The Coalition of Expensive Chaos

[Alty]

To be fair that's not a one off saving of £4bn.

 

[Dave-Vale]

To be fair that's not a one off saving of £4bn.

It's still absurd.

 

[Pagnell]

Right-wing ideological policies disguised as austerity, you've got to love them. Not quite as much as the Government's little hissy fit following the house of lords' recent actions though.

 

[The Paranoid Pineapple]

I think they've pressed on with it so pigheadedly because there are another 4 and a half years before the election, and they calculated that there was enough time for the anger towards the policy to dissipate so they could try to get their most ideologically distasteful stuff through now.

I'm certain they didn't intend for it to have to become an issue again, obviously why there's so much anger towards the Lords and renewed threats of reform, particularly from Osborne. It sets their plans back, presents a huge PR issue for them and particularly for Osborne whilst he's putting the wheels of his leadership campaign in full motion. The HoL has potentially badly harmed his hopes of being PM.

Yep, agree with all of this. Can definitely see why they're trying to get it out of the way now though I must confess I'm a bit alarmed that they seem determined to press on with the £12bn of welfare cuts - I very much imagined that this was an absurd figure that they were expecting to have to negotiate down in coalition but it seems as though they're actually going to have a go at implementing them. I must also admit that I'm a bit unsure of the rationale - granted, targeting tax credits is a fairly obvious area to focus on if you're looking to slash the welfare bill but it hardly fits in with the Tory mantra of making work pay. Tax credits actually genuinely seemed to make work profitable for a lot of households so the removal of that incentive seems a bit perverse (the introduction of a "National Living Wage", though a clever bit of rebranding, isn't going to con anyone into thinking that those affected by the cuts won't be fairly significantly worse off). It certainly seems as though this may be a bit of an ill-judged move, though I'd tend to agree that the biggest victim could yet be Osborne's PM aspirations.

Re the Lords - I've always been an advocate for reform, as I think it's an utterly farcical institution at present. It's bloated, the appointments system is a mess, there are still hereditary peers and bishops hanging around - there's absolutely no way that anyone in their right mind would devise an upper house that looks like this. Having said that, I'm really not sure how you go about reforming it. You wouldn't want something that basically mirrors the makeup of the Commons, and you wouldn't, I don't think, want to introduce PR - for the upper house to have greater democratic legitimacy than the lower house seems patently ridiculous. For those reasons I'm probably coming round to the idea of just stuffing it full of technocrats. Was certainly pretty funny to see a Tory party, who so steadfastly opposed Lords reform in the last parliament, wailing about how unfair it was that unelected Liberal and Labour peers (who'd advocated reform) had meanly tried to scupper their plans resulting in a CATACLYSMIC CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS (oh no).

 

[Dave-Vale]

http://www.theguardian.com/business...ount-deficit-osborne-no-plan?CMP=share_btn_fb

Worrying that the Chancellor doesn't have any kind of qualification in economics or business. He does have a degree in modern history, though.

 

[mowgli]

http://www.theguardian.com/business...ount-deficit-osborne-no-plan?CMP=share_btn_fb

Worrying that the Chancellor doesn't have any kind of qualification in economics or business. He does have a degree in modern history, though.

He only got the job because he went to Oxford with Cameron and they're best mates. Gideon always looks off his head all the time to me,look how he has a vacant look in the commons when he's not speaking.

 

[.V.]

http://www.theguardian.com/business...ount-deficit-osborne-no-plan?CMP=share_btn_fb

Worrying that the Chancellor doesn't have any kind of qualification in economics or business. He does have a degree in modern history, though.

On the rare occasions they clash, Cameron likes to remind him or this apparently.

 

[.V.]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...sual-number-of-special-advisers-a6716306.html

 

[Dave-Vale]

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/02/labour-is-in-the-shit-tristram-hunt?CMP=fb_gu

My MP, the wonderful Tristram Hunt.

Fucking clown.

 

[Dave-Vale]

Watching Cameron get schooled by Philip Schofield on This Morning.

"We're bringing in the national living wage". He said this and actually sounded like he was being sarcastic.

 

[.V.]

I do wish they'd stop using the phrase living wage when it's clearly an increased minimum wage.

 

[Dave-Vale]

"As a member of your constituency, a proud resident of Abbey Hulton and a born and bred Stokie I was horrified by your remarks regarding how the Labour Party (the party that you are in and the party that parachuted you in to one of the safer Labour seats) is heading to 'the shit'. Really Tristram? Really? More people have joined the Labour Party in the last 6 months than are in the ENTIRE Tory Party. Corbyn has given hope to thousands of young, old, disabled, dying, and vulnerable people. Hope which the Tory Party will never provide and that you want to snatch away.

I cannot believe that you, as the MP of a deprived and working class area, would make comments about how those wealthy, spoon-fed public school boys and girls should be leading the Party when many of them have zero idea or experience in how the 99% are living. I disagree immensely. Politics needs to change and Corbyn advocates that. He could win the next election if you and other Blairite, Blue-Labour deserters would get behind him. You won't do that because it doesn't fit your self-serving, neo-liberal ideology that Blair (a war criminal, by the way) brought to the Party 15-20 years ago. Oh, I've been reading all about you and your background. You were one of these wealthy, spoon-fed public school boys. It's no wonder you like Blair so much after he made your father a peer in the House of Lords. Brilliant.

If I wasn't horrified enough I was absolutely disgusted to read just now on one of various memes that are currently doing the rounds, that YOU actually abstained from voting against the tax credit cuts that would have further decimated this area. I work full time and earn above minimum wage and my partner works part time. We have 2 children, 1 goes to nursery which is costly. Tax credit cuts would have cost us nearly £100 a month. A drop in the ocean to how much it would have cost others in this area.

I didn't vote for you at the last election because I don't like you, your ideas or your background. I voted Green as more of a protest at the big 2 that were too similar. As I mentioned above you've had life given to you and to think that you wanted to rip away the tax credits lifeline that so many in this area are so reliant on is disgraceful. I want to swear at you, I want to rhyme your last name with the 'C' word like others are doing but I aren't going to start mud slinging; like you said would happen when you stepped down as Shadow Secretary of Education. It's funny you said that and Corbyn let you get on with it, then you go to Oxbridge students and start slating him.

I hope you read this message. I'd like a reply but I doubt I will get one. If I see you again on Holehouse Road taking promo photos and pretending you care, then I will come and read this message to you because I want an answer as to why you don't want a decent human being in charge of your Party and why you abstained and basically gave 2 fingers to those in this area.

Actually, I would prefer it if you stepped down and were replaced with somebody who will back Corbyn."

Just sent this to Tristram Hunt. Posted it on a number of posts on his Facebook page, too.

 

[Techno Natch]

The 1% comment was the biggest piss take. He's a dick.

 

[GodsGift]

His general point is right though. Who cares if the party membership has soared, the same has happened with the Lib Dems and they're hardly in great shakes are they? Labour are unelectable.

 

[Aber gas]

His general point is right though. Who cares if the party membership has soared, the same has happened with the Lib Dems and they're hardly in great shakes are they? Labour are unelectable.

I don't agree, corbyn is providing an alternative to the conservative government and has energised the Labour Party and the left in general. I'm a labour member but have been generally apathetic and depressed with the direction the party has taken until the election of corbyn. I now feel motivated to campaign again for a labour government especially in the face of a increasingly aggressive Tory party who are following and implementing an attack on the poor which would have made Thatcher blush. It won't be easy especially in the face of a hostile media and hostile party members who frankly should probably leave the party but corbyn is definetly not unelectable.

 

[Dave-Vale]

"Dear David,

Thanks for your message.

I assume you're writing in response to the coverage of my discussion with students at Cambridge University? If so, it might be worth reading the write-up by the student who was at the presentation for some fuller context, which you can find here: http://www.varsity.co.uk/news/9147

As you'll see, Tom made clear that I closed the event "without the tensions or antagonism that has characterised the post-Miliband Labour party" and also said that we need to "serve the Corbyn leadership".

The piece also makes clear that my remark about the current state of the Labour Party was in the context of having just suffered one of the biggest defeats in our history - which was the focus of my talk there.

You might also be interested to see the comment I issued to the media who covered the report of my remarks:

“My message to the students at Cambridge was clear: Labour has a mountain to climb if we are to recover from our defeat in May, and as the next generation of Labour activists they are absolutely central to our efforts to renew.

“I am confident that – with the support of committed Labour activists from across the country, and from all walks of life - we can build a strong, credible and forward-looking movement that promotes the interests of the many, not the few.”

I hope that clarifies things somewhat, and want to reassure you that my overriding priority is to serve my Party so that we can be returned to power in 2020. I hope that you will feel able to vote for me in future - and perhaps even campaign on behalf of the Labour Party - but either way I will fully respect your decision.

Best,

Tristram"

This was the reply I got this morning. Probably sent from an adviser. The next time he's around I'm going to speak with him face to face. I want proper answers.

It is abundantly clear he doesn't support Corbyn and that is fine; but his politics are far too Tory Lite especially for the constituency he represents.

 

[Alty]

"Dear David,

Thanks for your message.

I assume you're writing in response to the coverage of my discussion with students at Cambridge University? If so, it might be worth reading the write-up by the student who was at the presentation for some fuller context, which you can find here: http://www.varsity.co.uk/news/9147

As you'll see, Tom made clear that I closed the event "without the tensions or antagonism that has characterised the post-Miliband Labour party" and also said that we need to "serve the Corbyn leadership".

The piece also makes clear that my remark about the current state of the Labour Party was in the context of having just suffered one of the biggest defeats in our history - which was the focus of my talk there.

You might also be interested to see the comment I issued to the media who covered the report of my remarks:

“My message to the students at Cambridge was clear: Labour has a mountain to climb if we are to recover from our defeat in May, and as the next generation of Labour activists they are absolutely central to our efforts to renew.

“I am confident that – with the support of committed Labour activists from across the country, and from all walks of life - we can build a strong, credible and forward-looking movement that promotes the interests of the many, not the few.”

I hope that clarifies things somewhat, and want to reassure you that my overriding priority is to serve my Party so that we can be returned to power in 2020. I hope that you will feel able to vote for me in future - and perhaps even campaign on behalf of the Labour Party - but either way I will fully respect your decision.

Best,

Tristram"

This was the reply I got this morning. Probably sent from an adviser. The next time he's around I'm going to speak with him face to face. I want proper answers.

It is abundantly clear he doesn't support Corbyn and that is fine; but his politics are far too Tory Lite especially for the constituency he represents.

"Dear David,

Thanks for your message.

I assume you're writing in response to the coverage of my discussion with students at Cambridge University? If so, it might be worth reading the write-up by the student who was at the presentation for some fuller context, which you can find here: http://www.varsity.co.uk/news/9147

As you'll see, Tom made clear that I closed the event "without the tensions or antagonism that has characterised the post-Miliband Labour party" and also said that we need to "serve the Corbyn leadership".

The piece also makes clear that my remark about the current state of the Labour Party was in the context of having just suffered one of the biggest defeats in our history - which was the focus of my talk there.

You might also be interested to see the comment I issued to the media who covered the report of my remarks:

“My message to the students at Cambridge was clear: Labour has a mountain to climb if we are to recover from our defeat in May, and as the next generation of Labour activists they are absolutely central to our efforts to renew.

“I am confident that – with the support of committed Labour activists from across the country, and from all walks of life - we can build a strong, credible and forward-looking movement that promotes the interests of the many, not the few.”

I hope that clarifies things somewhat, and want to reassure you that my overriding priority is to serve my Party so that we can be returned to power in 2020. I hope that you will feel able to vote for me in future - and perhaps even campaign on behalf of the Labour Party - but either way I will fully respect your decision.

Best,

Tristram"

This was the reply I got this morning. Probably sent from an adviser. The next time he's around I'm going to speak with him face to face. I want proper answers.

It is abundantly clear he doesn't support Corbyn and that is fine; but his politics are far too Tory Lite especially for the constituency he represents.

TBH the constituency is probably perfect for a Tory Lite MP. You look at the 90s modernisers: Hartlepool; Darlington; Sedgefield; Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath. It's not your Islington or Manchester Withington-type demographic. It's the working-class "I don't care who the bloke with the red rosette is as long as he beats the Tory scum" type characters. Often poorly educated, these people tend to stick to the (formerly accurate, now somewhat less clear) principle that the Conservative Party doesn't act on their behalf and the Labour Party, in whatever guise, is a better bet.

As an aside, I thought Hunt was generally held to be more liberal and left-wing than the PLP 'mainstream' when he first arrived on the scene? Pretty sure he had to row back on his opposition to academies and free schools when he took up his post in the Shadow Cabinet, for example.

 

[Techno Natch]

Here is an AAV article on Hunt http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/tristram-hunt-labour-1-percent.html?m=1

 

[Aber gas]

Here is an AAV article on Hunt http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/tristram-hunt-labour-1-percent.html?m=1

That's fairly damning he's absolutely right though

 

[Dave-Vale]

Cameron caught out making comments about how PMQ's is taking longer and longer.

Well I'm sorry it's such an inconvenience, Mr Prime Minister.

Can really tell he's getting uncomfortable.

 

[mowgli]

Cameron caught out making comments about how PMQ's is taking longer and longer.

Well I'm sorry it's such an inconvenience, Mr Prime Minister.

Can really tell he's getting uncomfortable.

That's because of his MP's behaving like a gang of 12 year old public schoolboys, the way they shout "More" is embarrassing,anyone know what time the commons bar opens? Seems to me some of them are pissed for PMQ's.

 

[Veggie Legs]

I watched PMQs this week for the first time in a while. I expect it to be tribal, but is it always so rude and obnoxious?

 

[AFCB_Mark]

When Corbyn started he and Cameron agreed to make a go of a quieter and more sensible PMQ. However it's quickly descended back into chaos unfortunately.

As for Corbyn making Cameron work, I'm not so sure. Cameron doesn't even have to open his box of notes to bat away most of Corbyn's questions. I keep expecting Corbyn to pull something out of his hat (or jacket) to which all the questions prior will seem like softeners, and will make Cameron stumble a bit. But it doesn't seem to happen.

 

[Alty]

I watched PMQs this week for the first time in a while. I expect it to be tribal, but is it always so rude and obnoxious?

It was worse than usual. Bercow was far too weak. He should have stopped the Tory backbencher a shouting Corbyn down.

 

[mowgli]

I watched PMQs this week for the first time in a while. I expect it to be tribal, but is it always so rude and obnoxious?

I'm afraid it is.It has become a shambles and a disgrace to parliament it's time Bercow kicked some of the loudest hecklers out of the commons so they can be shamed live in front of the public,might make thedm think again about their boorish behaviour.

 

[Veggie Legs]

Can someone who understands parliamentary procedure better than me explain why this is allowed to happen? Isn't the point of having a parliament that bills are debated and voted on? http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/fury-parliament-tory-minister-forces-6782577

 

[blade1889]

Da fuq that's weird. Youd have thought thered be a rule that they'd just vote on it another time to stop that from happening? Could Labour have in theory talked for 2hours about tax-credits and therefore not given the tories chance to vote it in?

 

[SUTSS]

It's happened quite a lot recently. Happens in America as well, the Republicans are the masters of it.

 

[mowgli]

It happened last week in the debate over hospital car parking charges. It was run down by a Tory for 3 HOURS with a little help from 2 of his chums,this MP (Can't remember his name) claimed his hospital car parking charges on his expenses as well One rule for them and another for the serfs it seems.

 

[silkyman]

Fillibustering.

The yanks like a good filibuster, and it does seem that it's the arseholes who do it.

The longest ever went on for more than 24 hours and was to put a stop to the Civil Rights Act of 1957.

http://www.businessinsider.com/longest-filibuster-in-history-strom-thurmond-rand-paul-2013-3?IR=T

He spoke for more than 24 straight hours, just to stop black people being able to vote.