|
In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note. Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon. All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting. https://www.registertovote.service.gov.uk |
On February 18 2017 04:14 Jockmcplop wrote: Burnham is committed to going for the Manchester Mayor job. He won't challenge for leadership.
I gave Burnham as an example of a "smart socialist" who could lead the UK. He's an unrealistic option for 2020 but if Labour lose that (which looks likely) then Burnham could be put in place for 2025. A successful stint as Manchester Mayor would make him more qualified than any other candidates Labour could likely throw up. (Except possibly Sadiq Khan.)
|
On February 18 2017 04:50 Melliflue wrote:Show nested quote +On February 18 2017 04:14 Jockmcplop wrote: Burnham is committed to going for the Manchester Mayor job. He won't challenge for leadership.
I gave Burnham as an example of a "smart socialist" who could lead the UK. He's an unrealistic option for 2020 but if Labour lose that (which looks likely) then Burnham could be put in place for 2025. A successful stint as Manchester Mayor would make him more qualified than any other candidates Labour could likely throw up. (Except possibly Sadiq Khan.)
Sadiq Khan would be a great choice. But let's be honest.. A brown muslim being voted in by the British majority? Especially now? I suppose it would actually send a positive international message for once. Would be hilariously ironic after listening to so many deluded inverviewees talking about immigration.
|
On February 18 2017 04:50 Melliflue wrote:Show nested quote +On February 18 2017 04:14 Jockmcplop wrote: Burnham is committed to going for the Manchester Mayor job. He won't challenge for leadership.
I gave Burnham as an example of a "smart socialist" who could lead the UK. He's an unrealistic option for 2020 but if Labour lose that (which looks likely) then Burnham could be put in place for 2025. A successful stint as Manchester Mayor would make him more qualified than any other candidates Labour could likely throw up. (Except possibly Sadiq Khan.)
2025. Jesus. I'll be replaced by a robot by then.
|
Tom Watson, maybe? Seems to be the only competent/popular figure left in the cabinet, anyway. Sadiq Khan couldn't win.
|
On February 18 2017 07:58 Deleuze wrote:Show nested quote +On February 18 2017 04:50 Melliflue wrote:On February 18 2017 04:14 Jockmcplop wrote: Burnham is committed to going for the Manchester Mayor job. He won't challenge for leadership.
I gave Burnham as an example of a "smart socialist" who could lead the UK. He's an unrealistic option for 2020 but if Labour lose that (which looks likely) then Burnham could be put in place for 2025. A successful stint as Manchester Mayor would make him more qualified than any other candidates Labour could likely throw up. (Except possibly Sadiq Khan.) 2025. Jesus. I'll be replaced by a robot by then.
What's your job? You probably exaggerate a bit.
|
On February 18 2017 21:26 bardtown wrote: Tom Watson, maybe? Seems to be the only competent/popular figure left in the cabinet, anyway. Sadiq Khan couldn't win.
No he's not white enough.
|
Already said Chuka Umunna would have had a chance. It's not about skin colour.
Edit: In answer to my question about whether even Remainers think Tony Blair's intervention will help...
Thought not.
|
Tony Blair is a political non-entity who is obscenely popular in USA, and make good use of media agencies for photo ops much like Farage. At this point you are just making up phantom enemies and arguments. Mythical, I summon you!
|
Commenting on the BBC's headline story is making up phantom arguments, apparently. Blair and Farage are political non-entities, apparently. You still haven't moved on from the first stage of grieving, apparently.
|
United Kingdom13774 Posts
Tony Blair, the last hero of keeping the UK as the US's loyal dog within the EU?
Stronger in.
|
Well I've never turned down a summons.
I didn't really reply to this topic simply because it is completely irrelevant and uninteresting. Blair has a bad reputation however speaking out on this issue at this point in time is probably just some set-up for another Labour internal power struggle. Since Blair has no actual power, I doubt he will change the opinion of anyone for or against; which unironically is the winner in the poll. I mean the fact that you had to answer your own question should mean something to you, it was just a pointless topic. It would be more pertinent to discuss the 122 Billion£ borrowing increase, 56% of large firms already experiencing negative effects and finally the vulnerability of the still existing large British firms in regards to hostile takeovers (KraftHeinz just made a run at Unilever for example). But no let's just discuss the impact of a pointless speech by a more or less disliked individual which has no real impact on anything.
|
On February 20 2017 04:05 MyTHicaL wrote: It would be more pertinent to discuss the 122 Billion£ borrowing increase... Interesting.
Government finances record £9.4bn surplus in January http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39037698
"The OBR is likely to deliver some rare good news to the chancellor by revising down its forecast for public sector net borrowing in the current fiscal year," the EY Item Club said in its Budget preview.
...
John Hawksworth, chief economist at PwC, thinks that borrowing for the financial year could be less than £60bn. As a result, the chancellor might have some room for extra spending in the Budget. "Overall, the public finances now look in rather better shape than they did three months ago, and more in line with other data showing a relatively robust UK economy in the period since the Brexit vote. "This should give the chancellor a bit more room in his Budget on 8th March to find extra money for priorities like the NHS and social care, and possibly also to alleviate the increase in business rates for the biggest losers from the coming revaluation in April."
I don't know where you got your numbers, and I know your post translated to 'let's only talk about bad news that supports our stance on Brexit' but I'm taking you at face value. So, let's discuss borrowing.
|
Hahaha, those are awesome. I was hesitant to throw his name out because like I said I don't really follow UK politics that closely, but that just affirms what I said was probably right.
|
On February 21 2017 22:50 bardtown wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2017 04:05 MyTHicaL wrote: It would be more pertinent to discuss the 122 Billion£ borrowing increase... Interesting. Government finances record £9.4bn surplus in Januaryhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39037698Show nested quote +"The OBR is likely to deliver some rare good news to the chancellor by revising down its forecast for public sector net borrowing in the current fiscal year," the EY Item Club said in its Budget preview.
...
John Hawksworth, chief economist at PwC, thinks that borrowing for the financial year could be less than £60bn. As a result, the chancellor might have some room for extra spending in the Budget. "Overall, the public finances now look in rather better shape than they did three months ago, and more in line with other data showing a relatively robust UK economy in the period since the Brexit vote. "This should give the chancellor a bit more room in his Budget on 8th March to find extra money for priorities like the NHS and social care, and possibly also to alleviate the increase in business rates for the biggest losers from the coming revaluation in April." I don't know where you got your numbers, and I know your post translated to 'let's only talk about bad news that supports our stance on Brexit' but I'm taking you at face value. So, let's discuss borrowing.
Or we can attempt to start a debate about one minister's speech on Brexit. As for budgeting, the information is widely available. The 56£billion comes from the opposition NI leader on Brexit, it is in regards to the €65Billion that the UK has not accounted for but must agree to pay before any actual trade talks begin.
As for talking about budgets. You're a torry so you say spend less and everything is hunky dorry, who the hell cares that this is going to further the multitidue of crises in the NHS- possibly the one place not to fuck around with budget cuts as it will directly affect people's health and mortality rates. I like Portugal's recent example of a socialist government raising public services yet managing to significantly decrease its' defecit. As for discussing anything with you, I can't cure delusion so why bother. Just you and the EU hating Americans (the ones that do) against everyone else in tl.net. yawn.
|
Almost 2 weeks old but wondering if there was an update to this story?
The Ministry of Defence have denied that the Royal Navy’s fleet of attack submarines are all currently out of action.
Britain’s seven ‘hunter-killer’ vessels were reported to to be ‘non-operational’ as they undergo repairs and maintenance.
However, an MOD source told the Telegraph the reports were "categorically not true."
Theresa May was said to have been kept in the dark by Defence chiefs, the Sun reported.
A Whitehall source told the newspaper: “No one is being honest about the scandal.”
It was reported that five of the fleet, including one of the new type, are having refits or maintenance after breaking down.
Sources said the three new Astute class subs, which cost £1.2billion each, are beset by technical problems.
An MOD source said: "This story is categorically not true- there are operational, capable and ready attack submarines.
"Where they might be is clearly sensitive operational information that the MOD will not comment on."
It comes after Britain's ability to defend itself against a major military attack was called into question after an investigation found Navy warships are so loud they can be heard 100 miles away by Russian submarines.
A Royal Navy spokesman said: "We don’t comment on specific submarine operations.
"Britain has a world-class fleet, the Royal Navy continues to meet all of its operational tasking, deploying globally on operations and protecting our national interests as Britain steps up around the world."
Source
|
Looking bad for labour, seems the momentum loud but small minority narrative of people being "fed up" with centre sensible politics isn't lasting long.
The Conservatives have won the Copeland by-election, beating Labour in an area it represented for more than 80 years.
Trudy Harrison won with 13,748 votes to Labour's Gillian Troughton's 11,601.
Mrs Harrison hailed the victory - the first by-election gain by a governing party since 1982 - as "a truly historic event".
Labour's Gareth Snell held Stoke-on-Trent Central with 7,853 votes, seeing off a challenge from UKIP leader Paul Nuttall who got 5,233.....
Tories in historic by-election Copeland win as Labour holds Stoke
+ Show Spoiler +Tories in historic by-election Copeland win as Labour holds Stoke
"What has happened here tonight is a truly historic event" The Conservatives have won the Copeland by-election, beating Labour in an area it represented for more than 80 years. Trudy Harrison won with 13,748 votes to Labour's Gillian Troughton's 11,601. Mrs Harrison hailed the victory - the first by-election gain by a governing party since 1982 - as "a truly historic event". Labour's Gareth Snell held Stoke-on-Trent Central with 7,853 votes, seeing off a challenge from UKIP leader Paul Nuttall who got 5,233.
Labour had held both seats since their creation but was forced to defend them when two former frontbenchers, Tristram Hunt and Jamie Reed, resigned as MPs. Copeland, created in 1983, and its predecessor constituency Whitehaven have returned Labour MPs since 1935. Media captionGareth Snell: "A city dubbed by some the capital of Brexit has once again proved to the world we are so much more than that" Mrs Harrison, who had been joined by Prime Minister Theresa May on the campaign trail, got 44.3% of the vote, increasing the Conservatives' vote share by more than 8%. She overturned a Labour majority of more than 2,564 to take the seat by 2,147 votes - a swing of more than 6%.
Professor John Curtice, of Strathclyde University, said the Copeland result was the best by-election performance by a governing party in terms of the increase in its share of the vote since January 1966. In her victory speech, Mrs Harrison said: "It's been very clear talking to people throughout this campaign that [Labour leader] Jeremy Corbyn doesn't represent them.
Theresa May this morning finds her grip on British politics hugely strengthened.
For a governing party after seven years of austerity to be sweeping aside Labour in a heartland seat and to see their share of the vote increase in another is an extraordinary achievement. It will be taken by her supporters as a vindication of her hard-edged drive towards Brexit and her break with the more metropolitan politics of David Cameron. As for Labour, relief that it has at least repulsed the perceived threat of UKIP but its slow painful anguish under Jeremy Corbyn seems set to continue.
In normal times, both by-elections should have raised barely a flicker of concern and while the slide in support may not ignite a further leadership challenge, the convictions of Mr Corbyn's critics that he is leading the party into the wilderness will only have been strengthened."They want a party which is on the side of ordinary working people, which will respect the way we voted in the referendum and which will build a country which represents everyone. That's why they voted for me tonight."
Mr Corbyn said Labour's "message was not enough to win through in Copeland" but hailed victory in Stoke as a "decisive rejection of UKIP's politics of division and dishonesty". He added: "Labour will go further to reconnect with voters and break with the failed political consensus." But Labour MP John Woodcock, a critic of the leader, said as things stood the party was on course for a "historic and catastrophic defeat" at the next general election. In Stoke-on-Trent, UKIP had hoped to capitalise on voters' leanings towards Brexit - the area voted strongly to leave the EU in June.
Both the Labour and UKIP candidates had tough moments during their campaigns, with Mr Snell apologising over old social media posts about women appearing on television and Mr Nuttall facing a backlash over false claims he lost close friends in the Hillsborough tragedy. But in his victory speech, the new Labour MP Gareth Snell said voters had "chosen the politics of hope over the politics of fear". "This city will not allow ourselves to be defined by last year's referendum and we will not allow ourselves to be divided by the result," he said. He said the result was "a victory for the whole Labour Party and Labour movement".
However Labour's share of the vote was 37% - slightly down on the 39.3% it got in 2015. UKIP got 24.7% of the vote and the Conservatives, who came a close third, 24.4% - both slightly higher than their 2015 vote shares. The questions facing Labour in Copeland are tumbling UKIP's way here in Stoke. A party whose very success in achieving the thing they were set up to achieve, Brexit, brought with it a blunt question - what is the point of them now?
The answer sounded like this: winning traditionally Labour seats from Labour. And yet here in Stoke-on-Trent, a hubbub of Brexiteer jubilation after the referendum, they failed. UKIP insists this seat was always well down their target list. But on a night where Labour was sufficiently vulnerable to lose a previously rock-solid seat in Cumbria, UKIP's still the bridesmaid not the bride in the Potteries.
All of which begs two questions: If not here, where? If not now, when? Speaking to journalists after the result, UKIP leader Mr Nuttall said his party's "time would come". "There's a lot more to come from us," he said. We are not going anywhere, I'm not going anywhere." UKIP chairman Paul Oakden said: "The whole narrative of Paul's leadership depends on winning in Stoke is a nonsense." Labour MP Jack Dromey, who ran Mr Snell's campaign, said: "I think as we win we need necessary humility because there is a view that Labour is no longer listening in the way it should do.
"I think what we have done in this community is precisely to do that. "Are we yet a credible alternative government? No we're not. But tonight is a decisive moment." The by-election results mean the government's majority is now 12 - the same as it was immediately after the general election, as the Conservative's new Copeland seat makes up for the one they lost to the Lib Dems in the Richmond Park by-election. The working majority is 16.
Personally I've love to see Hillary Ben take over, although he probably is lacking the ambition.
|
Corbyn is a disaster. If you have to go back to 1872 to find a comparable upset you know you're doing something horribly wrong. When will the man realise he's not fit for the job?
|
Come on, it's not entirely Corbyn's fault. Labour overwhelmingly represents Remainers, but any talk of going back on the referendum makes you look like a sore loser and anti-democracy. There's almost nothing Labour can do about that.
|
That is, I think, partly true. It's very hard to see competent leadership on Brexit coming out of Labour, making their chances of winning the next election very slim indeed. I mean, I would like to see Hilary Benn lead them, too, but I wouldn't trust him to negotiate Brexit. Anybody who thinks staying in the single market is an option is clearly misunderstanding the situation. Ironically Corbyn is one of the few who understand this.
There's a real chance that Labour just disintegrate completely. Winning an election when they have lost Scotland is extremely difficult. They need a miracle to win England. Also, a Labour coalition held hostage by the SNP is a horrible prospect. Then there's Corbyn and his cabinet... There are so many reasons not to vote for Labour. Unfortunately, there isn't really a group strong enough to splinter from Labour and challenge the Tories. I've said before that we are very lucky to have the Conservatives split down the middle, because they provide their own opposition when Labour cannot. We probably have to wait for the Tories to split and pick up centrist Labour MPs to have two real parties again.
|
On February 24 2017 23:07 LightSpectra wrote: Come on, it's not entirely Corbyn's fault. Labour overwhelmingly represents Remainers, but any talk of going back on the referendum makes you look like a sore loser and anti-democracy. There's almost nothing Labour can do about that. So stop talking about it? There's no reason Labour has to harp on about the referendum, is there? I'm sure there's policies they are in favour of that have nothing to do with Europe? Strengthening the NHS for instance?
|
|
|
|