Topics about the Labour Party
:grinning: 100 %
By mikey mikey
Membership Days Posts
Daley Mayle wrote:Burnham only came alive after the Labour leadership campaign IMO.
I agree. He's not a natural "moderate". By which I mean the besuited, newspeak spouting beigelings that Progress process like plastic cheddar in Asda.

I have warmed to the man.

He was raised a Catholic by the way. So our two very electable mayors are prohibited by prejudice from No.10

Yet from reading LJB's posts, you would think anti-Semitism was the only form of religious intolerance in politics
By Tubby Isaacs
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
mikey mikey wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:The 3 EU politicians get the EU though. Could do worse than them on that issue.
Agreed. There is every reason to welcome their support on this issue. I have to say that I am very impressed with Sadiq Khan, and also with Andy Burnham's performance recently has occluded MidStaffs very succesfully. His mayorship of Manchester is assured (fingers crossed) and I suspect both of these MPs are going to vital in reuiniting the party.
He was properly done over by the media for Mid Staffs. He fought back very well there. The really weak leadership election effort is hard to explain.
By Tubby Isaacs
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
Daley Mayle wrote:Burnham only came alive after the Labour leadership campaign IMO.

He showed great presence during the outcome of the Liverpool 96 Inquiry and more recently in the Mayoral hustings.

What was it with the three other Labour leadership contenders that they appeared so lacking in vision and inspiration that Corbyn became the deserved winner? And I'm speaking as one who lashed out sixty bob and voted Jezza.
Hard to explain. Certain amount of keeping powder dry, I expect. Traumatised by the election I expect.
By Andy McDandy
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
My guess is that none of Burnham, Kendall or Cooper really had much time to prepare a defining platform, so stuck with 'more of the same', and appealing to the centre-right of the party. Corbyn ended up as the only voice of the left, and offered something distinct and different, and represented by default a large number of people including those who felt gutted by the surprise Tory victory. As ever, nothing wrong with that - we just need someone who can sell that vision better and resonate with the wider public and here we go again...
By mikey mikey
Membership Days Posts
Tubby Isaacs wrote:He was properly done over by the media for Mid Staffs.
He was indeed;this Murdoch hatchet job just over a year ago is strikingly familiar to the sort of thing Corbyn has been subject to.

6 reasons the Tories would love Andy Burnham as Labour leader
Dodgy on the NHS, awful on the economy, in the pocket of the unions, as red was Ed, and some ‘interesting’ expenses… The Tories can’t wait.
By crabcakes_windermere
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
Notably, the unions have done precisely that and negotiations are back on.

To be honest, Southern Rail are more or less universally loathed - it needs to be a careful balance between making a point and not showing that you really will take all measures available but the unions really want to play it as cleverly as possible here. The public will largely be on their side because Southern are so awful, but not if they fuck up people's last couple of weeks at work before xmas.
By Tubby Isaacs
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
The government ordered new DOO (Driver Only Operation) trains already and the conductors, as door openers, are fucked. Changing the new trains so they can open the doors would cost lots of money and be a complete waste of time.

There's a strong case for lots of conductors to continue on Southern's busy routes for revenue protection, helping passengers etc- and the RMT have a point there. But on other routes where the same issue will come, there won't be such a strong case. Southern are basically doing what the government want in rejecting compromise, and nationalization is going to have exactly the same problem and reluctance to give way. There are going to be other lines where the case for so many conductors won't be strong, and any kind of precedent set with Southern will encourage similar strikes.

Having said that, Scotrail did do a deal and at the moment the Nats are congratulating themselves about how they do things differently etc, and gleefully comparing themselves with "Labour" (ie John McTernan, who wrote something very hostile about the unions here). They might be less happy if Ruth Davidson asks some awkward questions and finds out the Scottish Government is bunging Scotrail a load of extra taxpayers' money for the privilege of running overmanned trains, and making cuts elsewhere. There are bits of cost cutting on Borders Rail already biting the Scottish Government on the arse, even though overall you have to give them lots of credit for getting it done at all when money was so tight.

It's hard to see where the dispute goes.
By D.C. Harrison
Membership Days Posts
A friend who works on the railways told me conductors, beyond revenue protection, are vital when things go wrong. They're supposed to (and, I gather are tested) know what to do in a number of emergency situations to ensure passenger safety.

Obviously if conductors are just there to check/produce tickets and nothing else, you can pay them less. Personally, I'd feel better knowing someone on board is trained in what to do when shit happens.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 10
Roll Call

Morning David, morning everybody. Up early, in fa[…]

The Trump Presidency

Someone tell me the one again about the desecratio[…]

Rishi Sunak

Rishi's back, with a cultural industries plan. W[…]

Conspiracy theories

Meatloaf, AKA Marvin Lee Aday, is actually a deliv[…]