Abrahams)

Combinations of certain phrases can really give the impression someone's talking out of their backside, don't you think?

Perhaps someone can explain to me how if we, the British government, own parts of our infrastructure, we're going back to the dreaded 1970's, because governments can't run utilities and services.

Except of course if your a foreign government then everything is rosy, for some reason, German water companies, French energy all seem to be doing very well thank you.

The same people who despise any mention of nationalisation, are usually the same people who are for Trident and general arms expenditure, to fight off Johnny Foreigner should he become too bloshy.

Well what happens when they decide they want their electricity or gas for themselves or that they want to charge the UK and extra 50% on top?

Are we going to bomb them into supply our electricity, gas or our water?

We're pissing money out of our country to other countries, and we're being told that nationalisation is bad for us or it's stepping back in time.

Well it seems to be the future for France and Germany so why are we not getting in on the act? Are we really that stupid that we can pay other nations but not have any nationalised industries ourselves?

Really?

Are you suggesting Ken was only suspended for two weeks?

Can you show me a TV News program this was reported on? There was wall to wall before the election about how racist Labour were / are, every channel, every news report, every Radio news report for at least a week. I'm all for rooting out racism, but let's do it for ALL of society and all the time not just when it suits some people.

Subsidies for renewables have been cut by the Conservatives, and 'the big six' energy suppliers are meant to be the ones with the highest prices for customers. and the worst customer service. It's a market where the immoral situation exists that, for a unit of energy, somebody who is poor can end up paying more because they're not so good at looking for the best deal. we all (should) know about the effects of poverty when it comes to motivation and efficacy.  If economies of scale make it easier to buy more cheaply in bulk, it seems odd to me that a privatised energy market with competing companies is thought of of as something which is going to be better value for the consumer - how can that turn out to be true?

It seems to be that subsidies for renewable energy have been cut, there's more companies in the market - plausibly reducing the economies of scale, and overall prices have gone up for consumers, with the onus on them to look for the cheapest tariff and keep on top of what's happening in the energy market, meaning that somebody working two or three low paid jobs, is less likely to be able to find the time to do that, compared to somebody richer working one job who has more time to spare. It's an unholy mess.

Because a foreign company has no vested interest pleasing UK voters, it won't use needless recruitment, special bonuses etc... to buy votes. Foreign owners want an efficient company that people use which makes them a profit, it's win win in many respects.

That of course doesn't excuse all governments completely neglecting future planning and investment in power generation for the past 50 years. 

It was on BBC News at Ten and Sky.

You said that she was suspended for two weeks, are you genuinely thick or just a very poor debater?

Your lies are showing your true views.

Yes subsides have been cut, my view is that an industry which is demonstrably a good thing can properly benefit from subsides when it is at an early stage (often a good thing) but as the industry matures and becomes self sustaining the need for the subsidies passes.

In the real world this is called the investment cycle. (v. loosely)

How's is it win win, when you're putting our essential services in the hands of a foreign power. This is more risky than getting rid of Trident or depleting our armed forces, it simply doesn't make sense.

As we go into the future we going to be more and more reliant upon foreign governments to allow us to live our normal lives. When things get tight or diplomatically awkward, who will they look after first us or their own country?

There is no reason in the world we couldn't have a British nationalised energy provider, it's basically a brokerage firm that buys energy on the open market and sells it on, why shouldn't the be an option to by from a nationalised provider? Given the option, even at the same price to the consumer, we (the UK) all benefit because the profits are retained within the country, everything else would be the same, but we'd keep the profits! It really is a no brainer.

Genuinely thick

Labour won its best result in London, and the Tories their worst result, since 1971, and this is being spun somehow as a defeat. Amazing.

One idea would be to be part of an international union of reasonably like-minded countries that for the most part share common values, and for that union to have mechanisms for preventing such diplomatic awkwardness by all agreeing to common standards of behaviour.

Just a thought.

I don't think anyone is saying that it's a defeat in London. But winning one battle is little consolation if it seems like you may be losing the war.

I would agree it wasn't a defeat in London but it wasn't victory either. Victory would have been taking 2 of 3 of the target councils, the result, 0 / 3, this was more the 1916 Somme rather than the 1918 advance.

No I know, but at the last general election we were being told, "Labour are acting like winners, though they lost the election" true, but not the whitewash most people we saying was going to happen, and the end of Corbyn was neigh, prior to the election. Now they's actually won and it's not even good enough!!

If the result was a general election and not local elections, we'd have a Labour government, so it's hardly a loss.

"We need the middle ground" but if everyone that voted last week the same in the next general election, they don't need anything they'd have won, and bollocks to the middle ground

Through all the bad media, "Labour can't do this or that", "They'll never be in power", "they are all anti-Semites", "the loony left", Trotskyite communists, "Corbyn will never be leader", "Corbyn doesn't bow low enough", they are still coming out in front.

Imagine where they'd be if the media gave them a fair chance, and if people stopped believing what they are being told to think and simply stopped and looked at the facts for a minute.

if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle.

Imagine if Labour had a competent leadership team.

Don't let the facts get in tbe way of a good argument. I'll give you Corbyn's performance in the last general election was excellent and that he was unfairly demonised. Yet he was a serial refuser of the party whip in the past so can't complain fairly about others doing the same. In the general election he was faced by the Maybot, and particular circumstances that were arguably lucky (I really hope that the huge rise in the optimism of youth for politics continues and the comparative lack of competance of the Conservative party machine on Social Media). Labour still have a big mountain to climb to win a majority and need to convince centre ground voters.  The Council elections were in any practical terms a loss  for Labour as mid term opposition parties should be making big gains, especially as the tories are in a real mess at the moment. The 3 target London councils seemed heavily influenced by the Jewish vote... foot shooting of the highest order.  Labour has certainly been infiltrated by some leading trots that I know from my Union and some from Respect, and similar for some big names in Militant. Labour also has a real problem with dealing with a small minority of individuals displaying anti-Semitism, that is shameful for a party of the left as equally are the way they dealt with some really nasty attacks on women on the right of the Labour party who had the nerve to criticise Corbyn. 

If you read my posts I was talking more about rail and said all governments should have invested more over the past 50 years in energy production.

You raise a good point, foreign countries like France can't be trusted to supply the UK with power, so it's probably a wise move leaving the eu.  

Everything you've written here is true, but none of it contradicts the fact that Corbyn is incompetent and ineffective. The overwhelming core Labour support for him would be more important if people were allowed to vote two or more times for *really* liking him. Meanwhile, the floating voters and pragmatists are being offered precisely f*ck-all, or at least no one in Labour appears to be trying to sell them anything currently. Many on the left, myself included, complain loudly that the Tories govern without a thought for those who wouldn't vote for them and yet we're apparently happy for Labour to return the favour.

Most of the criticism of Corbyn is unfair, but he is at this point irredeemably damaged goods in the eyes of much of the electorate. It may not be fair to need to have him replaced on this basis, but when has politics ever been that?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/wind-power-onshore-policies-...

This may be interesting to you.

Interesting, thanks.

I'm not saying the policy to remove subsidies was taken at the right stage, rather that it will at some point be the right decision.

As for wind, how are the large offshore arrays going (and why aren't e going for tidal barrages)?

Because the current projected strike price is rumoured to be higher than that of Hinkley C.

More bullying accusations within the Kernow branch of the nasty party;

Two senior figures in the Labour Party in Cornwall have resigned claiming that they have been victims of bullying. Last night both the chair and secretary of Labour in Truro and Falmouth announced they would be standing down immediately.The resignations are the latest changes to be seen in the Labour Party in Cornwall which have also included the leader of the Labour group at County Hall, Tim Dwelly, leaving the party and sitting as an independent. He also cited bullying as the reason for resigning from the party.

https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/cornwall-labour-party-membe...

Environmentally they are not that great, a lot of marine life depends upon the tidal flows.