Politics, politics, politics

[the dza]

Scara, a point I was going to make to @the dza was that a good way of choosing your leader is to look at who your opponents most fear. I think that this is partly what we have seen from the Tories today. If you had the choose the leader of the Labour party, is there anyone you would fear less than Corbyn?

I've said before, it's not about one election. It's about the Labour party being more than Tory-Lite. Corbyn as leader paves the way for a member led, democratic party of the left. Someone with more charisma, more of a natural leader can follow in time, representing a party with left-wing policies. The country will eventually throw the Tories out and when that happens, I don't want a Blair clone holding the baton and I think that is the prevailing view of the Labour party, bar 170-odd MPs.

The Tories don't fear Angela Eagle. But the right of the party will just use her to sh1t on the membership, change the leadership rules and get a Blair clone in at a future time. As a left-wing, working class voter, I can tell you that I don't want a choice between Tories and Tory-Lite -- you might think Tory-Lite is a trite expression, but that's exactly what Blairism is. People have had enough of it.

 

[milo]

May has already said that she will create a department for Brexit and put a leave supporter in charge of it. I think that this is a rather clever strategy to make sure that potential rivals for her post are mired in the outcome of negotiations. The reshuffle on Thursday and Friday will be fascinating, I would expect to see a Brexiteer at DEFRA too because it is going to be a pig of a job untangling ourselves from EU environmental and agricultural law, I would not be surprised if that was where she put Leadsom.

It will be very interesting to see where she puts Osborne. He is meant to want to be Foreign Secretary which would see him doing a lot of the drumming up business stuff that he has been doing in New York today. Osbourne is still only 45 and a stint doing foreign diplomacy would put him in a good position to have a tilt at the leadership when it next comes up.

It is going to be a challenging period for the Foreign Office because it is going to have to recruit heavily to deal with Brexit. Since 2010 it has cut our presence overseas massively, ironically with us sharing ambassadorial presence in many countries with the EU. This will have to be reinstated, I would also expect to see UKTI increase in size and that is jointly overseen by the Foreign Office and BIS.

Chris Grayling and Phillip Hammond are probably to other two who will get the top jobs. I wonder where she will put Gove and Johnson.

 

[milo]

I've said before, it's not about one election. It's about the Labour party being more than Tory-Lite. Corbyn as leader paves the way for a member led, democratic party of the left. Someone with more charisma, more of a natural leader can follow in time, representing a party with left-wing policies. The country will eventually throw the Tories out and when that happens, I don't want a Blair clone holding the baton and I think that is the prevailing view of the Labour party, bar 170-odd MPs.

The Tories don't fear Angela Eagle. But the right of the party will just use her to sh1t on the membership, change the leadership rules and get a Blair clone in at a future time. As a left-wing, working class voter, I can tell you that I don't want a choice between Tories and Tory-Lite -- you might think Tory-Lite is a trite expression, but that's exactly what Blairism is. People have had enough of it.

A centre left Labour Party is not Tory-lite, it is electable and has a chance of enacting some of its policies. Corbyn staying on will see the Labour Party decimated at the next election and in no position to make a proper fight of the one after that.

Tony Blair became leader over 20 years ago. His policies are as irrelevant to the problems that we face now, as the politics of Corbyn, that were set over 35 years ago. The Labour Party desperately needs to stop looking backwards and develop a set of policies that address our problems now, can be effectively communicated to the electorate and have an appeal outside of a core rump of Labour support.

 

[parklane1]

May has already said that she will create a department for Brexit and put a leave supporter in charge of it. I think that this is a rather clever strategy to make sure that potential rivals for her post are mired in the outcome of negotiations. The reshuffle on Thursday and Friday will be fascinating, I would expect to see a Brexiteer at DEFRA too because it is going to be a pig of a job untangling ourselves from EU environmental and agricultural law, I would not be surprised if that was where she put Leadsom.

I had not heard that to be honest and i hope that is true, of course it all depends on if she does then she has to let them get on with the job without trying to influence unfairly.

 

[parklane1]

She was a junior minister in the Blair and Brown governments, she would have had to followed the whip. Her politics are clearly not Blairite.

I think that the Labour party really needs to get over its obsession with Tony Blair and the Iraq war. It is holding the party back and just extenuates divisions.

i would imagine that would suit Blair and his fellow skullduggers, he lied and i bet he and others with him would hope it all gets swept under the carpet. There are millions of voters out there who want him brought to book for his deceiving the nation.

 

[milo]

I had not heard that to be honest and i hope that is true, of course it all depends on if she does then she has to let them get on with the job without trying to influence unfairly.

She will be Prime Minister, she is ultimately responsible for what happens, so it would be a dereliction of duty if she did not give direction and expect the Brexit minister to do as she asks. I think that it would be a mistake for leave supporters to get too fixated on which side certain politicians backed during the referendum. May has always been pretty Eurosceptic and her Euroscepticism has a more conviction than someone like Boris Johnson.

 

[the dza]

A centre left Labour Party is not Tory-lite, it is electable and has a chance of enacting some of its policies. Corbyn staying on will see the Labour Party decimated at the next election and in no position to make a proper fight of the one after that.

Tony Blair became leader over 20 years ago. His policies are as irrelevant to the problems that we face now, as the politics of Corbyn, that were set over 35 years ago. The Labour Party desperately needs to stop looking backwards and develop a set of policies that address our problems now, can be effectively communicated to the electorate and have an appeal outside of a core rump of Labour support.

Which of Corbyn's policies are not centre left?

 

[parklane1]

She will be Prime Minister, she is ultimately responsible for what happens, so it would be a dereliction of duty if she did not give direction and expect the Brexit minister to do as she asks. I think that it would be a mistake for leave supporters to get too fixated on which side certain politicians backed during the referendum. May has always been pretty Eurosceptic and her Euroscepticism has a more conviction than someone like Boris Johnson.

I understand that and that is why i said influence unfairly. As i said earlier i hope that she will have no undue influence just because she voted to remain.

As for you second point i agree and would hope that if the remain side had won and the next PM had been Leadsom the same criteria would have followed? ( what do you think)

 

[milo]

i would imagine that would suit Blair and his fellow skullduggers, he lied and i bet he and others with him would hope it all gets swept under the carpet. There are millions of voters out there who want him brought to book for his deceiving the nation.

You misunderstand me. I was talking about the Labour Party framing political outlook through or in relation to Tony Blair. The politics of New Labour were in response to Britain in the mid-nineties and irrelevant to the country today.

With regards to Blair being brought to book, I think that you will be waiting a long time. Whilst Blair came in for criticism in the Inquiry Report last week, there was nothing in it that amounts to something that he could face any sort of action for. I cannot see us ever having a more detailed investigation into the war which could see such a case being built.

 

[milo]

I understand that and that is why i said influence unfairly. As i said earlier i hope that she will have no undue influence just because she voted to remain.

As for you second point i agree and would hope that if the remain side had won and the next PM had been Leadsom the same criteria would have followed? ( what do you think)

The vacancy would not have been vacant for another two or three years if remain had won and I think that Cameron would have hung on until Osbourne was in the best place to replace him. I think that it would be very difficult for the Conservative Party to get behind Leadsom for the same reasons that Labour is struggling to get behind Corbyn.

 

[parklane1]

You misunderstand me. I was talking about the Labour Party framing political outlook through or in relation to Tony Blair. The politics of New Labour were in response to Britain in the mid-nineties and irrelevant to the country today.

With regards to Blair being brought to book, I think that you will be waiting a long time. Whilst Blair came in for criticism in the Inquiry Report last week, there was nothing in it that amounts to something that he could face any sort of action for. I cannot see us ever having a more detailed investigation into the war which could see such a case being built.

Point one, ok i get that now.

Point two, I am sure it will get covered up that is how many untruths get treated, as for Blair facing action i and many others hope you are wrong. I am sure i heard on the radio there is talk of some MP's bring up a charge of contempt for lying to the house. Not sure if that is correct or will get done but if politicions ever want to get back the respect and belief of the public then it has to be followed through. He has blood on his hands and that is wrong.

 

[milo]

Which of Corbyn's policies are not centre left?

It is difficult to say on Labour policy because he has been so inward looking. Corbyn's own politics and those closest to him are certainly not centre left though.

 

[parklane1]

The vacancy would not have been vacant for another two or three years if remain had won and I think that Cameron would have hung on until Osbourne was in the best place to replace him. I think that it would be very difficult for the Conservative Party to get behind Leadsom for the same reasons that Labour is struggling to get behind Corbyn.

My question was a hypothetical one and no one can say for sure what would have happened.

 

[milo]

Point two, I am sure it will get covered up that is how many untruths get treated, as for Blair facing action i and many others hope you are wrong. I am sure i heard on the radio there is talk of some MP's bring up a charge of contempt for lying to the house. Not sure if that is correct or will get done but if politicions ever want to get back the respect and belief of the public then it has to be followed through. He has blood on his hands and that is wrong.

I don't agree with you on cover ups. They are rarely successful because too many people have knowledge of them and it is impossible to keep something like that quiet.

I did read about the talk of contempt of parliament, I doubt that it would get enough votes to proceed and if it did, I think that they will have a difficult time proving that Blair lied to the house. The Chilcot Report did not say that Blair lied on the presence of WMDs and places the blame on MI6 for poor intelligence. I think that it appears that he was certainly negligent for not challenging the intelligence (or just wanting it to be true) but that is not a contempt offence.

 

[glasgowspur]

Which of Corbyn's policies are not centre left?

Corbyn has policies?

 

[milo]

My question was a hypothetical one and no one can say for sure what would have happened.

Leadsom is probably a bad choice for an example because it is hard to see a circumstance where she would be in with a shout of getting the job if remain won. I think that the Conservatives would have united behind Johnson or Gove if they had managed to not self destruct.

 

[parklane1]

I don't agree with you on cover ups. They are rarely successful because too many people have knowledge of them and it is impossible to keep something like that quiet.

I did read about the talk of contempt of parliament, I doubt that it would get enough votes to proceed and if it did, I think that they will have a difficult time proving that Blair lied to the house. The Chilcot Report did not say that Blair lied on the presence of WMDs and places the blame on MI6 for poor intelligence. I think that it appears that he was certainly negligent for not challenging the intelligence (or just wanting it to be true) but that is not a contempt offence.

It depends on who and what they get out of it to keep it quiet but generally you are probably right on most of them. But this is different, i have said many times that Prime minsters are voted in an are/can do lots of things that the public may disagree with. Put taxes up, cut wages etc etc and we have to accept it because no party is going to make the right decisions for everyone. What a Prime Minister should not be allowed to get away with is taking us into WAR on a lie, causing the death of our own and others on a lie.

I am astounded that some are willing to sweep that under the carpet and say " lets move on".

 

[parklane1]

Leadsom is probably a bad choice for an example because it is hard to see a circumstance where she would be in with a shout of getting the job if remain won. I think that the Conservatives would have united behind Johnson or Gove if they had managed to not self destruct.

But the question was IF she had have done ( hypothetically) would you think that the same criteria you mentioned would have been followed by the remain side.

 

[milo]

It depends on who and what they get out of it to keep it quiet but generally you are probably right on most of them. But this is different, i have said many times that Prime minsters are voted in an are/can do lots of things that the public may disagree with. Put taxes up, cut wages etc etc and we have to accept it because no party is going to make the right decisions for everyone. What a Prime Minister should not be allowed to get away with is taking us into WAR on a lie, causing the death of our own and others on a lie.

I am astounded that some are willing to sweep that under the carpet and say " lets move on".

The question is, did he know that there were no WMDs? If there is no evidence that he did know this, then there is not a case to answer. Chilcot does not say that he did know this and mislead parliament.

 

[the dza]

It is difficult to say on Labour policy because he has been so inward looking. Corbyn's own politics and those closest to him are certainly not centre left though.

Off the top of my head, they want to raise corporation tax to be more in line with USA/Germany (around 30% iirc), re-instate the 50% tax rate, abandon Osborne's arbitrary deficit reduction targets/timescale (he's done this in light of Brexit), re-nationalise the railways as the contracts for the franchises lapse (and bring that forward if there are break clauses in the contracts), make universities tuition free, protect the NHS from too much private interest, bring forward shovel-ready infrastructure projects (I think they said that they will borrow for such projects, but not borrow to fund day-to-day gov. spending) build more council houses. I think that is centre-left or just left, certainly not far-left or any such nonsense.

Not renewing Trident is probably the most left-wing policy of Corbyn (but it won't necessarily be Labour policy). I'm quite ambivalent about that, though imo it makes sense not to renew it. I don't think it's an extreme policy either, I don't think the SNP are 'far-left' for having that same policy.

The way the media go on, you'd think Corbyn wants to nationalise every corner shop and have us all wearing tweed trousers or whatever.