RLB sacked
#11
Every million mile walk starts with a single step. Well tbf that was the second step.
Reply
#12
Good≠Popular
Reply
#13
(06-25-2020, 04:26 PM)Derek Hardballs Wrote:
(06-25-2020, 04:14 PM)Shabby Russian Wrote: Not a particular fan of RLB, but this strikes me as a sign that i need not reach for an application form to join the Labour Party anytime soon.

I am not sure why Peake mentioned Israelli forces in the article, but what she is reported to have said doesn't strike me as an Anit semitic conspiracy theory. It is a matter of open knowledge that there are close relations between The USA and Israel, and whilst this may not be an example of the two countries working together and sharing expertise, i am sure they do in many areas. So i would ask, how is this a conspiracy theory.

Anyway at least now we know that Labour under Kier Starmer are going to be more concerned about appeasing people who are never going to vote for them, than they are abut putting first the interests of the most vulnerable in our society.

I suppose his supporters will claim that it is good politics, but does morality, principle and ethics always have t be sacrificed on the altar of 'good politics'

Those that WILL vote for Labour on the Ooh Jeremy Corbyn side of the party won’t win them elections they need to appeal to those in the centre of politics. I think this is good leadership and is ethical and principled. There was no need to retweet an article that mentioned Israel. All it does is help to reinforce public perception that the party is obsessed with matters that have nothing to do with their lives. What average voters takes the mental leap from BLM to a Israeli conspiracy theory? It’s not relevant to people’s lives and is a distraction the party doesn’t need. The left of the Labour Party needs to grow the feck up and fight the opposition not themselves.

I don't disagree that politically this is an astute move by Starmer, but down the line there will be a huge price to pay.

I am not going to argue that there has been an issue with anti semitism in the Labour Party, but this isn't an example of it. As Rachel Shabi tweeted today - Sacking RLB isn't an example of zero tolerance on anti semitism. It;s an example of getting it wrong, over reacting and setting a bad precedent.
Reply
#14
(06-25-2020, 07:28 PM)ChamonixBaggie Wrote: Good≠Popular

They weren't good or popular. They were extremely costly niche policies centred around ideology rather than what was needed that ultimately fail to actually achieve anything.

What are the merits in nationalising water? None. Private water has been a resounding success and is so tightly regulated that any abuse is impossible.

What was the point in nationalising Openreach? None. It would cost billions and laws have been introduced that prevent them from abusing their monopoly position anyway so nothing would materially change other than the country would have wasted billions of pounds.

How is unconditional support of all strikes good? How is pushing for centralised green policy when our success in the energy market has come from the private sector? How is replacing the Lords with a senate that is unable to amend legislation based on merit good?

Her big policies make no economic sense whatsoever and her small policies are out of the realm of student politics. There's a reason she was laughed out of the Labour leadership election.
Reply
#15
(06-25-2020, 08:14 PM)Borin' Baggie Wrote:
(06-25-2020, 07:28 PM)ChamonixBaggie Wrote: Good≠Popular

They weren't good or popular. They were extremely costly niche policies centred around ideology rather than what was needed that ultimately fail to actually achieve anything.

What are the merits in nationalising water? None. Private water has been a resounding success and is so tightly regulated that any abuse is impossible.

What was the point in nationalising Openreach? None. It would cost billions and laws have been introduced that prevent them from abusing their monopoly position anyway so nothing would materially change other than the country would have wasted billions of pounds.

How is unconditional support of all strikes good? How is pushing for centralised green policy when our success in the energy market has come from the private sector? How is replacing the Lords with a senate that is unable to amend legislation based on merit good?

Her big policies make no economic sense whatsoever and her small policies are out of the realm of student politics. There's a reason she was laughed out of the Labour leadership election.

Exactly. How can anyone claim RLB was a success by any measure as a politician.

I can't believe people are defending Maxine Peake's comments either. That Amnesty USA article is hotlink laden nonsense and the idea that the US police need special training from Israel to kneel on people's necks when they've been doing it for decades is laughable.

Labour has members with an anti-semitism problem. They are not "pro-Palestinian" - they had nothing to say when Palestinians were being starved to death by Assad in Syria. The sooner these people leave the party, the sooner the party will be electable again.

Starmer has impressed me today.
Reply
#16
(06-25-2020, 06:06 PM)Protheroe Wrote:
(06-25-2020, 04:14 PM)Shabby Russian Wrote: but what she is reported to have said doesn't strike me as an Anit semitic conspiracy theory

Its Anti Semitic Conspiracy theory 101. Big Grin

(06-25-2020, 03:55 PM)ChamonixBaggie Wrote: One of our best policy makers

Big Grin Big Grin Big Grin Big Grin Big Grin

I know - have you heard her. I mean if that's one of the best Labour may as well fold
Reply
#17
(06-25-2020, 08:14 PM)Borin\ Baggie Wrote:
(06-25-2020, 07:28 PM)ChamonixBaggie Wrote: Good≠Popular

They weren't good or popular. They were extremely costly niche policies centred around ideology rather than what was needed that ultimately fail to actually achieve anything.

What are the merits in nationalising water? None. Private water has been a resounding success and is so tightly regulated that any abuse is impossible.

What was the point in nationalising Openreach? None. It would cost billions and laws have been introduced that prevent them from abusing their monopoly position anyway so nothing would materially change other than the country would have wasted billions of pounds.

How is unconditional support of all strikes good? How is pushing for centralised green policy when our success in the energy market has come from the private sector? How is replacing the Lords with a senate that is unable to amend legislation based on merit good?

Her big policies make no economic sense whatsoever and her small policies are out of the realm of student politics. There's a reason she was laughed out of the Labour leadership election.

+1
Reply
#18
(06-25-2020, 08:14 PM)Borin\ Baggie Wrote:
(06-25-2020, 07:28 PM)ChamonixBaggie Wrote: Good≠Popular

They weren't good or popular. They were extremely costly niche policies centred around ideology rather than what was needed that ultimately fail to actually achieve anything.

What are the merits in nationalising water? None. Private water has been a resounding success and is so tightly regulated that any abuse is impossible.

What was the point in nationalising Openreach? None. It would cost billions and laws have been introduced that prevent them from abusing their monopoly position anyway so nothing would materially change other than the country would have wasted billions of pounds.

How is unconditional support of all strikes good? How is pushing for centralised green policy when our success in the energy market has come from the private sector? How is replacing the Lords with a senate that is unable to amend legislation based on merit good?

Her big policies make no economic sense whatsoever and her small policies are out of the realm of student politics. There's a reason she was laughed out of the Labour leadership election.

+2. Echoes of 1983-85 under a new leader on the long road back from ideological insanity.

The Left has had it for another generation thank goodness. Next time it will be my kids' turn to fight it.
Reply
#19
(06-25-2020, 08:14 PM)Borin\ Baggie Wrote:
(06-25-2020, 07:28 PM)ChamonixBaggie Wrote: Good≠Popular

They weren't good or popular. They were extremely costly niche policies centred around ideology rather than what was needed that ultimately fail to actually achieve anything.

What are the merits in nationalising water? None. Private water has been a resounding success and is so tightly regulated that any abuse is impossible.

What was the point in nationalising Openreach? None. It would cost billions and laws have been introduced that prevent them from abusing their monopoly position anyway so nothing would materially change other than the country would have wasted billions of pounds.

How is unconditional support of all strikes good? How is pushing for centralised green policy when our success in the energy market has come from the private sector? How is replacing the Lords with a senate that is unable to amend legislation based on merit good?

Her big policies make no economic sense whatsoever and her small policies are out of the realm of student politics. There's a reason she was laughed out of the Labour leadership election.

You obviously don't live in the South West.

Private water has not been a success, it is in effect a private monopoly and anybody who believes in free markets could not in all conscience even begin to defend it. My water bills over the last 12 years are horrendously high, around 8 times the cost i was paying in the Midlands, i can not go to a rival competitor to South West Water - there isn't one. I am not sure anyone can deem that a success.
Reply
#20
The year before water privatisation the South West Water Authority were responsible for the Camelford incident and their response and the response of public officials in Cornwall was to cover it up, in fact encouraging people to keep drinking it. Since privatisation an event of that nature has not occurred in England. There was an issue in Scotland over water pollution in 2017 but Scottish Water is publicly owned and operated by the Scottish government. The success of water privatisation has been a huge increase in water quality in the UK since privatisation.

As for cost, Ofwat set the price limits so blame them.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)