Support NeoGAF

[Jezbollah]

Corbyn: Chilcot report will reveal that Bush and Blair did a secret deal over the Iraq war

I think most of us probably saw this coming. I wonder if Jack Straw thinks all MPs who voted for the war should be the ones sharing responsibility after this..

Also, the Doom reference - that's probably the most in touch anyone from either side of the EU argument has been in the campaign.

I'm afraid to get into Stellaris though. That may destroy my life.

Civ 6? All over that

 

[Mr. Sam]

Who even has time to play videogames anymore? Too busy working/socialising/posting about politics on a videogame forum.

 

[cabot]

But my xenophobic, militaristic, Human empire is crushing everyone while standing alone. I even kicked out those terrible immigrants from another dimension.

We got a space Boris Johnson over here!

 

[tomtom94]

When Chilcot comes out, I can't see Corbyn still being leader at the end of the month. No matter what stance he takes, or how morally right he is, it is the definition of a no-win situation for Labour.

 

[Moosichu]

When Chilcot comes out, I can't see Corbyn still being leader at the end of the month. No matter what stance he takes, or how morally right he is, it is the definition of a no-win situation for Labour.

Corbyn was ani-Iraq though. How does that check out?

 

[War Peaceman]

Corbyn was ani-Iraq though. How does that check out?

Last stand of the Blairites?

 

[CyclopsRock]

I attempted a little thought experiment on the walk to the station earlier but I'm a dumbo so I didn't get far. But picture this...

Long-term policies - large scale infrastructure, climate change action, cultivating non-commercial scientific research etc - are goals that the government is the only body that can perform it, yet the long term nature of it makes actually achieving it, politically, difficult. This is because politicians need to get re-elected and are judged on 5-year cycles where as many of these things have repercussions decades down the line.

SO what about this - MP terms go to a fixed 10 year cycle *but* 1/5th of the parliament is re-elected every 2 years. These could be geographically spread (Though obviously the political ramifications of this would alter throughout time). This would mean parliament is in a semi-constant state of flux, with MPs themselves having a 10 year shelf life but any given government only having a 2 year grace period (unless their popularity is such that even if every seat at the next election owned by them flips, they'd still have a majority).

My initial thoughts are that this would, whilst retaining FPTP, establish a more bi-partisan approach to legislation. With less certainty over a long-term government but more certainty over each MPs own position, you'd get more ad-hoc groups of MPs supporting legislation such as new powerstations, carbon limits, investment in infrastructure etc. The length of MP terms would reduce the threat of the removal of the whip (because a) MPs have greater security by virtue of the length of their terms and b) parties won't want to lose an MP for so long), but the frequency of elections would keep governments accountable despite the long term lengths.

This, combined with my wacky name-out-of-a-hat electoral system and I think I've cracked it, lads!

 

[f0rk]

Wouldn't that make short/medium term decisions on things like foreign policy massively volatile? Why would other countries agree anything with our leader if they could change in less than 2 years?

 

[CyclopsRock]

Wouldn't that make short/medium term decisions on things like foreign policy massively volatile? Why would other countries agree anything with our leader if they could change in less than 2 years?

Hmm, that's true. Though this could lead to the executive being more pro-active in seeking the support of the legislature for such things (and tbf, it's actually already fairly decent for that - see Syria) because, at most, only 1/5th of that will change in the near future.

 

[Par Score]

When Chilcot comes out, I can't see Corbyn still being leader at the end of the month. No matter what stance he takes, or how morally right he is, it is the definition of a no-win situation for Labour.

If anything, Chilcot should cement Corbyn's already rock-solid position by totally discrediting Blair, Blairism, and the residual Blairites by proxy.

Long-term policies - large scale infrastructure, climate change action, cultivating non-commercial scientific research etc - are goals that the government is the only body that can perform it, yet the long term nature of it makes actually achieving it, politically, difficult. This is because politicians need to get re-elected and are judged on 5-year cycles where as many of these things have repercussions decades down the line.

This is why benevolent dictatorship / technocracy is the only sensible form of governance.

Democratic capitalism is a failed experiment, and one we're all paying the price for.

 

[Saiyar]

BBC

Looks like the Queen's speech could be voted down. And Cameron tried to play it so safe as well.

Edit: Government are now backing the changes.

 

[Moosichu]

BBC

Looks like the Queen's speech could be voted down. And Cameron tried to play it so safe as well.

Edit: Government are now backing the changes.

Am I remembering incorrectly, or did Labour back TTIP wholeheartedly before Corbyn?

 

[Fernando Fernandez]

http://www.waronwant.org/media/ttip-and-2015-election-where-do-parties-stand

Labour Party

"We support the principles behind the negotiations on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership Treaty (TTIP). We will hold the European Commission to account on issues of concern, including the impact on public services and the Investor to State Dispute Settlement Mechanism. And we will ensure the NHS is protected from the TTIP treaty."

 

[Moosichu]

http://www.waronwant.org/media/ttip-and-2015-election-where-do-parties-stand

Labour Party

"We support the principles behind the negotiations on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership Treaty (TTIP). We will hold the European Commission to account on issues of concern, including the impact on public services and the Investor to State Dispute Settlement Mechanism. And we will ensure the NHS is protected from the TTIP treaty."

So it seems Corbyn’s stronger stance is making in impact then? Although it's hard to judge how say a Cooper or Burnham Labour would have behaved in same situation.

 

[Fernando Fernandez]

It does look like it, a lot can change in a year but this was the potential Labour leaders views on TTIP from July 2015

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-710a-STOP-APING-THE-TORIES#.Vz4s8WnTXqA

And Birmingham librarian Hannah Roche asked whether they would oppose the hated Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), which will help private firms snap up public services.

Mr Corbyn was the only one to say he would oppose the deal outright.
“If there are trade agreements, they should be based on human rights, equality, working conditions, and justice,” he said to cheers from delegates.

Ms Creagh, Ms Kendall and Ms Cooper all said they favoured reforming the deal but that they were committed to remaining part of it.

But there were signs Mr Corbyn’s presence and the audience had some effect on Mr Burnham, who said: “The party needs to take a step back from saying we accept the whole thing.”

 

[Jezbollah]

There was a lot of cross party opposition to this as well (including the 25 odd Conservative rebels). If they've backtracked on it so quickly (and quietly) then it seems like something they tried slipping and knew probably wouldnt get through..

 

[Jackpot]

When Chilcot comes out, I can't see Corbyn still being leader at the end of the month. No matter what stance he takes, or how morally right he is, it is the definition of a no-win situation for Labour.

We need him to stay just a bit longer for this:

Last year Mr Corbyn said that Mr Blair should stand trial for war crimes if it was found he had broken the law over the 2003 conflict.

 

[Mr. Sam]

So if the Chilcot report concludes that, essentially, Corbyn is right... his position as Labour leader becomes untenable? Please show your working.

 

[tomtom94]

So if the Chilcot report concludes that, essentially, Corbyn is right... his position as Labour leader becomes untenable? Please show your working.

Because half the party is going to go into absolute open revolt if Corbyn tries to push through his apology for the Iraq War, and Labour's poll numbers are going to plummet.

 

[Jezbollah]

Yeah the whole Chilcot response by Corbyn and co will be very interesting with regards to the question of unity within Labour.

I have a feeling he'll bite his tongue and be very sombre and appeasing to all in his party. If he lashes out against the Blairites he stands a chance of undoing a lot of work he has done to try and bridge the gap between internal idealism.

 

[tomtom94]

If nothing else, his Shadow Foreign Secretary voted in favour of the Iraq War...

 

[Maledict]

Unless I'm missing something, the moderate Labour folks aren't hung up over Iraq being a mistake in the same way Blair himself actually is. None of the new Labour folks I know in the party are willing to die on that hill - they would prefer to acknowledge it was a mistake and wrong, blame Blair and put it behind them.

So unless Corbyn goes really far and turns it into an attack on the entire concept of Centre left politics I don't see this doing much to be honest. Blair seems to be the only one left utterly committed to the righteousness of that war.

 

[cabot]

Blair's reputation is already slowly disintegrating but I hope the Chilcot Report nails the coffin.


I still laugh when big events happen and articles say 'Tony Blair is due to offer his opinion in the coming weeks'


OK Tony.

 

[CyclopsRock]

It's kinda a shame that Labour's only leader with any real success in the last 40 years happened to be a messianic warmonger.

 

[tomtom94]

It's kinda a shame that Labour's only leader with any real success in the last 40 years happened to be a messianic warmonger.

That's not true, we also had the person who

Spoiler

supposedly

fucked up the economy.

 

[CyclopsRock]

That's not true, we also had the person who

Spoiler

supposedly

fucked up the economy.

Well, I mean he never won an election as leader of his party. I think generally history will probably be fairly kind to Brown, but he wasn't a successful Labour leader by many metrics.

 

[Roberto Larcos]

Well, I mean he never won an election as leader of his party. I think generally history will probably be fairly kind to Brown, but he wasn't a successful Labour leader by many metrics.

Very successful as a politician though, especially with the Scotland referendum. I genuinely believe that the result of that referendum turned through his involvement.

 

[Rodhull]

Very successful as a politician though, especially with the Scotland referendum. I genuinely believe that the result of that referendum turned through his involvement.

It's hard to say as I think there was only one poll that had the yes vote winning. They made up a lot of ground late on but hard to imagine it was only stopped because of Brown. In reality I think the failure to deliver on the implied promises from Brown and others have a lot to do with Scottish Labour's current plight.

 

[Empty]

don't really understand why disavowing the iraq war would be toxic for corbyn given that miliband did it constantly.

anyway anyone on the labour right who makes apologizing for the iraq war a line in the sand issue is an idiot. opinion in the labour membership in 2016 ranges from iraq was a shameful clusterfuck but maybe blair did some decent stuff, to blair is an evil murderer who should be hung for war crimes. the legacy of iraq is a battlefield where corbyn can only win and win big and shore up his support. like syria. or trident.

 

[Saiyar]

New Statesman: The Tory Civil War

It is a long read.

The way David Cameron has conducted his wing of the Remain campaign in recent weeks has horrified many Tory MPs, even some who are or were notionally on his side. “The personal attacks and crude propaganda have really upset the party and I don’t think he understands how badly this has gone down in the constituencies,” a Remainer told me.

...

Meanwhile, Cameron has sought to ridicule Bernard Jenkin, one of the most vocal Leavers among MPs, for making a perfectly reasonable observation about the dilution of trade union legislation in return for the unions’ support of Remain. The snide side of the Prime Minister’s character, depressingly familiar to those who deal with him in private, is becoming more and more unchecked as tensions in the campaign rise.

...

The favourite to end up in the last two with a Brexiter if there is an early leadership contest is Theresa May, described by one who knows her well as “cold, unfriendly, charmless, not as clever as she thinks she is, lacking imagination, unable to think outside the railway lines and intellectually dishonest”. However, he said that were the choice to be between her and Johnson, “I would, of course, vote for her.”

Still one month to go till the referendum. I imagine things will get worse.

 

[Fernando Fernandez]

That May description was brutal! Didn't realise there was such a heavy divide of MPs in favour of Brexit.

 

[Mr. Sam]

The favourite to end up in the last two with a Brexiter if there is an early leadership contest is Theresa May, described by one who knows her well as “cold, unfriendly, charmless, not as clever as she thinks she is, lacking imagination, unable to think outside the railway lines and intellectually dishonest”. However, he said that were the choice to be between her and Johnson, “I would, of course, vote for her.”

That is one hell of a fucking paragraph.

 

[Jezbollah]

I have a feeling the next Tory leader wont be any of the contenders we've seen listed in most of the press.

 

[War Peaceman]

I have a feeling the next Tory leader wont be any of the contenders we've seen listed in most of the press.

I have a similar feeling. The EU referendum is going to really poison the well. It would be wise to keep a low profile, which appears to be May's strategy except she is very dislikeable.

 

[Mr. Sam]

“Cold, unfriendly, charmless, not as clever as she thinks she is, lacking imagination, unable to think outside the railway lines and intellectually dishonest” is exactly how I would have described Theresa May and it's heartening to know I'm not alone.

 

[Moosichu]

I have a feeling the next Tory leader wont be any of the contenders we've seen listed in most of the press.

David Davis?

 

[tomtom94]

McDonnell has announced some of Labour's plans to ruin for the economy and houses at a conference:

Councils would be given the power to limit "skyrocketing" rent increases under new Labour proposals.

In his speech, Mr McDonnell also announced reviews by Labour into the workings of the Treasury, HM Revenue & Customs and the remit of the Bank of England's monetary policy committee.

They include powers to regulate private rent rises, similar to those pledged by Ed Miliband in Labour's unsuccessful general election campaign, below the rate of inflation for the duration of a tenancy.

Mr McDonnell said he wanted to see more local authorities following the examples of Manchester, Warrington and Sandwell by "offering cheap, local authority-backed mortgages to first-time buyers in particular".

 

[Roberto Larcos]

David Davis?

Even if he were to come to power this year, he'd be the oldest man to take the office (for the first time) since Neville Chamberlain. If the transition were to be closer to mid-term, then he'd be the oldest man to take the reigns for the first time since Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman, and that was over 110 years ago. I think Davis' time's probably gone - although it's worth noting that Corbyn would be breaking all the same records should he win in 2020.

 

[Moosichu]

Even if he were to come to power this year, he'd be the oldest man to take the office (for the first time) since Neville Chamberlain. If the transition were to be closer to mid-term, then he'd be the oldest man to take the reigns for the first time since Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman, and that was over 110 years ago. I think Davis' time's probably gone - although it's worth noting that Corbyn would be breaking all the same records should he win in 2020.

I know. But he seems so on point in a lot of areas that really matter.

 

[Roberto Larcos]

I know. But he seems so on point in a lot of areas that really matter.

But any leader coming in would surely want o run in the election, too?

By 2025, Davis will be 75. We haven't had a Prime Minister of that age for a rather long time, and many would question whether he'd be able to successfully lead a demanding party in a demanding role.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

I have a feeling the next Tory leader wont be any of the contenders we've seen listed in most of the press.

Remember that only the two candidates who win the Conservative MP's ballot make it through to the Conservative membership vote. That precludes rank outsiders because you need a fair amount of internal party support and so on. Cameron in 2005 was the closest the Conservatives have ever really had to an outsider, and that's using the term extremely loosely given that he had the support of the party's Shadow Chancellor, Shadow Defence Secretary, and two former leaders before his campaign even began. Given that most of the current Cabinet are planning to run themselves as it is, there's not really the room for that this time - for example, Crabb, the most likely potential outsider, is a pretty clear Cameroon, but the Cameroons have already largely been marshalled by Osborne so there's not many MPs left to get him to the popular vote.

I think right now the actual battle is between May and Osborne. If Brexit lose, then Johnson's image will be pretty badly hit, and I suspect whichever candidate in the popular vote favoured Remain will end up winning. That means it largely depends on whether May or Osborne prove better at networking between now and whenever the election is.

 

[CyclopsRock]

Remember that only the two candidates who win the Conservative MP's ballot make it through to the Conservative membership vote. That precludes rank outsiders because you need a fair amount of internal party support and so on. Cameron in 2005 was the closest the Conservatives have ever really had to an outsider, and that's using the term extremely loosely given that he had the support of the party's Shadow Chancellor, Shadow Defence Secretary, and two former leaders before his campaign even began. Given that most of the current Cabinet are planning to run themselves as it is, there's not really the room for that this time - for example, Crabb, the most likely potential outsider, is a pretty clear Cameroon, but the Cameroons have already largely been marshalled by Osborne so there's not many MPs left to get him to the popular vote.

I think right now the actual battle is between May and Osborne. If Brexit lose, then Johnson's image will be pretty badly hit, and I suspect whichever candidate in the popular vote favoured Remain will end up winning. That means it largely depends on whether May or Osborne prove better at networking between now and whenever the election is.

Who the hell are you?

Also, I think it's less about networking and more about the economy, no? I mean, Osborne's been the king of patronage for some time (aided by his position obviously) but if the economy bye bye before Cameron does, I can't imagine him having much luck.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Also, I think it's less about networking and more about the economy, no? I mean, Osborne's been the king of patronage for some time (aided by his position obviously) but if the economy bye bye before Cameron does, I can't imagine him having much luck.

What I mean is that the Conservative leadership election is a multi-round ballot of MPs. There's no limit on the number of candidate nominations, and MPs vote for their favoured candidate. Each round, the lowest scoring candidate is eliminated. When there are only two candidates left, it goes to the popular vote. That squeezes out outsiders because you need to have cross-party support - just mathematically, over a third of Conservative MPs must prefer you to any other candidate for you to make the final round, and you also need a strong core to survive the early rounds. Generally speaking, the final two candidates that go to the popular vote will represent the two wings of the party at that time, and I think it's very hard not to argue that at the moment that's Brexit vs. Bremain. Boris Johnson is the only real clear Brexit candidate because Michael Gove has no personal support. Bremain depends on whether Osborne or May are looking better to the Cameroons to beat off the Johnsonites, because they share a pretty similar support base.

 

[Jezbollah]

Good to see you back Crab

 

[QuicheFontaine]

We need that picture of the old guy pretending to be a teenager at this stage. Who on earth is doing their social media that thought this was a good message to run with?

Plus everyone knows Uncharted is the big game for this week not Doom!

Uncharted would have made a better point anyway. Doom-mongering is fairly easily brushed off, but saying "Our path outside the EU is Uncharted" is actually a reasonable point.

Step up your game, Remain!

 

[fizzelopeguss]

London set to become a sardine packed, judge dredd sweatbox.

Couldn't happen to a nicer shower of shite.

 

[Nicktendo86]

Not sure if this deserves it's own thread to be honest but there has been a leak of BMA whatsapp messages which suggest Saturday pay, rather than safety, was the sole sticking point in the dispute, that they wanted to drag the dispute out and wanted to force the government to impose the contract.

Junior doctors leaders at the British Medical Association (BMA) wanted to “draw out” the acrimonious contract dispute with the government for 18 months, leaked messages reveal.

Private Whatsapp messages sent between members of the union’s Junior Doctors’ Committee (JDC) shows the group intended to “tie the Department of Health up in knots”, while a message from JDC chair Johann Malawana in December said the “best solution” might be to play out the dispute to “force” the government to “impose [the contract] against our support”.

Despite public protestations that the dispute was about “safety, not pay”, the issue of weekend pay was described late last year by one JDC executive member in a message as “the only real red line” for junior doctors.

The strategy, revealed in more than a thousand pages of leaked messages, seen by the Health Service Journal, is at odds with public statements made by BMA leaders throughout the dispute, saying the confrontation could only be resolved if the Government was willing to negotiate.

On February 23, for example, Dr Malawana said: “The Government can avert this strike action by re-entering talks with the BMA and addressing rather than simply ignoring the outstanding issues and concerns of junior doctors.”

In another message, the JDC chair said the January round of negotiations with the Government were “rubbish” and that the JDC should only take part “to play the political game of always looking reasonable”.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...doctors-plot-to-draw-out-bitter-contract-dis/

 

[Moosichu]

Not sure if this deserves it's own thread to be honest but there has been a leak of BMA whatsapp messages which suggest Saturday pay, rather than safety, was the sole sticking point in the dispute, that they wanted to drag the dispute out and wanted to force the government to impose the contract.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...doctors-plot-to-draw-out-bitter-contract-dis/

I'm a bit busy. But I will come back to this in a sec. Reading it it seems like a lot of quotes taken out of context, and nothing contradicting what Junior Doctors have said.

The Government

Public:

This is not just about pay. The long-term effect on patient care is at the heart of junior doctors' concerns.

Johann Malawana, chairman of Junior Doctors Committee (JDC) April 2016

Private :

Weekend pay is “the only real red line” for junior doctors, Kitty Mohan, executive member, JDC

The whole thing is that being overworked as a result of the payment structure results in less safety. You can't expect the same number of doctors to cover more hours than they currently do without affecting patient safety. One implies the other so pay is 'the red line'

Public:

That strikes could be averted if the Government simply re-entered talks, Dr Malawana, February 2016

Private

To draw the dispute “right out” with strikes for a prolonged periods, in order to tie the Department of Health “up in knots” for the next 16-18 months, Dr Malawana, December 2015

If you read again, the quotes make it clear that the Doctors felt the talks led nowhere, they weren't constructive at all. So you would draw the dispute out.

Public

“We want to end this dispute through talks but the government is making this impossible,” Dr Malawana, March 2016

Private

JDC executive believed in March that they had “nothing to talk about” as they were not willing to discuss weekend pay. In January, Dr Malawana advised that the group should not get “too concerned in the Acas rubbish. We need to play the political game of always looking reasonable.”

Again, wants the point of entering talks if before entering the Government states they aren't willing to consider the main point of dispute? There is no contradiction here.

Public

That the union embarked on strikes unwillingly. “No doctor takes industrial action lightly and we regret the disruption it will cause. However, junior doctors now feel that they have no option,” Dr Malawana, January 2016

Private

“The more I think about it the more I love our plan. Basically five weeks of headlines about juniors strikes through January and February,” Dr Malawana, December 2015

Fair enough

Public

That it was appalled by the Government’s threat that it would impose a contract.

“The Government must listen to concerns from all sides calling on it to lift imposition and get back around the negotiating table. It is not too late to remove the threat of imposition and end this dispute through talks,” BMA spokesperson April 2016

Private

“God if they do that [threaten to impose a contract] it would be like manna from heaven,” Dr Malawana, January 2016

Saying something is good for PR but bad for Doctors, isn't a contradiction at all.

Public

That the union had no option but to embark on a full walkout. “No junior doctor wants to take this action but the government has left us with no choice,” Dr Malawana, March 2016

Private

“We need to somehow not get to a full walkout. It’s a vanity event for juniors. It’s going to blow up in our faces, Dr Malwana, January 2016.

Again, this is a contradiction how? If anything they state the same thing. They are worried that a full walkout will destroy public sympathy and only want to leave it as a last resort.

 

[Pie and Beans]

Truly desperate spin. Unironically posting Telegraph bilge as a thread would have been a sight to see though.

Also glad the phone-hacking scandal is further enough into history so we can just get right back to throwing up instant message client grabs. Classy.

 

[Protome]

That Telegraph article just reads as "Shocking news: people are more blunt when talking privately than in PR statements!"