POLITICS CORNER

[Stanley]

That 'donkey jacket' was an extremely expensive short black raincoat. It was the Tory papers who incorrectly identified it for reasons of their own.... Michael was a bad choice for Leader but nowhere near as crass as he was made out to be....

[Tripps]

I sat opposite him once, on a tube journey on the Northern Line. He never took his head out of a book, and I remember his face was a very bright pink.

I remember contrasting his mode of travel with that of other leaders.

Perhaps related - I saw an impressive convoy a few days ago coming out of Cambridge - five Police motor cycle out riders. fore and aft, with flashing lights, escorting two very large black Range Rover type vehicles. Perhaps it was Prince William going home from work?

PS - a few minutes search shows that Michael Foot's coat is now in a museum in Manchester, so we can go and see it and remove all spin from the situation. I'll put it on my 'to do' list Peoples History Museum
PPS
It did look like a donkey jacket - but what's wrong with that?

[Tizer]

I saw an impressive convoy a few days ago coming out of Cambridge - five Police motor cycle out riders. fore and aft, with flashing lights, escorting two very large black Range Rover type vehicles. Perhaps it was Prince William going home from work?

Or perhaps Stephen Hawking going home from work?

It strikes me that one thing common to both politics and religion is that they are both undermined by human frailty, mainly greed for money or power, or both. This has been the case for as long as we've had politics and religion but I think celebrity status is now a third factor.

No reason for anyone to be unemployed, there are too many holes in the road and we don't have enough houses.

I think the validity of that statement depends on what you mean by `employment' - is it (a) keeping someone occupied, busy etc, or (b) that plus paid the wage they would expect for the job done? These days you only need a few blokes to fill in all the potholes in town but the council still say it's too expensive, they can't afford to pay them. Similarly, houses pop up in no time at all now, but the builders want `good' wages and the houses are not affordable. It relates to something I wrote a week or so ago on here...we need to re-think how people in future will earn the necessary money to live the life they expect, or alternatively how we will give them that life if they are no longer needed `in employment'. The world moves on and we're not planning for the big changes that will come.

[Tripps]

I was wondering when the 'skeleton in cupboard' team would be activated. Didn't have to wait long. Stop Corbyn

Doesn't mean it's not all true though.

[Stanley]

David, The comments on the Mail article were interesting.... The article is a positive indication that he has got their attention... Muckraking is never a pretty sight, have you read any of the PE comments about the Mail and the Rothermere family? People who live in glass houses....

[Pluggy]

I don't think you're going to get a credible argument about leftie politics from the Daily Mail whose politics are 'Conservative' - the Conservatism slightly towards the centre from Neo-Nazi......

I tend toward the right of centre, but I can't stomach the Mail.....

[plaques]

These people are professionals and should know that if you want to make a point with your MP put it in writing and send it to the House of Commons. This way there is always a record or your complaint. Never mind 'Face Book', Twitter' and verbal complaints (not worth the paper its written on).etc: you may as well write it on the toilet wall.

[Tripps]

That may well apply to your MP, and if you wish the matter to remain confidential, but I am told by my son, that to produce a result with his company, better to use facebook or twitter. That way your complaint becomes public, and may well be spread further and quicker than the company would wish. He tells me they monitor modern social media keenly, and respond.

Despite his advice - I would still write directly. I don't get on with facebook etc.

[Stanley]

Neither do I David.
I was talking to my old mentor (I say old but I'm 15 years older than him!) Steve Constantine yesterday and got a right ear-bending from him when I mentioned I was all in favour of Corbyn. He is a long time active Labour Party member and tore large chunks out of me for my attitude! I respect him enormously but the basis of his argument was that Labour could never win an election under Corbyn. Actually I think he's right but I stood my ground... There is too much focus on 'getting back into power' and not enough on sorting out a clear social democratic message from the party. At the moment they are concentrating on the same goals Blair had and look what a mess he made of 'power'! We all have an opinion and are entitled to hold it. They should accept being in the wilderness and concentrate on effective opposition based on clear socialist principles, attacking the shameful Tory policies.... Corbyn can do this I think if he accepts the fact that he will face internal opposition. A 'winning leader' will emerge if he or she is needed. After all, Corbyn has already said that he doesn't want power, he wants a principled Labour Party....

[Stanley]

The government is having a problem with immigration.... Not entirely their fault of course, this is an enormous and growing problem, floods of refugees moving round the globe in search of a better life. It will get much worse....
However, interesting to see that part of the government reaction is to propose a series of repressive measures, withdrawal of minimum support payments, eviction without notice, up to five years gaol for landlords who don't do the government's job to check the status of tenants. My problem is that I can remember measures like these being introduced in Germany in the late 1930s... That didn't go well. There must be a better way of dealing with desperate human beings without ostracising them.
Rotherham has found £3million down the back of the sofa and thrown it to Barnado's to finance their work. Is 'outsourcing' the problem the right way to approach this problem? We see too much of this transfer of responsibility these days, the government gives the problem to local government (and at the same time cuts their resources), the council takes note and does the same thing, passes it, in part, to Barnado's. We've seen this government strategy in every area from social care and the NHS to sourcing IT and they all have one thing in common, a deterioration of service. CSA is an enormous problem and I doubt if throwing inadequate amounts of funding to outside agencies is going to do any good.

[plaques]

Is 'outsourcing' the problem the right way to approach this problem?

We are now following the American example where government do not provide any services themselves. All the manpower bits are provided by the private sector. Quite often the initial provider will subcontract it down to a second layer who will in turn do the same manoeuvre. Each layer taking its cut leaving the last guy in the chain to do the best he can with the lowest tender possible. Unfortunately, they won't change the system because it will 'cost jobs', but is really a smokescreen to cover the profit take. Big government bad, small government good.? We are going the same way.

[Stanley]

P, exactly the point made by Naomi Klein in her book 'Shock Doctrine' if you haven't read it please get hold of it, it opened my eyes to the whole problem (opportunity?) of outsourcing.
In effect we are outsourcing our 'migration problem' to the authorities in Calais but Phil Hammond has announced that we have cracked the problem.... (LINK) I fear he is being a bit premature, the full force of the flood of refugees has yet to hit us. These people are accused of coming for the benefits but the real reason why they head for the UK is more likely to be because many of them already speak English.
I saw a report about comparative levels of inward migration in Europe and it transpires that per capita we have one of the lower rates. Luxembourg is top of the league table and in Sweden the government takes the view that anyone who is a genuine refugee from repression is entitled to leave to remain. I haven't noted the collapse of their country (mind you, I'll admit that the Far Right vote there is getting some traction from this.
Why do we not call them by the proper description, 'refugees' which is what they are. Is the intention to demonise them?

[Nolic]

I note your comments about outsourcing in Rotherham but there is pressure from central government on authorities to pursue this course of action. It still baffles me that no-one has thought to look at Ofsted's role in the Rotherham saga. They knew about the levels of CSE in 2003 and have continued to "monitor" since. What good is a regulator that merely sits on the sidelines and takes no action?? Nolic

[Stanley]

Comrade. I remember what you told me at the time and take your point. Mick was telling me only a few days ago about the weight your opinions carry in the profession. Why aren't professionals like you listened to and given the power to effect change? Is it because politicians are reluctant to do this because if they did it would expose their inadequacies?
See THIS for news that Andy Burnham has come out in favour of re-nationalising the rail franchises as they come up for renewal. Jeremy Corbyn storms ahead in the leadership election and it seems to me that the election is developing into a protest vote against the present course of policies. This will be criticised as a 'swing to the Left' by detractors but could just be a cry for a return to common sense. Take the railways.... every time the running of a franchise has had to be taken 'in house' by the rail authority services have improved, costs have fallen and customer satisfaction has improved but fallen back again when taken up by another private provider. If public control is seen as 'Left Wing' in those cases, every privately owned business in the country must be left wing because they take note of evidence like that and adjust management policies in the search for more efficiency and better profit. In the case of the railways it's the taxpayers who get the 'profit'.

[Bruff]

[Sarcasm alert]

Well you see Stanley, the private sector is so much better than the public sector at running any service, be it water, energy, railways whatever. To misquote the satirist Chris Morris, there’s no evidence at all for that view, but it’s a proven fact. That’s why the East Coast Line, which was taken into public ownership (essentially) and run exceptionally well after the private outfit walked away (or couldn’t cope), was basically handed over to the biggest corporate welfare-sponger you’ll ever see, Branson. Because the private sector is better. End of, as I think they say.

Richard Broughton

[Stanley]

Unfortunately Richard you are right. It's one of the 'Big Lies' constantly repeated by people who think they understand economics. Compare with 'A rising tide floats all boats', 'Wealth trickles down' and 'Efficiency of the market'. Add criticism of 'Demand Economies as inherently Socialist and inefficient' then look at how we managed the economy in two World Wars.... As Piketty pointed out, the media and the lobby are controlled by the wealthy who are in fact the biggest 'benefit spongers'.
We live in a world where truth is discounted, evidence is selective and the majority of the public believe everything on the printed page without interrogating the arguments. As the Buddha said "Believe nothing that doesn't accord with your own reason". (Yes, I watched Bethany Hughes on BBC 4 last night....)

[Stanley]

Funny how things go quiet in the holiday season. The problems are put on hold and left to the civil service who mind the shop... Strange how the world doesn't fall to bits...
Meanwhile we are 'entertained' during the silly season by reports of that fool Trump repeatedly opening his moth and putting his foot in it. Such a monstrous ego! Can this man possibly be a future President of the US? I sincerely hope not.....
Jeremy Corbyn is still the front runner in the interminable Labour leadership battle. For God's sake, why can't we have a decision? [Breaking news as I right that Corbyn could revive Clause 4 or a variation of it. This is causing horror in the donors and his rivals who say the clause is 'history'. That's as may be but the principles embodied in it are still relevant and I wouldn't object to such a clear statement of objectives. This objection is a symptom of the modern trend towards the party being all things to all men which I abhor. If there's one thing we need in politics at the moment it's a clear set of objectives and policies directed towards attaining them.
See LINK for the growing concern over the publication of the Iraq Report. Possibly quite irrelevant, the work to get the permissions in could still be ongoing, but still valuable pressure....

[Tizer]

I don't object to either private or public ownership of essential services such as transport, energy, communications, banking etc in principle but I have concerns about both in practice and nor would I want to see it becoming 100% one or the other. The large privately-owned organisations are in a mess, badly managed, flouting the regulations, incompetent in many areas, so perhaps that in itself is justification for trying the alternative. You've only got to look at the news about Carphone Warehouse to see the present problem.

As for Donald Trump, we can only hope that even the Republicans will decide he's a step too far. But Trump or no Trump, if the Republicans get in they'll be winding back the energy saving climate change work that Obama's done and setting a bad example for the rest of the world.

[Stanley]

What strikes me is that every time Clause 4 is mentioned it's only nationalisation that gets attention. Clause 4 is far more inclusive than that and contains some good principles. By the way, I notice that Jeremy is not mentioning the 'N' word, he refers to the process as 'cooperation'. I have to agree that on present record there is a good case for taking control of some of the 'commending heights'! LINK to a Wikipedia article on Clause 4.
See THIS for the full versions of the Original and amended clauses. Worth reading. I still don't see what is wrong with the principles.....
See THIS for Phil Hammond's interjection in the immigrant debate. He is normally silent and leaves anything 'foreign' to his boss but now has joined in the oblique demonisation of the refugees flooding into Europe. The thing that strikes me is that everyone sees this as a problem when it could be a great opportunity. There are some energetic young people here, some of them highly educated and qualified. Think of our ageing and sometimes stagnant populations and reflect on the possibilities..... I wonder if he has been pushed into this......

[Stanley]

Alastair Campbell says that electing Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the Labour Party could make them unelectable for at least ten years. This from the man who was Blair's henchman, and just where did that lead the party??? His intervention is most likely to enhance Jeremy's prospects (already so good he has been described as unstoppable) by reminding people of where centrist policies led them....
I heard a North East business leader this morning asking for more action under the much vaunted 'Northern Powerhouse' project. This at a time when the upgrading of the trans-Pennine link has been postponed indefinitely and the only rail improvement project current is in the South West.... Election promises?
Another pre-election statement by Cameron is gradually changing. Reports that his continuing as Leader after 2020 are circulating in the Westminster Village.... Deep Joy!

[plaques]

So now Mr Cameron is thinking of halting benefit payment to ALL 18 to 22 year old's just so that he can apply the same rules to immigrants. It has apparently come as a surprise to him that the EU rules stipulate that benefit restrictions must apply to all citizens rather than just a selected target group. What is this world coming to? I knew this years ago and I'm only a back street pleb. This is another attack on the working class, or should I say lazy good-for-nothings, behind closed curtains, scroungers. Meanwhile lets give another tax cut to the 'hard working' rich. Immigrant Benefit Cuts.

[Bruff]

Mad isn’t it? If you go to Germany or France or Holland or Malta or Latvia or wherever, the benefits etc. to which you as a Brit would be entitled to are those that a native German, Maltese, Latvian or whoever would be entitled to. That is, any EU citizen in Germany gets what a German would get. Any EU citizen in Britain gets what a Brit would get. So you can get more or less depending on which country you are in as the German benefits system is different to ours, as the French is to theirs or the Finnish is to the French (and so on and so on). All EU law says is you can’t discriminate by having different arrangements for say the French or anyone else in the UK. The EU is not forcing us to do anything here. It is wholly in our gift to design the benefits etc. system we want. This is absolutely fundamental stuff as you say, but the ignorance of it is appalling.

Still, this is the spirit. Keep on kicking the young. Goodness me, this oldie really hopes the young start kicking up an almighty hoo-hah soon. I’ll be with them all the way.

Richard Broughton

[Tripps]

From another thread -

Home Bargains seems to have a permanent offer of 240 Yorkshire Tea bags for the price of 120. Marvellous.
Richard Broughton

I think they are from up your way Richard. Capitalism red in tooth and claw.

Can't wait for that Mr Corbyn to get in and improve it all with a Ministry of Tea, and of course - Oftea.

[Stanley]

" This is absolutely fundamental stuff " Quite.... This government has thrown the concepts of equality and fundamental rights out of the window. Even the promises to ring fence some vital services is being breached by the back door. As for manifesto promises, forget them! Funny isn't it, the media and chattering classes fulminate about Labour moving to the Left but not a word about the Tories lurching to the Right....
Mind you, this might in the end be a good thing. For many years the constant refrain of the voters has been "They're all the same...." and apathy has grown. Clear differentiation between the principles of opposing parties may encourage participation. That's the only possible benefit I can think of at the moment..... Am I clutching at straws?
I have never heard of Home Bargains so I looked them up.... LINK
David is correct, founded in Liverpool in 1976 and their HQ is still there....

[Stanley]

See THIS for Blair's latest intervention in the Labour leadership election. He should shut up and go away to make more money. If anyone knows about jagged rocks and condemning the party to 'ten years in the wilderness' it is he....
The more support Jeremy Corbyn gets, the more shrill the hysterical voices forecasting doom become. My advice to the party is to stop making a public spectacle of the election, get on with it and accept the democratic decision. The fact that it isn't in accord with what the candidates and grandees want is immaterial. For God's Sake get on with it! What they are doing demonstrates that they aren't even capable of governing themselves, let alone the country!
See THIS for a report in the Guardian on the third day of devaluation of the Yuan. The fact that this has had such an effect on the markets shows how important China's currency is today in global terms. I can remember when one of my father's favourite sayings was 'In a worse state than China', that one is redundant today. The general opinion is that China is on track for making the Yuan a reserve currency on a par with the Dollar. I don't really understand this but I know an historic event when I see it!
I was talking about Maxwellisation in the bank topic yesterday. See THIS for another effect of the process. This is what has been holding Chilcot up and it has now become ridiculous.