Hear, hear! Neither agreeing with Corbyn nor Osborne, Allen could have a bright future if she hangs around long enough.
Politics at Westminster | BREAKING: UKIP
- Thread starter Team Brian GB
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Hear, hear! Neither agreeing with Corbyn nor Osborne, Allen could have a bright future if she hangs around long enough.
Did she ever get round to proposing anything though?
Allen is open to tax credit reform, it is the scale of the current proposals and the pace of implementation where i suspect the concern lies. For an opening speech to the Commons it was a pretty gutsy thing to do, unless we suspect of her having some ulterior motive.
Tax credits and steel were the topics chosen by Corbyn at PMQs today.
What is Labour's position with regard to the steel industry, are they proposing that government subsidise the continued operation of these plants in financial difficulty?
What is Labour's position with regard to the steel industry, are they proposing that government subsidise the continued operation of these plants in financial difficulty?
I think the word they are using is intervene (presumably either change the whole pricing mechanic of worldwide supply and demand or subsidise the plants)... Intervene probably polled better than subsidise.
I thought Corbyn did a bit better today - was quite funny to see the conservative mp (forget his name) using a question from his constituent as well
the yah boo punch and judy is creping back in again though
was interesting to see Jacob Rees Mog also suggesting that it could be end of the lords if they blocked the legislation - (or make up lots of conservative peers to push the bill through) Cameron didn't exactly dispel that possibility and they cited enough previous rulings to suggest they have a strategy in mind if they need to put in into play
Cameron warning the House Of Lords is like a red rag to a bull.
only one winner in the fight though and it aint the house of lords
I have had a day off today from the said steel industry and watching the daily politics I noted the fact that we have just guaranteed an electricity strike price twice the current market price for the next 3 decades. Meanwhile the price of steel drops to less per tonne than the price of cabbages no doubt EU subsidised ones without introducing anti dumping measures. All in order to get a French national energy company to build us a nuclear power plant with Chinese command economy money.
Can you outline the free market principle we are following consistently and across all sectors because I'm easily confused these days?
Do we know how much it's gone up by over the last three decades?
Edit: or down?
Well DKB, we need the French and Chinese because free marketeers have successfully made central planning and long term planning dirty concepts for the UK.
yes though that current price is based on prices including coal and gas - most of which will be going off stream as hinkley is built - there is no current commercially viable alternative to nuclear that will achieve the carbon targets the government wants and provide consistent base load... so as its either nuclear or the lights go out I don't think its that bad a deal... pretty much all of the 24bn goes into uk supply chain through the three main contractors
Think it through, if we introduce these carbon targets and then buy the cheaper produced steel and all the products made with the cheaper steel ,from countries not applying the same standards on energy supply, then are we not just shooting ourselves in the foot for no environmental gain at all.
RIP Michael Meacher, from all accounts sounded like a genuinely great guy who entered politics for all the right reasons.
The By-election in Oldham should be interesting, whether Labour increase their majority will be the first sign of Corbyn's popularity, and will Labour look for a Left-Wing candidate as an appointment I wonder...
The By-election in Oldham should be interesting, whether Labour increase their majority will be the first sign of Corbyn's popularity, and will Labour look for a Left-Wing candidate as an appointment I wonder...
It's this government's PFI
Yes, because the debate was about totally cancelling the tax credits cuts.
Three or four years ago when the last Welfare Reform Bill went through (universal credit, benefits cap, etc) Labour added a bunch of amendments to the bill to soften its impact rather than just reject it outright, and tried to get the Lib Dems to rebel to get the amendments added. With the coalition having a majority of 40 there was no way they'd get 20 to rebel against the bill completely. But they figured that a modification of the bill was better than nothing. However this meant they were demonized by the anti-austerity set for not giving full throated rejection of the cuts.
Yesterday I believe the debate was for total rejection of the cutting of tax credits. But this time round had they gone forward with the frank field proposal or something similar they would probably have been able to get enough Tories to rebel to get it passed. Granted it was only an opposition day debate and hence had no actual value, but it would have put pressure on the Tories.
Can't help feel a little more political nous and they could have had a big win out of this. Since Osborne is no doubt going to make a u-turn in the autumn statement to ameliorate the cuts, had they won the vote yesterday they would have been able to claim the responsibility for forcing the change.
But it's obvious few Tories would vote for a total rejection of the cuts. A proposal that protected just the poorest for example would have probably done a lot better, and could easily have been carried. Heidi Allen said just that.
Instead Frank Fields proposal is now being lined up as a cross party motion for debate, which is likely to carry by the sounds of it, which means that it's going to be Labour's most right wing MP (by far) working cross party that actually gets the change, drastically limiting what credit Labour can get out of this.
Sometimes full on opposition is desirable, but other times you have to negotiate in the house to make a positive change for the country. For Labour though, such tactics will rarely be on the table because Corbyn has been put there to approach the big issues in black and white terms.
Indeed, all tributes from all sides of the party today sound heartfelt, come as a surprise too by most accounts.
Oldham is a place where UKIP did well in the last election and judging from the data so far, Corbyn's appointment has led to more people going there from Labour rather than fewer. Will definitely be a result to keep an eye on in that respect.
In some ways it does indeed remain a mess, however i have little sympathy for the SNPs objections (given their ultimate aim) and successive Labour regimes have only perpetuated the problem. Sooner or later we'll probably have to reach some form of balanced federal settlement, although depending upon the outcome of the EU Ref the Scots might still opt full independence anway.
Last edited:
Liz on This Week tonight 
She's kept a fairly low profile since Corbyn was elected.
She's kept a fairly low profile since Corbyn was elected.English votes doesn't really solve the problem, it just creates a new one. If this goes through I can see there being a push for greater federalism, as Nick says.
Not that I'm naive enough to think that the Tories actually have any interested in solving a problem, it's another sneaky way to strengthen their hand whilst appearing benevolent.
Not that I'm naive enough to think that the Tories actually have any interested in solving a problem, it's another sneaky way to strengthen their hand whilst appearing benevolent.
More importantly though, Kermode and Mayo talking about filmsLiz on This Week tonight
Any in particular or just general? If Kermode starts banging on about lame horrors I shall be peeved.More importantly though, Kermode and Mayo talking about films
Politics of film. Not sure which ones, mind.
Hopefully when labour see just how easy it is for the conservarives to push English only votes through on issues and it dawns on them the inevitably of eventual scottish independence they will see sense and realise they need to appeal to the middle ground to have any viable future.
Yeah, EVEL's not a great proposal, federalism would be better at this stage. Either regional/full devolution for England that equates to devo max, with it being the same for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Doesn't make sense for each area to have differing levels of devolution.
A few local election results
That Bury result was where the local Cllr had been done for having indecent images of kids, so probably safe to ignore that result.
That Bury result was where the local Cllr had been done for having indecent images of kids, so probably safe to ignore that result.
I assume 'No Two Way' in Westminister is a incredibly geographically-specific single-issue group?
Apparently they object to the change of Baker Street to a two way street. Pretty good result for them.
Was this worth watching? Love Mayo and Kermode.More importantly though, Kermode and Mayo talking about films
Was alright, they were listing films more than anything else though.
Osbourne says he is now in listening mode.Looks like he's feeling the pressure.
Im not sure if its pressure or opportunism? but phasing it in over an extra year or two would allow them to blow the compassionate conservative trumpet loudly and plant the blue flag in the (now vacated) centre ground of UK politics.
Labour would then face either backing the new timetable or being branded far left deficit deniers (though you could argue thay have been tarred with that brush already and this would be the feathering)
Osborne must be made to stand off and think again; five years from now few will care that a u-turn was necessary, the same will not be so if this policy is forced through in its present form.
This might be from (far) left field but my reading is this:
a governments re-election is not based on its first 3 years but its last 2. (The Economist had run a good article on this.)
Voters have short memories, and if there's an improvement in conditions as the election approaches, that govt is as likely to win (maybe more) than a govt which had a stable performance throughout.
It strikes me as a sound electoral strategy. The previous Tory govt did plenty of U-turns, none of them cost it since the economy improved in the last 2 years, and he also gave a bonus tax break in the last budget, textbook stuff. Currently with Labour in disarray, and the GE 5 years away, it is the perfect time to do this.
a governments re-election is not based on its first 3 years but its last 2. (The Economist had run a good article on this.)
Voters have short memories, and if there's an improvement in conditions as the election approaches, that govt is as likely to win (maybe more) than a govt which had a stable performance throughout.
(This is very anecdotal, and I'm not sure if he was just trolling me). I was talking with a relative of a MP of the party which swept to power here in India last year on the promise of ending unemployment, corruption, and implementing large-scale industrial development. None of that had happened in the 1st year. He said the govt will wait for 3 years for the big changes because that is when it will pay off electorally. Right now it is costing him in state elections, the wave of popularity is not that strong anymore.
It strikes me as a sound electoral strategy. The previous Tory govt did plenty of U-turns, none of them cost it since the economy improved in the last 2 years, and he also gave a bonus tax break in the last budget, textbook stuff. Currently with Labour in disarray, and the GE 5 years away, it is the perfect time to do this.
You could look at it like that.Or you could say the Tories promised not to touch Tax Credits before the election and went back on their word once in power and because of outside pressure in some small part thanks to Corbyn he may have to back track.They can blow that compassionate trumpet as hard as they like .But they will never shake of the tag of the Nasty Party.
Their commitment to the centre ground is neither genuine nor long term, but they don't need it to be. They're just making a raid on the voters that Labour have left behind. Given that the only other centre ground alternative is (ahem) the Lib Dems, they don't need to be super compassionate, they just need to make enough of a show to stop voters feeling bad for voting for them.
throw in an affable chap like boris (though I think they will go with gideon) and they could walk the next election with a tonly blair 1997 style majority... (unless they scupper themselves over the eu referendum - or labour see sense and move back to the middle)
This isn't just about 2020, there is also the succession to be considered here. Osborne is not only tied to these reforms of tax credits but a pro-EU position as well (plus a dash of Heathrow), this contrasts with his rivals for the leadership can manoeuvres around these obstacles and stake a claim as the centre-right candidate. As Bloomberg's Stephanie Baker pointed out the other day, the status as heir apparent could soon begin to work against him.