POLITICS CORNER

[Bruff]

Refugees from Syria face either crucifixion or decapitation on the one hand or on the other, barrel-bombing and gassing (there are similar choices in Iraq and Afghanistan and let’s be clear: the Gulf States are not the oases they might seem depending on which side of the Shia/Sunni divide you find yourself on). So to avoid this they flee first to the Lebanon and Turkey and Jordan and then to Europe as the situation both worsens in their homeland and the camps in Lebanon etc.

I’m afraid I can’t for a moment imagine this exodus as some sort of advance fifth column of present and future ISIS militants intent on the Islamification of Europe and the implementation of Sharia law.

I would also add that refugees are generally intent on returning to their homelands once it is safe to do so, and playing a full role in rebuilding their country. Which is why personally I would apply as much human compassion as it takes now for all those in immediate dire need whilst getting on with the vital and longer-term task of ending the problems in their homelands so they can in time return (which many, many will).

Once of a day, Britain would have been at the vanguard on this sort of thing, from the Ugandan Asians to the Vietnamese ‘boatpeople’ (didn’t a family settle in Barnoldswick?), the rather relevant Hungarian refugees post-1956 to the Kindertransport. In each case, tens of 1000s came. Now perhaps in small part aided by the wilful confusing for far too long of the terms migrants, economic migrants, immigrants, asylum seekers, refugees, and bogus- and illegal- categories of each, we are less likely to lead or even, until confronted with the reality via a dead 2-year old bobbing in the surf, act at all.

Richard Broughton

[Tripps]

I don't think I said they were some sort of advanced fifth column - though some of them may be just that. I meant it would suit the strategic aims of ISIS. The behaviour of a minority would change if they became a majority, and this would be a step in that direction.
I will ask the awkward question- how many should we allow in to the country? Comparisons with Uganda, Vietnam and Hungary are surely not valid. We have moved into the globalised digital age which must be having an effect.

I'll say no more on this topic, I can see it escalating to a level I wouldn't wish it to.

[Bruff]

I think this will be my last post too. On the awkward question I agree it is awkward and the temptation is to say a lot more than current and planned. I guess we could look to the numbers the likes of Sweden and Denmark and Germany have taken and come to a pro-rata 100,000s type figure. We’ve plenty of space and are a rich country too.

Richard Broughton

[plaques]

Just to complicate matters its worth reflecting on what Jesus had to say about 'who is our neighbour?' In Luke, The good Samaritan, Jesus asks the Lawyer. " Who was the wounded man's neighbour? " In today's global world virtually everybody is our neighbour. No doubt some of the arguments put forward in Jesus's time are very similar to what are being being offered up now. To a large degree I think there is a general feeling that Great Britain should be more charitable to these refugees and not wait for others to force us into action.

[Stanley]

I understand David and Richard's comment about the danger of this topic and agree with them. However I'd like to point out that I think I understood the tenor of David's original post and agree with him about the difficulties. Two things about the 'crisis' as defined by the media, have you noticed how everything else on the news agenda, even China's economic difficulties and their effect on world markets, has disappeared completely from the news schedules? My reading of the refugee problem is that it is just that a problem that we have to address sensibly, it will not go away. We have too many examples from history of the consequences of failing to respond to these matters. It may be a non-sequitor but one of the first things that came to my mind was the Last Tzar of Russia and his family, they applied for asylum in England but were refused on political grounds even though they were related to our royal family. Most historians agree that if allowed, the massacre of the family would not have happened. The refugees at the moment are more numerous but the possible consequences are the same.
The second thing is the way the government has handled the whole question. Think back to one of their first responses to the boat people in the Mediterranean, we (the government) were actually considering destroying the boats in N African ports to stop the flood! Since then they have had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the point where they will (possibly) accept 4,000 a year for the next five years. There are times when a simple recognition of what is right trumps political caution.
I see the government had no difficulty in deciding to kill secretly two UK citizens without any form of judicial process beyond consulting the Solicitor General to see if we could get away with it. Why does this action disturb me so much?
I note that Cameron had his first defeat yesterday as his own back benchers suspected he was trying to rig the referendum for a stay in vote. I don't know if you saw his face in the Commons yesterday but he was definitely not his old smug self... He may be finding out what I predicted the other day, that governing with a slim majority against opposition is not a bed of roses.

[Stanley]

See THIS for news that despite their generally tough stance on refugees, Australia is to take 12,000 from Syria.... Australian jets are of course participating in the attacks on IS in Syria....

[Tizer]

I've been distracted by family events and hadn't noticed that we've reached the final day for voting in the Labour leader election until it was mentioned on the news this morning. Voting ends at midday today and the results will be announced on Saturday. One thing that strikes me is that throughout the process the anti-Corbyn lobby and the news media seem to have forgotten that it's the people deciding who should be the next Labour leader and not them. I'm looking forward to Saturday!

[Tripps]

There was a Friday afternoon 'debate' in Parliament this afternoon, attended by about five members, at which the junior Defence Minister Penny Mordaunt, apologised for the Libyan trainee soldiers fiasco, at the local barracks, which last year resulted in a 2.00 am evacuation of all of them, except the five who are now in jail after being convicted of sexual attacks in Cambridge. Gurkhas were put in to control them towards the end. The bill for repairs to the barracks has just been revealed as close to half a million pounds. Details here
The local villagers are a bit vexed.

The newly elected MP has now suggested, with skillful timing, that the currently empty barracks, should now be offered to Syrian refugees. I quite liked her when she knocked on my door in April, but I think that's what Sir Humphrey of Yes Minister would have described as 'brave'.

[Stanley]

Tiz, I totally agree with you. I predict that one of the first things that will be attempted is to go back to a more 'controlled' way of electing a leader.... The Problem with Milliband's revision of the process is that it allows everyone to have a say! They call it democracy.....
David, wonderful how they find the best slots to release news like that. I think it's called 'news management'....
Like Tiz, I am waiting with bated breath for tomorrow's result. It could be an earthquake. Even if the worse predictions come true and even if Jeremy doesn't get the job, the reaction of the public to his campaign should have given the Party pause for thought.
Chilcot says he now has all the responses, they need time now to 're-write the report'.... If this means emasculating it and producing a whitewash it will be another earthquake!

[Stanley]

Looking forward to the result today and hoping that we haven't been bamboozled by a lot of hype in the media.
Listening to the headlines this morning on the news I can't help thinking that I have never heard such a farrago of anti-socialist nonsense. That's exactly what it is, knee-jerk opposition to anything that sounds like a socialist movement. They are all forecasting melt down of Labour, noting who has already refused to serve under him and generally predicting disaster. It will be interesting to see what the protesters will do if Jeremy gets in and offers them a post. There could be many reverse ferrets.
Perhaps they should take a deep breath and reflect that this is a genuinely democratic process to the point where Tories could vote! If Jeremy gets in they should hold their fire on his policies until they actually know what they are! We know that Jeremy tends to the left, we know that he has a history of rebelling against tendencies to the right and Blair and his cohorts think he is the devil incarnate. But we also know he is not a fool, he is a very experienced parliamentarian and he is a thinker... If he does indeed get the leadership I suspect he may surprise many people. I sincerely hope so....

[PanBiker]

Just short of 60% of the vote in the first round so a proper mandate for Jeremy Corbyn. Lets see what a bit of socialism does for the party.

[Stanley]

Hear hear! And he has a good man as deputy in Tom Watson. An amazing result. Now let's see what the Party can do with it. I have a good feeling about this, the first time I've felt like this about politics for many years. Yippee!!

[Pluggy]

The labour party and the '3 quidders' certainly got their way. It will be interesting to see if old school labour still has mileage in it. Ms Sturgeon is obviously feeling the threat of being out lefted.

[Whyperion]

Having recently read an Evening Standard article by Nick Clegg (which was on fairness in British Society), I have a hope that with a more clear Labour lefter stance there becomes a place for Liberal politics , which, to me (other than Europe issues ), got ignored by the British electorate in this years elections.

[Stanley]

Not just the '3 quidders' but full members as well Pluggy. See THIS Guardian article on Saturday for an interesting analysis of the membership and of course, not all the registered members were 'spoilers'. The increase in ordinary membership gives the lie to the theory that apathy reigns. No other party has anything near these figures.
THIS Guardian report today seems a fair assessment of Jeremy's victory. What interests me is the depth of hatred in the Tory reaction to him, according to them he is 'a clear and present threat to the security and economic well-being of the country', they haven't actually said the crops will fail.... The 'threat' is to them and their policies of austerity. Alexis Tsipras in Greece recognised this straight away and sees the election as another example of the growing opposition to austerity and inequality. I think this is right and have always said that the 'austerity solution' to the economic crisis is, in the long term, the biggest danger we face, I am in good company. Nicola Sturgeon describes Labour as 'a deeply divided party'. The massive mandate Jeremy got seems to be evidence against this. All political parties are 'divided' and Ms Sturgeon may be influenced by the fact that the Labour Party is now moving into her ground. She can see tanks on her lawn in the Scottish Elections....
One of his first policy decisions is to try to break the log jam of PMQs by occasionally having other MPs stand for the party instead of the leader. I hope it works.
We are entering a very interesting period in party politics. This result could be a game changer in so many ways. It might even affect political reporting in the media, the commentators got the General Election wrong and this result might help get rid of some of the old clichés and encourage more objective reporting. It's a bright new dawn, let's hope it all goes well and we have some brighter political weather!

[Whyperion]

I doubt if most media ('impartial' BBC radio and telly included) will stop being sensationalist, headline generating and generally trying to run the show rather than objectively report, and yes where needed question whats happening, but at present media its-self is ill-informed.

Tom Watson appeared on Andrew Marr this morning, he seemed to cope well enough to be a good serious contender against some rather daft line of questioning from Andrew Marr ( Watson answered a question and Marr still persisted in re-asking it - mostly around differences re NATO and British Defence Policy where the Labour Party Leader and Deputy have differing views) , hopefully overall Watson can knock a few of the wacky Corbyn ideas off him.

Will we see 'New Labour' dissentors float off into a new gang of 8 social democratic party ?

I think I read that Corbyn was somewhat anti-monarchist, I checked with the Telegraph and got this.

“The royal prerogative should be subject to parliamentary vote and veto if necessary. The Queen hands her powers to the prime minister and he can then exercise them. It’s a very convenient way of bypassing parliament. Also, orders in council are a very convenient way of bypassing parliament.”

As our recently longest-serving monarch was reported elsewhere as saying - ' "The British Constitution can be quite un-understandable"" ' - and I doubt many people would follow the subtleties of Corbyn's concerns. Although his changes MIGHT make a small change in Democracy in Britain, there could well be advantages taken of them by large majority parliaments.

[Stanley]

It was quite funny yesterday watching the media trying to fill their quota of comment about Jeremy Corbyn. They were reduced to speculating about what is essentially a private process to which they had no access. I was reminded of a classic case of this when I saw President Reagan shot on live TV and all the anchors jumped in to report on it with no information other than what we had all seen. It was disturbing but slightly hilarious because they were completely in the dark. Even General Haig got it wrong, he took control of the country when it wasn't his job.... ("As of now, I am in control here in the White House." Oh no he wasn't!)
I see the noble Lord Mandelson is shoving his oar in again.... I wish he would shut up and go away. I wouldn't trust him even if I could see him! Why do these dinosaurs who orchestrated the biggest missed opportunity of a generation think that their opinions have any currency. What they haven't realised is that the Corbyn phenomenon is part of a wider movement, one could almost call it a revolution in public attitudes to outdated economic thinking which still pursues the concept of 'sound money' by promoting inequality. It was wrong in 1920 and it's wrong now. All it can do is provoke a reaction. In 1920 the public didn't have the advantage of modern communications, social media and the like. Ideas can grow much faster now than they did then and rather than industrial strife, today they are opting for change by going for inclusion in the process. I think that some enlightened politicians have realised this, Alexis Tsipras is another. Tsipras is considered by some to be a failure but I don't agree, look at the changes he triggered in Europe. My forecast is that Corbyn has already succeeded in changing the face of politics. It remains to be seen how he will exploit the opportunity that has opened up for him. Internal dissent and electability will play their part in the future but the key fact at the moment is that he has triggered self-examination in the party.... It's a hopeful sign, but at the moment that's all it is. I hope he can keep the process going.

[PanBiker]

Interesting to note also that the medias frenzy to find anything detrimental about the new leader does not touch on the fact that since taking up the post 15,000 new members have joined the Labour Party. Who says he and his policies are not popular?

[plaques]

Has the Westminster bubble burst? Ever since Margaret Thatcher adopted Milton Friedman’s theory of economics whose central planks were :- Sale of National assets, :- Privatisation of services, :- Austerity. Each successive government, including that of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown have followed the same basic programme. Principally this doctoring followed the capitalist ideals of ‘self interest’ where individuals would achieve a better outcome if they were left to their own devices. It is worth quoting what Amartya Sen, Nobel Prize Economics, said of Friedman on this subject. “ Friedman has gone on to claim that even what we regard as ‘realistic’ descriptions should not be based on truthfulness of the description but by seeing whether the theory works”. Paul Samuelson has called it the ‘F-twist’. It would now appear that Corbyn has finally exposed the reality of this theory in that we are now living in a country where all the national assets have been sold. Services, including the NHS and Schools, are being turned over to the private sector and austerity has made the ordinary worker thousands of £’s a year worse off. The long term effect has been spelled out by Piketty and Stiglitz that the top 1% will accumulate all the real capital while those at the bottom, this includes many of our middle classes, will drop into poverty. This Corbyn revelation may prompt those inside the ‘bubble’ to realise that there is a different world outside Westminster and that the ‘Masters of the Universe’ should no longer hold sway over the democratically elected parliament. Perhaps then we might have a chance at returning to a more equal and fair society.

[Stanley]

Ian, I am considering re-joining myself, just waiting to see how it all pans out.
P, a wonderfully succinct post that hits all the buttons, I agree totally.... Bob Bliss' dad weighed up Friedman when he first published his theories and told Bob that he was wrong, dangerous and should be stopped.... The reason why the politicians fell for it was because they saw the advantages in it for them in terms of higher tax takes from phantom money and more capacity in the wealthy donor market as they lobbied for more freedom to accumulate wealth. Can you remember them telling us this was the new economy? "No more boom and bust". The key thing that I have noted is that Corbyn got his initial sponsors because while they were sceptical about him winning they thought that the injection of a new style of politics where honesty and truth-telling was the foundation of the appeal would energise the internal debate in the Labour Party about the way forward. Nobody realised how big the grenade was. Alexis Tsipras has got it right, he said yesterday that this is dead in line with the growing undercurrent in world politics against the ills Plaques laid out. Perhaps we are beginning to see real opposition to the Chicago school of economics and the entrenched power of the established order in the UK. Remember what the same tactics did for the SNP!

[Stanley]

The inane attacks on Jeremy Corbyn continue. This time it's criticism of the fact that he didn't sing the words to the national anthem at the remembrance service for the Battle of Britain. First question; was he the only one? Second, have his critics looked at the words to the anthem lately and given them a bit of thought? (LINK) It's an anachronism and Jeremy isn't the only person to recognise this. There have been tentative moves from time to time to bring about change which reflects more accurately the real world but they have all failed. High time we had a revision....
See THIS for a BBC report on the passing of the first stage of the Trade Union Bill. I am totally opposed to this, we are not a strike prone country. It is an attack on democracy despite the rhetoric. I wonder how many of the people who voted for it have any experience of hard work or labour relations in real life? Yet another example of the way the Tories are trying to drag us back into the laisser fair ethos of the 19th century.
I was reminded of this article by P J O'Rourke (LINK) this morning (well worth a read!) when I heard the report of one of the Republican presidential hopefuls on the deck of the US Iowa moored in LA harbour. His basic theme was that the US would maintain armed forces big enough to convince any adversary that it was a mistake to 'mess with us'. Is it any wonder that many people look at the state of the world and simply can't understand what is wrong with the human race.... Yes, I'm thinking about Trident and need for atomic capability....

[Nolic]

I rejoined the Labour Party immediately after the election feeling strongly that things have got to change and that the Blairites were not going to do anything that might tip their chances of being elected at the next election.Nolic

[Stanley]

I'm on the verge Comrade. I need to find out whether I can afford it! As I've already said, I am more optimistic about politics now than at any time in the last twenty years.... As for Blair, Mandelson et al.... the sooner they sink into ignominious obscurity the better!

[Stanley]

I listened to an aggressive lady from the BBC interviewing Jeremy last night, It was quite obvious from her questions about singing the national anthem and whether he would kneel whilst being inducted as a Privy Councillor that she had an agenda, she wanted a headline saying that Corbyn is anti Monarchy. He kept his cool and gave sensible answers but I couldn't help thinking how much more constructive the interview could have been.
PMQs.... noticeable that even though Jeremy managed to modify the structure with his questions from individuals Cameron didn't give any direct answers but reverted to the old defensive ploys, he spouted spurious facts about what had been done in the last five years. I was dying to hear him being pressed for proper answers, that's what we want to hear!
The chaotic and totally uncoordinated response of the members of the EU to the refugee crisis doesn't bode well for any moves towards central political and economic control of the factors that are the Achilles Heel of the Euro problem. On this showing, when the Grexit resurfaces in less than three years there are going to be major problems and they will affect the UK even more than the current worries. If Ossie stays in post he is going to have a rough ride! Events Dear Boy!

[Tripps]

"whether he would kneel whilst being inducted as a Privy Councillor "

He could always do this Crossed fingers

I doubt if anyone who does it really means it.
With the possible exception of Jacob Rees Mogg.