UKC

Just when you thought that TM and the Tories were handling the whole Brexit shambles worse than you thought possible the leader of the opposition steps up to steal her thunder - he walks out, in the huff, at a meeting of cross party leaders due to the presence of Chuka Umuna! WTF - this is supposed to be the leader of the opposition, to lead (yes, lead) the opposition to what the Govt. is proposing - which is needed in this time of crisis.

I really despair at who is worse, TM, or JC.

Oh well, JC in talks with Michel Barnier today, thats nice, wonder what that will achieve?

In reply to subtle:

I couldn't believe it either, it's not a quality a leader should have - to be a mardy bum essentially. 

In reply to subtle:

Utterly disgraceful. If ever there was a time to rise above petty squabbling, this is it. He has failed every single test presented to him in the whole sorry tale of Brexit, and it is well past the time for him to go. 

In reply to subtle:

Pathetic behaviour. Won't support a longer extension, won't be constructive about anything.

By god we need a change in our political party structure.

In reply to subtle:

Laughable were it not so serious.

Politics is about power. JC wants to lead a protest movement, a pressure group. He has no interest in actually engaging with the machine of governance and power. This is what has traditionally made the Conservative party so utterly ruthless, they demand power at all costs. The Labour party was gone through periods of significant introspection and infighting. The Tories have always been happier to be whipped into line and stand behind the leader. They also display the same ruthlessness when it comes to dumping a leader as well. I think many Labour politicians come to politics because they have convictions (some in both senses of the word) whereas many Conservative politicians seek office because they want power.

Perhaps this will change, Brexit could still see a schism in one of both of the main political parties. The pieces are in flux.

In reply to subtle:

This tells me everything I need to know about JC...… a few months back he refused to meet with party leaders, now he has a tantrum, toys all over the place and walks out of meetings at long past the 11th hour ! a leader he is not......

I am truly in mixed thoughts about who id throw to the lions first..... it seems it doesn't matter which way you voted on Europe neither side are getting what they wanted...…..

All solutions welcome...……………..

In reply to subtle:

I'm quite sad that JC does not present an effective opposition.  If we are to have an adversarial system of government, there needs to be an opposition.  Please tell me if I'm wrong, but I have no idea what JC's proposal for Brexit is, he just wants to seem to be Complainer in Chief, and I suspect would "walk out" if he was asked to come up with a proposal.

Chuka  Umuna is shite - basically TM with a better tailor, he's not the leader of any party and was only invited to rile Labour. While I've got serious reservations about JC I'm with him on this one - this is TM playing silly shitty little games while Rome burns - pathetic.

In reply to yorkshire_lad2:

I get the impression that JC wants to leave, as he is in favor of nationalizing certain industries. This is not allowed under EU rules. The EU is a socialist utopia, compared with the free market nightmare that is the US. If we were to leave, we would be be at the mercy of the free market economies of the bigger countries. The re-nationalized industries would last only as long as the next tory gov, when they would be sold to the highest bidder (again).

It would be much better if we were to remain and reform the EU from within, as many in his party want to do.

This lack of leadership form the tories is disgusting. How the flip are they meant to negotiate trade deals with the world, when they cant negotiate a trade deal with the EU, even after years of plnning. Labor, under JC, have proven to be a shambles. All this plays into the hands of the populist right wing fringe parties.

In reply to subtle:. Yes it's very poor of him, and foolish as it creates an impression, likely accurate that he too is playing party politics over 'country'. 

But TM has still been pm for two years, and her own deep mess is the result of similar contortions

In reply to gravy:

Why?  he represents a group of politicians with a certain mindset on Brexit, same as meeting with JRC and others.  IMO all differing views need to be round the table at the same time getting it sorted whatever party or alliance they are with.  Too much fcking about talking to cameras this lot are.

In reply to TMM:

Or as Dennis Healey declared to party conference in 1959 after Labour’s 3rd successive election defeat:

“There are far too many people, who want to luxuriate complacently in moral righteousness in opposition ... We are not just a debating society. We are not a socialist Sunday school. We are a great movement that wants to help real people at the present time. We shall never be able to help them unless we get power. We shall never get power until we close the gap between our active workers and the average voter in the country.”

In reply to James B:

Which is more or less verbatim what Blair and Blunkett said too later when they set about making Labour electable.

In reply to Bellie:

No, he shamelessly represents himself

In reply to subtle:

I voted for Corbyn in 2015. I deeply regret that now. If we had Yvette Cooper as Labour leader, I don't think we'd be in this appalling mess.

In reply to gravy:

The adult response to silly little games is to ignore them, especially when an entire country's future hangs in the balance. Corbyn's response was PATHETIC.

In reply to dread-i:

That's not true, a French nationalised industry was contracted to print the new blue UK passports

In reply to gravy:

Yes and he got completely out played by her. He was outwitted by a halfwit on a blunderfest

In reply to Tyler:

Yes he did walk into that trap rather nicely.They knew he would walk out

Classic.

In reply to neilh:

Since the lobby journalists knew well beforehand that CU had been invited, then it is beyond doubt that his team knew as well.

In reply to Trevers:

Or several others (Starmer, Watson, Thornberry to name but three).

In reply to Tyler:

Indeed, nationalised (publicly owned) industries are rather common in EU and other countries (rail, energy, cars, busses etc). 

In reply to subtle:

Was it over whether he wanted a Whiskey drink, or a Vodka drink?

In reply to subtle:

So Mayhem continues with the childish playground games at a very serious time.

What did she think would be the benefit of inviting a loser with no influence like Umuna other than to create more problems.

She is an idiot. 

In reply to Pefa:

They may not be registered as a party yet but, as a group, they hold as many seats as the Lib Dems.

In reply to subtle:

Interesting analysis here: 

https://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/i-see-chuka-umunna-everywhere-admit...

In reply to subtle:

Life is never black and white.

Apparently what happened was that he, along with other party leaders, had a meeting with May. She refused to listen to any other alternative to voting for her deal. Jeremy then walked out realising the whole business was a waste of time and muttering about the presence of Chukka Umna thus gifting his enemies another stick to beat him with.

Walking out is perhaps a natural reaction to not being listened to but I'd have hoped he would have behaved differently. Politicians are supposed to be better than the rest of us at persuading, negotiating and finding compromise. It's depressing that in this instance none of them seem capable of living up to our hopes.

In reply to dread-i:

Nationalising an industry would not be against EU rules necessarily. What they say is the government can't unfairly support one company over another as this distorts the market. If the market disappeared because of nationalisation there is nothing to distort.

In reply to Andy Hardy:

This has been puzzling me, I did read a couple of months ago (might have been a Matthew Paris column, but not sure now) that JC wanted to leave because if we stayed he couldn't nationalise any industries. Under EU laws/rules. But it never explained why.

Is there something in this or not? Obviously if we remain (somehow) and JC comes to power, he would be unable to carry out those promises of nationalisation - not a great start for him. But equally why did he talk about it if he knew he wouldn't be able to?

Perhaps someone can explain?

In reply to gravy:

TIG appointed Umunna as their spokesman, didn't they? Why would Soubry be invited?

In reply to gravy:

You deleted your comment "Notice May didn't invite Soubry..." that I replied to. A simple "Actually, you're right", would've sufficed.

In reply to Moley:

I refer you to my post of 12:15 thursday. Public ownership is not only not prohibited by any EU rules, it is pretty prevalent, especially in the transport, energy and manufacturing sectors. So not sure what any of your post is about.

In reply to subtle:

Jc is between a rock and hard place. Young momentum style activists who put him in the post as party leader want to remain, he is anti eu, the voters that would put his party in power are in many Brexit heartlands. 

He must look like his pleasing his activists by showing willing, but not too much as he wants Brexit. Ideally as big a mess as possible so he can save the UK with his policies (in his not so humble opinion)

In reply to gravy:

Soubry was invited? Where did you find that out?

Edit: Apparently she was - I stand corrected. Still, it's quite a thing to stage by inviting leaders of all parties and other selected MPs just to get Corbyn to walk out. Even if that's true, is it good that he's so predictable and can be played like a fiddle?

In reply to gravy:

And again! If you keep deleting comments that people have already replied to then no one is going to want to play with you.

In reply to Trevers:

Me too. I wanted his ideas aired, scrutinised and where a fit could be found adopted into Labour policy to re-open the centre ground of British politics. I wasn't overly concerned about his leadership skills, I figured the opposition would function well enough as a team and I think it would have but for brexit and Labour's problem with their 'traditional' voters. He's been a utter disaster for Labour and the UK while the all consuming black hole of brexit has killed off the opportunity to explore a serious social-democratic policy agenda from opposition.

As he can't be deposed at least until he's been tested again electorally he needs to be marginalised by the PLP.

jk

In reply to Ian W:

I missed your other post, but have been wondering why someone writes that we would not be allowed to nationalise certain industries whilst still in the EU, if we can. Just wanted clarification.

Perhaps I'm missing something or misread, that's all.

In reply to summo:

And of course all this double faced politics is exactly the opposite of the persona he and Momentum have cultivated for him.  

We’ve had the thread about who is the worst prime minister, I’d start one about who is the worst leader of an opposition but I don’t think we’d have anything to discuss. 

In reply to Moley:

No problem....the reason someone would write that is, in common with a lot of stuff surrounding politics, is that they know many will believe them without checking it out. 

The worst example i can think of currently is the facebook post circulating...still....that claims we will have to join the Euro following the Lisbon treaty in 2020. It also contains many other claims that are simply beyond ridiculous, and despite having been shown to be completely false, many choose to believe it.

But no, the EU doesnt prevent public ownership of industries / companies. Hence sections of our rail and bus netorks are currently state owned, just not by our own state.

In reply to Ian W:

You are both correct and wrong. A state can own anything it likes, but can't breach eu competition laws, which apply to public and private sectors. Exceptions are applied for depending on if it is an economic or service activity.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets/en/sheet/82/competition-policy

I don't think anyone doubts a country can run state services, the doubt lies in Labour's ability to do it efficiently and how they'll finance it. 

In reply to Trevers:

It's off topic, but my Dad made me laugh in talking about her and her husband 'They're an odd couple, aren't they? She's small and nice, while he's (Edd Balls) big and horrible. '

In reply to summo:

Haven't we gone over this before?

You finance it the same way as any other business; from generating cash flows.

There are also certain "strategic" industries (steel, defence, passport printing etc) that countries manage to make exceptions for.

In reply to Ian W:

Oh it's a business... then it's not a state service and won't be exempt competition laws. 

Plus.. It's been done in theory, sort of. Name any country that has successfully renationalised on the scale they propose and by their methods? 

Countries don't manage exceptions, they apply to the eu for them. Why do you Corbyn wants Brexit? And the harder Brexit is the better for his plans.