Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[Rogstanley]

Why are we still talking about debt interest when we've established that the level of interest the government pays is lower than inflation? 

[Guest MattP]

16 minutes ago, David Guiza said:

Sometimes I read the replies to Guido on Twitter just for some light relief, this is how humdrum my midweek mornings have become.

 

Particular highlights in the past couple of days include a bunch of Tories criticising Emma Dent Coad's appearance because they were offended at her insinuation that Theresa May is ugly. 

 

Guido retweeting some fella whom, based on a survey from a website that I assume he found down the back of the sofa, concluded that the reason Corbyn is so successful with youth voters is because 60% of 16-24 year olds do not know who Mao or Stalin are and thus do not know the negative effects of communism. I wasn't educated about Rasputin at school which is probably why most of dreams revolve around becoming Russia's greatest love machine. WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN!?

I can't think of an MP in my lifetime who seems less suitable for a place like parliament that Emma Dent-Coad and she's only been in the role less than six months, that's about five personal insults we've found already, along with that ridiculous (and factually false) rant about Prince Harry and yesterday even more sharing of fake news claiming a homeless woman in LA was a victim of Tory austerity. She blocks other MP's on Twitter who try to pull her up on it, she's a real life Twitter troll that has managed to get elected, if recall was ever needed it's now.

 

If she was Tory and had said all this Corbyn would be up at PMQ's demanded she was sacked.

 

Labour should probably employ Guido Fawkes for the next election to vet the candidates, they seem to find the nastiness, mysogyny, racism and anti-semitism in a way people like Shami Chakrabati can't.

[Guest MattP]

Following on from the conversation a few of us were having yesterday......

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/moderates-forced-out-by-hard-left-in-labour-purge-sk8bgrpcj

 

Quote

 

Jeremy Corbyn’s left-wing supporters have been accused of carrying out an “aggressive purge” of centrist councillors to put up their own candidates in local elections next year.

Councillors across the country have been deselected in a vote of local members or have faced pressure not to contest their seats in May in favour of candidates more closely aligned to the cause of the Labour leader and the Momentum campaign that supports him.

Tensions in one London borough have become so bad that centrist organisers called for the regional party to take over the selection process. Tim Gallagher, a councillor from Haringey, north London, who decided to step down last week, said that he and colleagues were written off as “zombie Blairites”.

The divisions were laid bare as a US bank warned that a Corbyn government would threaten the UK asset market more than Brexit would. Graham Secker, chief European equity strategist at Morgan Stanley, was said to have told clients: “We could see the biggest shake-up in the political backdrop since the 70s. This is much more scary from an equity perspective than Brexit.”

In Haringey about ten Labour councillors are understood to have decided to stand down or to have lost the contest for their seat to a left-wing candidate. Mr Gallagher resigned after he was not automatically reselected.

He described the selection process as “poisonous” in a statement on Twitter. The local party had become “inflamed with division, distrust, and what at times feels like real hatred”, he said. He conceded that all sides deserved some blame but added: “Nothing excuses the aggressive purge that has taken place of all councillors not deemed to fit a flat-pack ideological mould.”

Alan Strickland, another Haringey councillor, announced he was stepping down after failing to be automatically reselected. In an open letter published online, he said “narrow factionalism” had dominated the selection process and he was not confident his candidacy would be received with an open mind.

Lorna Reith, the chief whip of the Labour group on the council, was also deselected for a Momentum candidate. Joe Goldberg, cabinet member for economic development, said earlier this month that he would not stand again.

Matt Pound, national organiser for Labour First, a centrist pressure group, said there had been “an orchestrated purge of hardworking Labour councillors” and called for the regional party to take over the selection process. He added: “Instances of deselections on purely factional grounds occurring around the country are totally counterproductive and should be called out and resisted by local members.”

The dispute in Haringey centred on a local development scheme, backed by many party councillors but which faced opposition from the left. A Momentum source said it was “unsurprising there is a desire among local members in Haringey to get some new faces on to the council”.

Rule changes passed by Labour last year mean that councillors, who used to have to face an open contest to recontest their seat, must now do so only if they lose a vote to reselect them automatically. Incumbent Labour councillors have tended in the past to be reselected to fight their seat. Internal party critics claim that deselections are beginning to happen more often on ideological and factional grounds.

In the south London borough of Southwark, Samantha Jury-Dada, a councillor who is linked to the Blairite pressure group Progress, has been blocked from standing again in favour of a male Momentum activist. Her deselection in July prompted anger among Labour members who wrote an open letter to the party’s national executive demanding an inquiry. They complained that Ms Jury-Dada, a “young LGBT woman of colour, was deselected in favour of a white man who doesn’t live in the ward”. She said on Twitter that she had been the victim of “factional swipes” that had left her “devastated”.

The Labour MP Neil Coyle, who was present at the deselection meeting, said: “Faraday ward is 60 per cent BME [black and ethnic minority] and yet has no BME candidate fighting for Labour after the deselection.”

In Manchester Carl Austin-Behan, the first openly gay lord mayor of the city, is one of two Labour councillors not selected to stand again for their seats. Local members backed three other candidates for a shortlist, on which a Momentum activist, Ben Clay, is said to be the frontrunner.

Judith Blake, leader of Leeds council, is understood to be facing an open selection battle against left-wing candidates later this week after she was not automatically reselected.

Critics of Momentum, which grew out of Mr Corbyn’s 2015 party leadership campaign, have likened the organisation to Militant, the group used by the far left to infiltrate Labour in the 1980s, and have deemed it a “party within the party”.

Momentum’s supporters say that it is a mass movement campaigning organisation that complements the Labour Party and point to its backing, which includes 31,000 members and 200,000 supporters.

Momentum said: “We think it’s fantastic that hundreds of thousands of people new to politics have felt so inspired that they’ve joined the Labour Party . . . We should trust local members to be the best judge of who should represent their community.” Labour said that its members chose candidates by processes in its rulebook. It would not comment on individual selections.

 

 

Edited 28 November 2017 by MattP

[Guest]

I believe the £250bil + figure for total debt interest over a parliament includes the cuTrent debt interest of nearly £250 bil per a parliament. 

 

In july the express guessed at an extra £5bil per year

 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/833888/jeremy-corbyn-labour-borrowing-cost-taxpayers-extra-5-billion-debt-interest-year
 

I saw, figures yesterday suggesting.that a body like the obr or ifs believe the figure to be an extra £2 billion per year. Can't find the article right now but this would make sense given that interest rates are around the 1% mark and we'd be borrowing a little over 100x this figure..

 

That amount is peanuts compared to the effects of growth.

The revision of growth figures released last week added £90 billion expected debt to put this into context. And it was a small revision of between 0.2 and 0.4% per year.

 

Investing for growth would very rapidly bring benefits massively outweighing the additional interest costs.

 

 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, MattP said:

Following on from the conversation a few of us were having yesterday......

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/moderates-forced-out-by-hard-left-in-labour-purge-sk8bgrpcj

 

 

Construing grassroots internal elections as an authoritarian cleanse is part of the smear campaign against Momentum by those terrified by its success

Hide your kids: those dastardly undemocratic reds are coming again! The front page of one Murdoch outlet today carries wild reports of“Moderates forced out by hard left in Labour purge”. What has actually happened is this. Labour is choosing candidates to stand as councillors in next year’s local elections. In some cases, members have democratically decided that some sitting councillors should face an open contest: this happened automatically until a rule change last year. Calculating that they will lose to a leftwing alternative, some have stood down. Others have lost. This is not a “purge”. This is what is known as “democracy”.

Labour’s membership has the right to decide who will represent the party in elections, based on their record and politics. Take Haringey. As my brilliant colleague Aditya Chakrabortty has exposed, the Labour council there has tried to force through the privatisation of £2bn of council housing, public buildings and land. On one estate, more than 1,000 social-rent homes are to be demolished, with no provision given for socially rented replacements.

You will be shocked to discover that this has not gone down well with Labour activists, or the local community. The plans have been opposed by both of Haringey’s Labour parties, both of the MPs, and local trade unions. Members who object to these proposals have, in many cases, chosen not to reselect councillors who support them. Again: this is democracy in action. It will mean that – after the local elections next May – there will be a majority of councillors who oppose the plans, and then they can be stopped. Good.

Before the Corbyn surge, many Labour parties were hollowed-out husks, the playthings of ambitious hacks, lacking roots in their local communities. Council candidates were selected at poorly attended meetings: yes, often because of stitch-ups. In the last two years, Labour has blossomed into one of the biggest parties in the western world. In Hornsey and Wood Green – one half of Haringey – one in 14 voters are now members of the Labour party. Many of these members are full of inspiration and optimism – they want to replace our bankrupt social order, not tinker with it – and expect their representatives to be accountable to them and their values.

And so, in Manchester and Haringey and elsewhere, members have decided that some existing candidates should be replaced. Any candidate who loses an election has the right to feel disappointed, hurt even. They may well have done things in office that they’re rightfully proud of. But construing democratic, grassroots internal elections as an authoritarian purge is a grave disservice to the truth.

Momentum loyalty test planned for would-be Labour MPs

This is, again, part and parcel of a renewed media campaign against Momentum, portraying them as sinister, extremist zealots intent on hijacking democracy. It bears no relation to reality. During the election, Momentum activists mobilised and campaigned for the most New Labour-sympathising parliamentary candidates. The truth is this. The rightwing press, the Tories, and the vested interests who fund and support them, are terrified of Momentum. They know that Momentum’s efforts in the general election – both online and on the streets – played a critical role in depriving the Tories of their majority. They understand that Momentum may prove decisive in catapulting Jeremy Corbyn into No 10.

Expect the press onslaught only to escalate as their fear grows. But the truth is that the democratisation of the Labour party is a good thing – and necessary if a democratic socialist society really will be built.

[Innovindil]

1 hour ago, toddybad said:

Construing grassroots internal elections as an authoritarian cleanse is part of the smear campaign against Momentum by those terrified by its success

Hide your kids: those dastardly undemocratic reds are coming again! The front page of one Murdoch outlet today carries wild reports of“Moderates forced out by hard left in Labour purge”. What has actually happened is this. Labour is choosing candidates to stand as councillors in next year’s local elections. In some cases, members have democratically decided that some sitting councillors should face an open contest: this happened automatically until a rule change last year. Calculating that they will lose to a leftwing alternative, some have stood down. Others have lost. This is not a “purge”. This is what is known as “democracy”.

Labour’s membership has the right to decide who will represent the party in elections, based on their record and politics. Take Haringey. As my brilliant colleague Aditya Chakrabortty has exposed, the Labour council there has tried to force through the privatisation of £2bn of council housing, public buildings and land. On one estate, more than 1,000 social-rent homes are to be demolished, with no provision given for socially rented replacements.

You will be shocked to discover that this has not gone down well with Labour activists, or the local community. The plans have been opposed by both of Haringey’s Labour parties, both of the MPs, and local trade unions. Members who object to these proposals have, in many cases, chosen not to reselect councillors who support them. Again: this is democracy in action. It will mean that – after the local elections next May – there will be a majority of councillors who oppose the plans, and then they can be stopped. Good.

Before the Corbyn surge, many Labour parties were hollowed-out husks, the playthings of ambitious hacks, lacking roots in their local communities. Council candidates were selected at poorly attended meetings: yes, often because of stitch-ups. In the last two years, Labour has blossomed into one of the biggest parties in the western world. In Hornsey and Wood Green – one half of Haringey – one in 14 voters are now members of the Labour party. Many of these members are full of inspiration and optimism – they want to replace our bankrupt social order, not tinker with it – and expect their representatives to be accountable to them and their values.

And so, in Manchester and Haringey and elsewhere, members have decided that some existing candidates should be replaced. Any candidate who loses an election has the right to feel disappointed, hurt even. They may well have done things in office that they’re rightfully proud of. But construing democratic, grassroots internal elections as an authoritarian purge is a grave disservice to the truth.

Momentum loyalty test planned for would-be Labour MPs

This is, again, part and parcel of a renewed media campaign against Momentum, portraying them as sinister, extremist zealots intent on hijacking democracy. It bears no relation to reality. During the election, Momentum activists mobilised and campaigned for the most New Labour-sympathising parliamentary candidates. The truth is this. The rightwing press, the Tories, and the vested interests who fund and support them, are terrified of Momentum. They know that Momentum’s efforts in the general election – both online and on the streets – played a critical role in depriving the Tories of their majority. They understand that Momentum may prove decisive in catapulting Jeremy Corbyn into No 10.

Expect the press onslaught only to escalate as their fear grows. But the truth is that the democratisation of the Labour party is a good thing – and necessary if a democratic socialist society really will be built.

Definitely interesting reading down in the comment section tbh. 

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Definitely interesting reading down in the comment section tbh. 

I thought was was interesting in the way two publications take exactly the same facts and come to entirely different arguments.

[Innovindil]

1 minute ago, toddybad said:

I thought was was interesting in the way two publications take exactly the same facts and come to entirely different arguments.

Wouldn't know, read the headline, realised it was a guardian article, went to the comments section.  

[Guest Foxin_mad]

Owen Jones would say that though wouldn't he? He is a Momentum supporting pillock. Momentum are a nasty horrible bunch, absolutely vile promoters of class war.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

Owen Jones would say that though wouldn't he? He is a Momentum supporting pillock. Momentum are a nasty horrible bunch, absolutely vile promoters of class war.

Owen Jones spent two years slagging off Corbyn before realising he'd have to Chang track after the election he certainly isn't momentum.

 

On one hand yes the Guardian would say this. But it's points are valid aren't they? It is a democratic organisation acting democratically.....

 

On the other hand the right wing papers would say what they say about it wouldn't they?

[ealingfox]

Come off it toddy, you know full well that any day now those councillors will be dragged from their beds in the middle of the night by John McDangerous personally and sent straight to the gulags.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

Owen Jones is just a pillock full stop.

 

Momentum have a record of being pretty vile.

 

Surely its no democratic, if you want it to be democratic then the local people should select the candidates. Some pressure group within a party pushing its ideological agenda doesn't seem that democratic to me.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

Just now, ealingfox said:

Come off it toddy, you know full well that any day now those councillors will be dragged from their beds in the middle of the night by John McDangerous personally and sent straight to the gulags.

Like the Evil Tories and Nasty rich men are going to go round all the poor neighbourhoods and going to kick the poor and eat their children.

[ealingfox]

3 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

Owen Jones is just a pillock full stop.

 

Momentum have a record of being pretty vile.

 

Surely its no democratic, if you want it to be democratic then the local people should select the candidates. Some pressure group within a party pushing its ideological agenda doesn't seem that democratic to me.

 

Newsflash - no party selects their local candidates by going round the houses and doing a straw poll of people who claim to have voted for that party.

[ealingfox]

3 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

Like the Evil Tories and Nasty rich men are going to go round all the poor neighbourhoods and going to kick the poor and eat their children.

 

You what? 

[Guest Foxin_mad]

3 minutes ago, ealingfox said:

 

You what? 

In reply to:

 

Come off it toddy, you know full well that any day now those councillors will be dragged from their beds in the middle of the night by John McDangerous personally and sent straight to the gulags.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

3 minutes ago, ealingfox said:

 

Newsflash - no party selects their local candidates by going round the houses and doing a straw poll of people who claim to have voted for that party.

Of course not but there has to be a better way. Either way Momentum are absolute ***** of the highest order, proper far left nasty bastards.

[Guest MattP]

29 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

Owen Jones would say that though wouldn't he? He is a Momentum supporting pillock. Momentum are a nasty horrible bunch, absolutely vile promoters of class war.

He really is an insufferable little child, on the Daily Politics today and it's same answers from him for every problem. 

 

Naturally believes everything Morgan Stanley say over Brexit, but then calls it scaremongering when they say Corbyn would cause even more economic damage. 

[ealingfox]

9 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

In reply to:

 

Come off it toddy, you know full well that any day now those councillors will be dragged from their beds in the middle of the night by John McDangerous personally and sent straight to the gulags.

 

I wasn't questioning the direction of your response, just it's babbling and empty irrelevance.

[Guest MattP]

55 minutes ago, toddybad said:

I thought was was interesting in the way two publications take exactly the same facts and come to entirely different arguments.

It's Labour councillors themselves saying an aggressive purge is starting to happen.

 

Facts in this case are often opinion.

[Guest]

58 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

Owen Jones is just a pillock full stop.

 

Momentum have a record of being pretty vile.

 

Surely its no democratic, if you want it to be democratic then the local people should select the candidates. Some pressure group within a party pushing its ideological agenda doesn't seem that democratic to me.

Local members do select their candidates.

They literally vote locally on it.

[Guest]

43 minutes ago, MattP said:

He really is an insufferable little child, on the Daily Politics today and it's same answers from him for every problem. 

 

Naturally believes everything Morgan Stanley say over Brexit, but then calls it scaremongering when they say Corbyn would cause even more economic damage. 

Owen Jones is a bellend. I'd say that. 

[Guest]

25 minutes ago, MattP said:

It's Labour councillors themselves saying an aggressive purge is starting to happen.

 

Facts in this case are often opinion.

It's one of those things.

If you're a councillor that loses your seat because of Labour's change of direction then you probably are going to be a bit bitter.

 

Whether it's fair to call it a purge is a bit different given that it's democracy in action.

 

I don't really have anything to say good or bad about momentum but it is certainly good to have a party with such a large membership that have a real say over selections and policy.

[Guest]

Pretty shameful stuff - yet again - by a government trying to ignore the democratic will of parliament.

 

David Davis at risk of contempt over Brexit reports, says Speaker

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/28/david-davis-risk-contempt-parliament-brexit-reports-speaker?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

 

[Webbo]

I'm glad. Why would you want to publicise all your weak points in the middle of a negotiation? Why aren't these MPs demanding that  the EU  release all their impact reports?