Fernando Fernandez
Member
He recently rubbed shoulders with Dave, George and many other Tories at Rupert Murdochs house party.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
UK PoliGAF |OT2| - We Blue Ourselves
- Thread starter Jezbollah
- Start date
- Status
He recently rubbed shoulders with Dave, George and many other Tories at Rupert Murdochs house party.
CyclopsRock
Member
It wasn't Corbyn's views he was criticising, it was STW's who did put out that article that was basically "Paris had it coming". I think it was then Corbyn's refusal to distance himself from the group and this view in particular that caused Pat's question to, well, be his question.
In other news, a resignation of the shadow Rail minister, citing (amongst other things), McFadden's sacking as part of the reason:
Fernando Fernandez
Member
I think Labour MP Cat Smith sums it up nicely.
Jeremy Corbyn, as leader of the Labour Party, is within his rights to pick the people that he wants to serve in his shadow cabinet.
And if he doesnt want people in the shadow cabinet who spend more time attacking the Labour Party leadership than the Tory benches opposite us, then he is perfectly within his rights to do that.
Jeremy Corbyn, as leader of the Labour Party, is within his rights to pick the people that he wants to serve in his shadow cabinet.
And if he doesnt want people in the shadow cabinet who spend more time attacking the Labour Party leadership than the Tory benches opposite us, then he is perfectly within his rights to do that.
Nicktendo86
Member
Stephen Doughty just resigned live on DP.
Nicktendo86
Member
So that's what, 3 down today now? I think that's more resignations than actual sackings. Rumour was 4 would go so I guess we have one more today.
JonathanEx
Member
At what stage do we need a word stronger than omnishambles
CyclopsRock
Member
Tbh there were always going to be resignations today. If they keep it to 4 fairly low key members, they've done alright (though there might be virtue to cleaning the stables in one go - otherwise this will keep happening).
Incidentally, there are few jib titles more sinister sounding than "Shadow Armed Forces Minister".
Incidentally, there are few jib titles more sinister sounding than "Shadow Armed Forces Minister".
This is the divide between Tories and the Labour party right now. Media showmanship versus actual concern for the welfare of people.
Fernando Fernandez
Member
Its so depressing, I just can't watch it anymore. Dave is an abysmal PM but a masterful deflector.
CyclopsRock
Member
Why is it to be considered a "versus" situation though? There's nothing inherent to Corbyn's positions that mean he needs to be awful at media management and successfully organising his team. It's not all just Westminster bubble politicking either, not when his actions actually get in the way of, for example, protesting rail faires.
RobotNinjaHornets
Banned
Thing is though, there is literally nothing he could do to get the media onside. No matter what he does, there will be some insult ready, with a fucking MP from Progress ready to say something along the lines of "WE NEED TO BE A CREDIBLE PARTY OF GOVERNMENT".
I mean seriously, Corbyn takes his time with a reshuffle and the press are in a furore with everyone running liveblogs despite knowing sweet fuck all, but the housing bill that got pushed to 3AM? The fact the Tories literally laughing at people who's houses have flooded, while Cameron doesn't bother to actually answer the questions put to him? Nah that's not important.
Shit's fucked.
True enough. How can the media be expected to give a damn about flooding in the north of England and Scotland? Or about a flood protection scheme in Leeds that was deemed unaffordable by the previous government at a mere £180m, but found £297m for flood protection for the Thames Valley?
Who cares about the north being underwater, while some former Labour shadow ministers are having a good whine, and Cameron's quoting Shakespeare! That's the important stuff right?
An initial 50 million government funding grant for additional flood defences has just been announced. The action has been taken.
Fuck all anyone can do about a flood until the water receeds. It amuses me the guy from the environment agency getting a hard time because he didn't rush back off holiday.
What do people expect him to do, perform a naked sun dance?
Coriolanus
Banned
Y'know, i'm firmly with JC, but he's not exactly facing things that he didn't expect. He'll continue to face them for the foreseeable future, and it is indeed his burden to find a way to deal with the press.
Yes, the coverage is ridiculously unfair. No alternative, though.
Not having a ridiculous level of dissent in the higher ranks of the party should help a tad. Just gotta weather the storm, keep improving his position and exploit any openings that do pop up. Truisms all day erry day.
Yes, the coverage is ridiculously unfair. No alternative, though.
Not having a ridiculous level of dissent in the higher ranks of the party should help a tad. Just gotta weather the storm, keep improving his position and exploit any openings that do pop up. Truisms all day erry day.
CyclopsRock
Member
Eh? It's not about having the media "on side", it's about not scoring own goals. For example, Dugher tweeting that he'd been sacked and then the Labour spokesperson refusing to comment on it for about 18 hours. Or Labour getting involved in a rail fare protest and then immediately wiping it off the news agenda by also starting a reshuffle. These are the things that make it look like you can't run a party properly. These aren't "favours" they need to ask political editors to do for them, and fixing these sorts of things aren't examples of dictating party policy by what works best in the press. It's about being competent.
Edit: Also, Uzzy, I do hope you have some other evidence rather than "this numbers bigger than that number" to suggest that the Leeds one is better value than the Thames Valley one. Maybe the latter's more effective, pound for pound?
Nicktendo86
Member
Keith Vaz has suddenly deleted his twitter and Facebook accounts. Ummmm.
Of course the latter's more effective, pound for pound. The Thames Valley one protects people near London, who matter, while the proposed Leeds one would have protected northerners, who don't.
Money's no object when it's the south that gets flooded (and rightly so), but when it comes to the north, it's suddenly important that projects are cost effective.
Pretty sure he got sacked for constantly briefing against Corbyn.
Tories repeatedly cut flood defence funding even in most vulnerable areas. Private Eye's been detailing it for months now.
Flood defences have been going backwards for over a decade and we aren't even allowed to dredge the rivers anymore...
Dredging is the first line of defence, then building up defences in the high silt areas where it's tough to keep up.
Fernando Fernandez
Member
There's some allegations he's under investigation for some wrong doing.
Jezbollah
Member
The tables have turned....
Fernando Fernandez
Member
I already thought George Osborne wasn't very good at his job but his speech this morning has filled me with dread. It feels like he hasn't accomplished much over the past 5 years and now he's getting his excuses in early.
CyclopsRock
Member
There was a good piece in the Spectator the other day about how everyone expected the Tories to double down on austerity after the election, as most governments tend to try and get their most unpopular and controversial stuff out of the way early, so they can do the sweeteners in the year/s before an election. But the Tories can't do that because they don't want the EU referendum to become a referendum on their government (and thus push us to leave, which the top brass really don't want) so they're having to do their pre-election routine now.
And this excuses the Tories' actions, how? Also recent research suggests dredging may increase flood risk.
CyclopsRock
Member
Though it pains me to say it, Moniot knows his fucking trees and this (long) article from a few years back...
http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...public-spending-britain-europe-policies-homes
Suggests that it's really neither dredging nor flood defences that cause the majority of our problems but rather our bizarre (in the POV of flooding) farming policy which encourages clearing fields of trees (which themselves are amazing at halting floods) and the manner in which we have tried to canal'ise so many rivers (which reducing their size and practically destroys their flood basin) that are the main causes of flooding.
As an example, there have been floods in places which don't even have rivers. It's clearly not all about flood defences.
http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...public-spending-britain-europe-policies-homes
Suggests that it's really neither dredging nor flood defences that cause the majority of our problems but rather our bizarre (in the POV of flooding) farming policy which encourages clearing fields of trees (which themselves are amazing at halting floods) and the manner in which we have tried to canal'ise so many rivers (which reducing their size and practically destroys their flood basin) that are the main causes of flooding.
As an example, there have been floods in places which don't even have rivers. It's clearly not all about flood defences.
Actually dredging does next to fuck all and can make the issue worse by allowing freer flow of water downstream. The best line of defense is forested peaks and more trees in land used for farming, cuts out around 30% of the water reaching the rivers and ensure that the other 70% is slowed and more dispersed.
Edit: see above
Nicktendo86
Member
Also, don't build on flood plains.
This x a million.
CyclopsRock
Member
Speaking of Osborne's money grabbing, I'm not the only one who literally never says "yes" when asked if they're eating in at Pret/Costa/wherever right? I just grab my sandwich and sit down. You won't get my vat, George.
Btw I'm in Starbucks ATM (speaking of avoiding tax) and there are two guys sitting next to the queue having a real, in real life conversation about Doge.
Btw I'm in Starbucks ATM (speaking of avoiding tax) and there are two guys sitting next to the queue having a real, in real life conversation about Doge.
Did you read my post?
Dredge the rivers, and then increase flood protection for the high silt areas where its hard to keep up. It the minute we've no idea where the rivers will spill over, it could be anywhere and its impossible to protect against unless we pay for water tanking on everyones house within 5 miles of a river.
Free flowing water is what you want...
His position is baffling to me. He got a 2:1 in History at University, attempted to become a Journalist before joining the Conservative party in '94. As a politician he's worked as a speech writer, campaigner and advisory positions then somehow quickly promoted to Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury position. This is a man with no finical advisory background. Any FTSE100 company would surely laugh at him if he tried applying for a position controlling fiscal & monetary policies, yet here he is, in charge of the countries finances and doing a piss poor job of it too.
What he has done over the past 6 years is a destructive and naïve attempt to run a surplus and treat the countries finances like a household budget. How politicians (on both sides!) aren't called out on their lack of credentials for the job I'll never know...
As someone out of University with a Mathematics degree and currently working on my accounting qualification for a position in Tax advisory, I know the amount of work, expertise and knowledge my job takes, so his position scares me too.
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
Yes but a minister's role is more managerial. If you've got a well-qualified group of employees there shouldn't be too much of an issue.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Essentially, yeah. The civil service say "here are the outcomes of policy X, Y, and Z, which do you prefer?". As long as Osborne can decide between the value of outcomes in terms of judgements like fairness or personal freedoms, and the civil service is accurate in terms of consequence predictions, then Osborne doesn't really need any personal economic knowledge.
The rivers used to be dredged with the silt and gravel pulled up used to raise the banks.
That still won't stop biblical stuff we've had though but it would help get the water on the plains instead of inside city centres.
I'm aware that there's studies either way. Same as most things where people have an agenda.
Coriolanus
Banned
Sure, but.... would he happen to have a whole lot of experience with management?
Requiring Chancellors to have a degree in economics or previous experience in a closely-related industry will not mean they do a better job. One possible outcome is such a person being stubborn and narrow-minded because he/she believes they are more suitably qualified than the civil servants advising them.
Coriolanus
Banned
The scenario you fear can occur regardless of experience. A wise person will seek and consider input from others, and if they're studied or experienced, is better equipped to consider and act upon the advice. An ignorant person is perfectly capable of thinking that they're god's gift to whatever job they've been given, regardless of how experienced they are at a given field.
Arrogance is a trait linked with the the individual's personality, not with their experience.
Thus you're only risking losing more by hiring an inexperienced individual. What you want is someone who is experienced and isn't an asshat.
CyclopsRock
Member
Tbh it sounds more like a professional television producer patting himself on the back for making a good TV show than a politically motivated hack seeing his dastardly plan harm Corbyn.
RobotNinjaHornets
Banned
Not rly the fucking BBCs place to do something for "a dramatic moment with big political impact" though is it?
And before the claims of hypocrisy etc.: I'd be condemning this if it had happened with a Tory as well (even if I don't believe that this would have happened at all had it been a Tory)
JonathanEx
Member
Fuss over nothing. "Hey are you planning on resigning?" "Yes" "Fancy doing it on our programme?" "Yes". And of course the production team will be delighted with having the news happen on their programme, because journalists like to break news. And you want to make an impact, because otherwise what's the point.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked