|
Replies:
|
|
Ewill
|
Aug 21 2015, 04:59 PM
Post #921
|
- Posts:
- 4,381
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #62
- Joined:
- Jul 27, 2014
|
- Steve K
- Aug 21 2015, 04:43 PM
- Ewill
- Aug 21 2015, 04:27 PM
- Steve K
- Aug 21 2015, 04:04 PM
. . So are you now disagreeing with him on grants? I do
No . . But what you actually posted was - Quote:
-
I agree with him on this point
>>We must abolish fees, restore grants and deliver lifelong education services for all,>>
"all" means everyone even if they've had grants before. It opens us up to the lifelong student I support grants and no tuition fees for the deserving IE those seeking education to better their ability to contribute to the UK (and be rewarded for doing so) But not for the serial undergraduate, not for non Brits and not for those who are going to take their skills we have funded to get fat salaries in lands foreign. Foreign students paid overseas fees when I was at university I'd leave them as non Brits paying higher fees
OK , I'd have grants and fees funded for UK undergraduates,I really don't care where they eventually choose to use those skills - they can only use a degree to enter professional training- a degree per se qualifies a student for nothing
postgrads can apply for scholarships if good enough-otherwise they fund themselves. Many postgrads also teach/run seminars for undergrads and some PHDs are funded for this or research
Adult education colleges should have very nominal charges only (no grants) they have courses for workers trying to upskill or bored stay at home mums/retireds/elderly
Open college quals are hardly PHDs but I still support education for education's sake
|
|
|
| |
|
Heinrich
|
Aug 21 2015, 05:02 PM
Post #922
|
- Posts:
- 2,920
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #51
- Joined:
- Jul 22, 2014
|
- Cymru
- Aug 21 2015, 04:54 PM
- C-too
- Aug 21 2015, 08:01 AM
- Cymru
- Aug 21 2015, 07:44 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Nonsense, please stop reproducing the lies and the insinuated lies of the Tory party. The international financial meltdown was the problem and no government was prepared for it. For further education see post 1024 page 26, on this thread.
You are deliberately conflating two separate issues to muddy the waters. Labour's lack of regulation of the financial sector was a problem in and of itself which, left unresolved, ended up making the predicted crash, when it came, that much more harder to deal with. If the roof had been fixed whilst the sun was shining we wouldn't have ended up wet when the rain came. The fact that you barely go a post without mentioning the Tories merely exposes your bias. But the bank shareholders and speculative bond gamblers should have taken the hit, not the British public. That is the capitalist way. All of a sudden when the market goes belly-up, the capitalist financial wizards become socialist overnight. The rich always win. Banking CEOs did well out of the crash with all their stratospheric bonuses at the public's expense.
|
|
|
| |
|
Steve K
|
Aug 21 2015, 05:10 PM
Post #923
|
- Posts:
- 33,941
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- Ewill
- Aug 21 2015, 04:59 PM
- Steve K
- Aug 21 2015, 04:43 PM
- Ewill
- Aug 21 2015, 04:27 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
But what you actually posted was - Quote:
-
I agree with him on this point
>>We must abolish fees, restore grants and deliver lifelong education services for all,>>
"all" means everyone even if they've had grants before. It opens us up to the lifelong student I support grants and no tuition fees for the deserving IE those seeking education to better their ability to contribute to the UK (and be rewarded for doing so) But not for the serial undergraduate, not for non Brits and not for those who are going to take their skills we have funded to get fat salaries in lands foreign.
Foreign students paid overseas fees when I was at university I'd leave them as non Brits paying higher fees OK , I'd have grants and fees funded for UK undergraduates,I really don't care where they eventually choose to use those skills - they can only use a degree to enter professional training- a degree per se qualifies a student for nothing postgrads can apply for scholarships if good enough-otherwise they fund themselves. Many postgrads also teach/run seminars for undergrads and some PHDs are funded for this or research Adult education colleges should have very nominal charges only (no grants) they have courses for workers trying to upskill or bored stay at home mums/retireds/elderly Open college quals are hardly PHDs but I still support education for education's sake That's tuition fees, you're not answering the question about grants
|
|
|
| |
|
Ewill
|
Aug 21 2015, 05:14 PM
Post #924
|
- Posts:
- 4,381
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #62
- Joined:
- Jul 27, 2014
|
- Steve K
- Aug 21 2015, 05:10 PM
- Ewill
- Aug 21 2015, 04:59 PM
- Steve K
- Aug 21 2015, 04:43 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Foreign students paid overseas fees when I was at university I'd leave them as non Brits paying higher fees OK , I'd have grants and fees funded for UK undergraduates,I really don't care where they eventually choose to use those skills - they can only use a degree to enter professional training- a degree per se qualifies a student for nothing postgrads can apply for scholarships if good enough-otherwise they fund themselves. Many postgrads also teach/run seminars for undergrads and some PHDs are funded for this or research Adult education colleges should have very nominal charges only (no grants) they have courses for workers trying to upskill or bored stay at home mums/retireds/elderly Open college quals are hardly PHDs but I still support education for education's sake
That's tuition fees, you're not answering the question about grants You've missed this
<<OK , I'd have grants and fees funded for UK undergraduates>>
All UK undergrads should receive a full maintenance grant imo
|
|
|
| |
|
Cymru
|
Aug 21 2015, 05:17 PM
Post #925
|
- Posts:
- 3,504
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #3
- Joined:
- Jun 26, 2014
|
- Heinrich
- Aug 21 2015, 05:02 PM
- Cymru
- Aug 21 2015, 04:54 PM
- C-too
- Aug 21 2015, 08:01 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
You are deliberately conflating two separate issues to muddy the waters. Labour's lack of regulation of the financial sector was a problem in and of itself which, left unresolved, ended up making the predicted crash, when it came, that much more harder to deal with. If the roof had been fixed whilst the sun was shining we wouldn't have ended up wet when the rain came. The fact that you barely go a post without mentioning the Tories merely exposes your bias.
But the bank shareholders and speculative bond gamblers should have taken the hit, not the British public. That is the capitalist way. All of a sudden when the market goes belly-up, the capitalist financial wizards become socialist overnight. The rich always win. Banking CEOs did well out of the crash with all their stratospheric bonuses at the public's expense. All that reflects Heinrich is who really runs this country.
Edited by Cymru, Aug 21 2015, 05:21 PM.
|
|
|
| |
|
johnofgwent
|
Aug 21 2015, 05:39 PM
Post #926
|
- Posts:
- 7,075
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- Jun 26, 2014
|
- Ewill
- Aug 21 2015, 04:47 PM
- C-too
- Aug 21 2015, 04:23 PM
- Ewill
- Aug 21 2015, 12:13 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deepCare professionals such as doctors, health visitors, social workers, CAB and police identify people in crisis and issue them with a foodbank voucher. Foodbanks partner with a wide range of care professionals who are best placed to assess need and make sure that it is genuine. Clients receive food Foodbank clients bring their voucher to a foodbank centre where it can be redeemed for three days emergency food. Volunteers meet clients over a cup of tea or free hot meal and are able to signpost people to agencies able to solve the longer-term problem. Some foodbanks also run a rural delivery service,
They have vacancies for f/t van drivers and other staff at £8.20 per hr
From a variety of non Trussell food bank sites(there's lots more-just ask):
<<Volunteering There is plenty of scope for people to help:- 1. In our warehouse, sorting donated food into food types and date order or packing Emergency Food Boxes. Contact David Jones 2. At our supermarket collections mainly on Saturdays a few times per year. Contact Brian Benford 3. At the Distribution Centre, talking to clients, providing tea and cake>>
<<speak to the CAB or your doctor, health visitor, social worker or other care professional and they will issue you with a foodbank voucher.
FoodBank Food StoreBring your voucher into the King's Centre on Wednesday (9-11am) or one of the other centres where it will be redeemed for 3 days worth of food.
While you wait for your food, sit down and have a cup of tea/coffee and chat to the helpers who are ready with a listening ear>>>
<<Foodbank clients bring their voucher to a foodbank centre where it is exchanged for a three day emergency food package, complete with suggested nutritious recipes to help them make best use of the food. At a foodbank centre, clients can meet with our volunteers, relax and enjoy a cup of tea. Where it is difficult for the client to reach one of our foodbank centres we can often arrange delivery of food to a client’s home.>>
GP's have been brought into the voucher issuing mix and just issue vouchers so they aren't blocking time with the genuinely ill(www.mirror.co.uk)
<<Doctors – along with social workers, health visitors and social organisations – are allowed to refer people who need rations . ....
And they say the rising number of those seeking food handouts is stretching resources to the limit.
Dr Peter Swinyard, chair of the Family Doctors Association and a GP in Swindon, Wilts, said: “How are we supposed to know whether someone is, what in Dickensian terms you might call the ‘deserving poor’, and who is basically a scrounger just trying to a get a free meal out of the system? It is putting GPs in an impossible position.”
....... “We’re so busy already I don’t know how we are going to find the time to see all these other patients.”
She revealed: “I had one who asked for a food bank referral because she was on low income. l don’t know how much money she had, but how could I have said no? So I signed it.”
... he simply wrote on one referral note: “My patient tells me he is hungry, and I have no reason to disbelieve him.”
Many GPs are unaware food banks are referring people until they walk through the surgery doors. <<
Surely the relative point is food banks are an increasing necessity under this government ?
Who says? If supermarkets gave away free food for three days they would be mobbed The OP didn't seem to be aware that foodbanks are a franchise business with paid staff so the aim is to have as many franchisees as possible - hence the numbers opening They also appear to be of the view that it's hard to get a foodbank voucher - that doesn't appear to be true either The OP also doesn't seem to be aware that foodbanks serve refreshments to users as a matter of course while they await their free food Some people probably do need help with food use , three days free food isn't going to stop malnutrition and benefits pay more than enough to eat - I wonder the percentage of foodbank users with smartphones,Sky TV, smokers, drinkers etc ?. That's a personal budgeting issue Schoolchildren get free school meals where required The only people ''starving'' in the UK today are doing so by choice or illness - they need help from other agencies Right then, now I'll take you on without the "mod" banner
Supermarkets DO give away free food, at least round here - come with me to three community centres in the Newport area where I will show you food parcels being made up for anyone who cares to come and ask, but if i were you I would not take them up on their offer, my daughter, out of curiosity, collected one and found it contained a catering pack of tuna that was clearly well out of date and had been stored at room temperature for days when the pack clearly said to should have been kept chilled. Christ knows what harm people might have come to if eating such stuff.
I don't see the Trussel Trust listed amongst the burger bars, photography , carpet washing, wheeliebin cleaning, internet estate agency, internet energy phone and broadband selling and christ knows what else offers of "a well known business name in return for an initial investment of betweeen £5000 and £50000" in the franchise mags, I suspect you usurp the meaning of the word in "Labour's 20004 Social Franchise Project" to fit these dodgy dealers in it for the profit the ponzi scheme brings to the franchisor ... of course, if you have proof any of the trussel trust directors are actually getting more than the £60K their website claims, lets see it, or STFU ...
As to the difficulty f getting a foodbank voucher, christ on a fucking bike not that bollox again.
And yes, you so get a cup of tea while someone sorts out your voucher entitlement. You get asked if you know about the CAB and other advice servixces that aim to ensure you are in receipt of all to which the state declares you are LEGALLY entitled. If only Newport's fucking jobcentre plus staff were forced to be that honest. So, what part of people being told how to receive that which the state says they are LEGALLY entitled do you have a problem with, because clearly you DO have a problem with it ...
In fact, the only thing in your entire diatribe I actually agree with is that three days emergency food is not going to solve malnutrition ... but the fact is, it was never intended to, it is a stop gap that deals in the main with people whose normal benefit claims to which they are perfectly legally entitled are fucked over by a mix of administration cockups and government policy.
Come with me and I will introduce you to six hundred people who lost housing benefits and got served with eviction notices because the IT system used between the welsh assembly government and Newport City Homes was changed and suddenly decided every one of its tenants with a four year old kid was now a tenant with a five year old kid and no longer entitled to the benefit they were getting, and as none of them could claim the other one, as their kids were not old enough to, they got fuck all money. It took three weeks to sort that shambles out and if you bother to read the trussel trust's own accounts, you will see the LARGEST reason for a foodbank being turned to is "benefit delays / administration problems" - apart from "no reason specified" which is where the voucher came from jobcentre plus staff who are under orders NOT to fill the reason in, because the reason is THEY fucked up
|
|
|
| |
|
johnofgwent
|
Aug 21 2015, 05:45 PM
Post #927
|
- Posts:
- 7,075
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- Jun 26, 2014
|
- Ewill
- Aug 21 2015, 04:27 PM
- Steve K
- Aug 21 2015, 04:04 PM
- Ewill
- Aug 21 2015, 03:47 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deepWell done
So are you now disagreeing with him on grants? I do
No I recall a bright (A levels ABB) friend at school who couldn't go to university because their parents (both pharmacists in Boots) refused to ''top up'' - they were only entitled to the minimum means tested grant based on parental salary - £125 a year Working was out of the question at the time as university was full on contact and evening jobs weren't allowed Those whose parents ''passed'' the means test had no such barriers to education - they received the full maintenance grant I believe that those with the level of results needed to enrol on a degree course should be able to - irrespective of parental support However I do not support the view that standards should be lowered to allow those with insufficient results but ''disadvantaged'' in other ways to read for a degree Well I got no help at all because my father's salary as an IBM hardware engineer and my mother's as a doctors receptionist pushed them above the point where any grant was handed out, and I can assure you the amount they brought home was NOWHERE NEAR the salary a pharmacist brought home as my aunt and uncle were both pharmacists and owned a stately pile in a village outside slough whose back fence backed on to Rick wakeman's stately pile in the same village ...
|
|
|
| |
|
C-too
|
Aug 21 2015, 05:47 PM
Post #928
|
- Posts:
- 17,666
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #49
- Joined:
- Jul 12, 2014
|
- Ewill
- Aug 21 2015, 04:47 PM
- C-too
- Aug 21 2015, 04:23 PM
- Ewill
- Aug 21 2015, 12:13 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deepCare professionals such as doctors, health visitors, social workers, CAB and police identify people in crisis and issue them with a foodbank voucher. Foodbanks partner with a wide range of care professionals who are best placed to assess need and make sure that it is genuine. Clients receive food Foodbank clients bring their voucher to a foodbank centre where it can be redeemed for three days emergency food. Volunteers meet clients over a cup of tea or free hot meal and are able to signpost people to agencies able to solve the longer-term problem. Some foodbanks also run a rural delivery service,
They have vacancies for f/t van drivers and other staff at £8.20 per hr
From a variety of non Trussell food bank sites(there's lots more-just ask):
<<Volunteering There is plenty of scope for people to help:- 1. In our warehouse, sorting donated food into food types and date order or packing Emergency Food Boxes. Contact David Jones 2. At our supermarket collections mainly on Saturdays a few times per year. Contact Brian Benford 3. At the Distribution Centre, talking to clients, providing tea and cake>>
<<speak to the CAB or your doctor, health visitor, social worker or other care professional and they will issue you with a foodbank voucher.
FoodBank Food StoreBring your voucher into the King's Centre on Wednesday (9-11am) or one of the other centres where it will be redeemed for 3 days worth of food.
While you wait for your food, sit down and have a cup of tea/coffee and chat to the helpers who are ready with a listening ear>>>
<<Foodbank clients bring their voucher to a foodbank centre where it is exchanged for a three day emergency food package, complete with suggested nutritious recipes to help them make best use of the food. At a foodbank centre, clients can meet with our volunteers, relax and enjoy a cup of tea. Where it is difficult for the client to reach one of our foodbank centres we can often arrange delivery of food to a client’s home.>>
GP's have been brought into the voucher issuing mix and just issue vouchers so they aren't blocking time with the genuinely ill(www.mirror.co.uk)
<<Doctors – along with social workers, health visitors and social organisations – are allowed to refer people who need rations . ....
And they say the rising number of those seeking food handouts is stretching resources to the limit.
Dr Peter Swinyard, chair of the Family Doctors Association and a GP in Swindon, Wilts, said: “How are we supposed to know whether someone is, what in Dickensian terms you might call the ‘deserving poor’, and who is basically a scrounger just trying to a get a free meal out of the system? It is putting GPs in an impossible position.”
....... “We’re so busy already I don’t know how we are going to find the time to see all these other patients.”
She revealed: “I had one who asked for a food bank referral because she was on low income. l don’t know how much money she had, but how could I have said no? So I signed it.”
... he simply wrote on one referral note: “My patient tells me he is hungry, and I have no reason to disbelieve him.”
Many GPs are unaware food banks are referring people until they walk through the surgery doors. <<
Surely the relative point is food banks are an increasing necessity under this government ?
Who says? If supermarkets gave away free food for three days they would be mobbed The OP didn't seem to be aware that foodbanks are a franchise business with paid staff so the aim is to have as many franchisees as possible - hence the numbers opening They also appear to be of the view that it's hard to get a foodbank voucher - that doesn't appear to be true either The OP also doesn't seem to be aware that foodbanks serve refreshments to users as a matter of course while they await their free food Some people probably do need help with food use , three days free food isn't going to stop malnutrition and benefits pay more than enough to eat - I wonder the percentage of foodbank users with smartphones,Sky TV, smokers, drinkers etc ?. That's a personal budgeting issue Schoolchildren get free school meals where required The only people ''starving'' in the UK today are doing so by choice or illness - they need help from other agencies Please do not go off on a tangent. The big increase in the number of food banks is surely the product of an increased in the need for food banks.
Is the franchise on some food banks from a profit making organisation or is it a charity organised organisation, or is it a charity registered run organisation ?
|
|
|
| |
|
C-too
|
Aug 21 2015, 06:03 PM
Post #929
|
- Posts:
- 17,666
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #49
- Joined:
- Jul 12, 2014
|
- Cymru
- Aug 21 2015, 04:54 PM
- C-too
- Aug 21 2015, 08:01 AM
- Cymru
- Aug 21 2015, 07:44 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Nonsense, please stop reproducing the lies and the insinuated lies of the Tory party. The international financial meltdown was the problem and no government was prepared for it. For further education see post 1024 page 26, on this thread.
You are deliberately conflating two separate issues to muddy the waters. Labour's lack of regulation of the financial sector was a problem in and of itself which, left unresolved, ended up making the predicted crash, when it came, that much more harder to deal with. If the roof had been fixed whilst the sun was shining we wouldn't have ended up wet when the rain came. The fact that you barely go a post without mentioning the Tories merely exposes your bias. Oh! for Fks sake do try and catch up.
Did you read the information on page 26 that I referred to ?
IF the so called lack of regulation in this country was the problem how did that cause problems that affected most of the world ? The international financial meltdown was not predicted by anyone. Prove me wrong and I will apologise, fail to prove me wrong and I will, because of the period for hindsight, think of you as an outright bigoted liar.
The fact that I post in an attempt to fight Tory lies proves that I'm an honest objective individual making an effort to be honest and objective.
|
|
|
| |
|
Pro Veritas
|
Aug 21 2015, 06:24 PM
Post #930
|
- Posts:
- 7,014
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #19
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- Steve K
- Aug 20 2015, 11:45 PM
There are two basic flaws in the Corbyista posts above
1. They think that the 600,000 people apparently entitled to vote in this election are all Labour supporters. If they were they'd have been members when it mattered in May this year when there was a real need to work to get the Tory heartless policies on welfare opposed and out of government.
2. That 600,000 dilitante Labour supporters have the right to get the other 99% of the UK population to fall in line with Corbyn's Hamas/IRA loving, economy destroying, job destroying, defence of the realm annihilating (and if Pro V 's post is believed) thieving policies. They won't.
This whole fiasco has been exactly what the far right of the Tory party wanted. Well done Corbynistas I so hope you are the first to feel the misery he will vest on the UK by letting the Tories run riot. 1) Not necessarily. For many, many Labour supporters the party was still "too Tory lite" under Miliband - with his accepting of the Tory Austerity narrative (which means that even a Labour victory would NOT have have seen those heartless tory policies thrown out. It was only when a more left-wing candidate for party leader became an option that they returned to the party.
2) No one is suggesting such. If Corbyn wins the rest of the 99% of the nation's population get to decide if they want to be a part of that at the next General Election.
If Corbyn is given a fair chance, rather than the McCarthyesque witch-hunts Labour are currently involved in, and is elected as Leader AND (and that is a very big AND) if Labour win the next General Election then the principles of democracy, such as they are in the FPTP system, have been followed.
And here is where I will call you out on your quite obvious disingenuity.
It really isn't Corbyn or his supporters' fault that Labour was not seen as a viable alternative to the Tories at the last General Election; that fault lies solely with Blairites who insist that Labour needs to be a centre-right party.
If the choice is a Centre-Right party that is dysfunctional, lacks principles and screwed the economy when last in power (Labour) or a slightly different Right-Of-Centre party that is less dysfunctional, has stuck to its principles (even if you disagree with those principles) and had started to turn the economy around (Tory), it is not too hard to see why Labour lost.
And they did lose. The ONLY reason the Tories won was because there was no viable alternative.
The only other option for a voter with enough conscience to not want to help the Tories directly, but who was uncomfortable with the prevalent "Austerity" narrative, was to vote for a third option knowing that in our FPTP system that third option is, in effect, a "lost" vote.
All The Best
|
|
|
| |
|
Rich
|
Aug 21 2015, 06:40 PM
Post #931
|
- Posts:
- 14,458
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #30
- Joined:
- Jun 28, 2014
|
- ACH1967
- Aug 21 2015, 02:44 PM
A bit late but I think calling Corbyn a HAMAS/IRA lover is a bit rich. Mr Corbyn is on R4 question time panel tonight at 20.00 hrs........I shall most certainly be listening.
|
|
|
| |
|
Steve K
|
Aug 21 2015, 07:00 PM
Post #932
|
- Posts:
- 33,941
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- Pro Veritas
- Aug 21 2015, 06:24 PM
- Steve K
- Aug 20 2015, 11:45 PM
There are two basic flaws in the Corbyista posts above
1. They think that the 600,000 people apparently entitled to vote in this election are all Labour supporters. If they were they'd have been members when it mattered in May this year when there was a real need to work to get the Tory heartless policies on welfare opposed and out of government.
2. That 600,000 dilitante Labour supporters have the right to get the other 99% of the UK population to fall in line with Corbyn's Hamas/IRA loving, economy destroying, job destroying, defence of the realm annihilating (and if Pro V 's post is believed) thieving policies. They won't.
This whole fiasco has been exactly what the far right of the Tory party wanted. Well done Corbynistas I so hope you are the first to feel the misery he will vest on the UK by letting the Tories run riot.
1) Not necessarily. For many, many Labour supporters the party was still "too Tory lite" under Miliband - with his accepting of the Tory Austerity narrative (which means that even a Labour victory would NOT have have seen those heartless tory policies thrown out. It was only when a more left-wing candidate for party leader became an option that they returned to the party. 2) No one is suggesting such. If Corbyn wins the rest of the 99% of the nation's population get to decide if they want to be a part of that at the next General Election. If Corbyn is given a fair chance, rather than the McCarthyesque witch-hunts Labour are currently involved in, and is elected as Leader AND (and that is a very big AND) if Labour win the next General Election then the principles of democracy, such as they are in the FPTP system, have been followed. And here is where I will call you out on your quite obvious disingenuity. It really isn't Corbyn or his supporters' fault that Labour was not seen as a viable alternative to the Tories at the last General Election; that fault lies solely with Blairites who insist that Labour needs to be a centre-right party. If the choice is a Centre-Right party that is dysfunctional, lacks principles and screwed the economy when last in power (Labour) or a slightly different Right-Of-Centre party that is less dysfunctional, has stuck to its principles (even if you disagree with those principles) and had started to turn the economy around (Tory), it is not too hard to see why Labour lost. And they did lose. The ONLY reason the Tories won was because there was no viable alternative. The only other option for a voter with enough conscience to not want to help the Tories directly, but who was uncomfortable with the prevalent "Austerity" narrative, was to vote for a third option knowing that in our FPTP system that third option is, in effect, a "lost" vote. All The Best You what? Clearly you can spell disingenuity but you seem to disingenuously use it. How hypocritical
There is nothing clear about why Labour lost the last election. You think it was because they were too centrist, I think they were leaderless and there are other views. Only an arrogant disingenuous poster (or outright liar - you choose) would say their view has to be so obviously true that any other posted view has to be dishonest
Edited by Steve K, Aug 21 2015, 07:01 PM.
|
|
|
| |
|
Pro Veritas
|
Aug 21 2015, 07:09 PM
Post #933
|
- Posts:
- 7,014
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #19
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- Steve K
- Aug 21 2015, 07:00 PM
You what? Clearly you can spell disingenuity but you seem to disingenuously use it. How hypocritical
There is nothing clear about why Labour lost the last election. You think it was because they were too centrist, I think they were leaderless and there are other views. Only an arrogant disingenuous poster (or outright liar - you choose) would say their view has to be so obviously true that any other posted view has to be dishonest
Hang on.
You can have whatever view you want on why Labour lost the last election.
But I can 100% guarantee that Corbyn and his supporters had nothing to do with it.
The Tory party are running riot - NOW!
And Corbyn carries no blame for that.
So trying to blame him for issues that haven't happened yet, while ignoring the causes of the issue that have happened is, IMO, disingenuous.
And even if Corbyn does win the Labour leadership, and because of that the Tories win the next election (IMO a very likely scenario) you still can't blame Corbyn. It is not his fault if he is the only credible candidate that Labour can manage to field. Maybe if the stopped dragging the rotting corpse of Blairite Tory-Lite policies around with them they could field a few more credible candidates AND win back some of the estimated 5 million lost voters Blair turned away from them.
All The Best
|
|
|
| |
|
Steve K
|
Aug 21 2015, 07:36 PM
Post #934
|
- Posts:
- 33,941
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- Pro Veritas
- Aug 21 2015, 07:09 PM
Hang on.
You can have whatever view you want on why Labour lost the last election.
But I can 100% guarantee that Corbyn and his supporters had nothing to do with it.
The Tory party are running riot - NOW!
And Corbyn carries no blame for that.
So trying to blame him for issues that haven't happened yet, while ignoring the causes of the issue that have happened is, IMO, disingenuous.
And even if Corbyn does win the Labour leadership, and because of that the Tories win the next election (IMO a very likely scenario) you still can't blame Corbyn. It is not his fault if he is the only credible candidate that Labour can manage to field. Maybe if the stopped dragging the rotting corpse of Blairite Tory-Lite policies around with them they could field a few more credible candidates AND win back some of the estimated 5 million lost voters Blair turned away from them.
All The Best Perhaps you could show me where you think I said Corbyn was part of why they lost the last election.
You still seem to assert that anyone that doesn't share your niche view on the last election must be posting dishonestly. If that does not seem to be arrogant to you it certainly does to me. It's offensive and provocative as well as plain wrong.
And if you think the Tories are "running riot" now you ain't seen nothing yet. Take a look at what the likes of Redwood would do with the NHS, what May would do with workers rights etc.
I see you like to post the lie about the 5 million votes Blair is supposed to have lost them, we've done this before. He never got less than 2 million votes morethan Michael Foot - fact. So he always gained them votes - fact. Even Brown got over a million more than Foot.
|
|
|
| |
|
Rich
|
Aug 21 2015, 08:10 PM
Post #935
|
- Posts:
- 14,458
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #30
- Joined:
- Jun 28, 2014
|
- Steve K
- Aug 21 2015, 07:00 PM
- Pro Veritas
- Aug 21 2015, 06:24 PM
- Steve K
- Aug 20 2015, 11:45 PM
There are two basic flaws in the Corbyista posts above
1. They think that the 600,000 people apparently entitled to vote in this election are all Labour supporters. If they were they'd have been members when it mattered in May this year when there was a real need to work to get the Tory heartless policies on welfare opposed and out of government.
2. That 600,000 dilitante Labour supporters have the right to get the other 99% of the UK population to fall in line with Corbyn's Hamas/IRA loving, economy destroying, job destroying, defence of the realm annihilating (and if Pro V 's post is believed) thieving policies. They won't.
This whole fiasco has been exactly what the far right of the Tory party wanted. Well done Corbynistas I so hope you are the first to feel the misery he will vest on the UK by letting the Tories run riot.
1) Not necessarily. For many, many Labour supporters the party was still "too Tory lite" under Miliband - with his accepting of the Tory Austerity narrative (which means that even a Labour victory would NOT have have seen those heartless tory policies thrown out. It was only when a more left-wing candidate for party leader became an option that they returned to the party. 2) No one is suggesting such. If Corbyn wins the rest of the 99% of the nation's population get to decide if they want to be a part of that at the next General Election. If Corbyn is given a fair chance, rather than the McCarthyesque witch-hunts Labour are currently involved in, and is elected as Leader AND (and that is a very big AND) if Labour win the next General Election then the principles of democracy, such as they are in the FPTP system, have been followed. And here is where I will call you out on your quite obvious disingenuity. It really isn't Corbyn or his supporters' fault that Labour was not seen as a viable alternative to the Tories at the last General Election; that fault lies solely with Blairites who insist that Labour needs to be a centre-right party. If the choice is a Centre-Right party that is dysfunctional, lacks principles and screwed the economy when last in power (Labour) or a slightly different Right-Of-Centre party that is less dysfunctional, has stuck to its principles (even if you disagree with those principles) and had started to turn the economy around (Tory), it is not too hard to see why Labour lost. And they did lose. The ONLY reason the Tories won was because there was no viable alternative. The only other option for a voter with enough conscience to not want to help the Tories directly, but who was uncomfortable with the prevalent "Austerity" narrative, was to vote for a third option knowing that in our FPTP system that third option is, in effect, a "lost" vote. All The Best
You what? Clearly you can spell disingenuity but you seem to disingenuously use it. How hypocritical There is nothing clear about why Labour lost the last election. You think it was because they were too centrist, I think they were leaderless and there are other views. Only an arrogant disingenuous poster (or outright liar - you choose) would say their view has to be so obviously true that any other posted view has to be dishonest IMO, Milliband and a non attainable manifesto lost the election for Labour.
|
|
|
| |
|
Cymru
|
Aug 21 2015, 09:00 PM
Post #936
|
- Posts:
- 3,504
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #3
- Joined:
- Jun 26, 2014
|
- C-too
- Aug 21 2015, 06:03 PM
- Cymru
- Aug 21 2015, 04:54 PM
- C-too
- Aug 21 2015, 08:01 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
You are deliberately conflating two separate issues to muddy the waters. Labour's lack of regulation of the financial sector was a problem in and of itself which, left unresolved, ended up making the predicted crash, when it came, that much more harder to deal with. If the roof had been fixed whilst the sun was shining we wouldn't have ended up wet when the rain came. The fact that you barely go a post without mentioning the Tories merely exposes your bias.
Oh! for Fks sake do try and catch up. Did you read the information on page 26 that I referred to ? IF the so called lack of regulation in this country was the problem how did that cause problems that affected most of the world ? The international financial meltdown was not predicted by anyone. Prove me wrong and I will apologise, fail to prove me wrong and I will, because of the period for hindsight, think of you as an outright bigoted liar. The fact that I post in an attempt to fight Tory lies proves that I'm an honest objective individual making an effort to be honest and objective. Again you are deliberately conflating two separate issues to muddy the waters.
|
|
|
| |
|
C-too
|
Aug 22 2015, 05:41 AM
Post #937
|
- Posts:
- 17,666
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #49
- Joined:
- Jul 12, 2014
|
- Cymru
- Aug 21 2015, 09:00 PM
- C-too
- Aug 21 2015, 06:03 PM
- Cymru
- Aug 21 2015, 04:54 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Oh! for Fks sake do try and catch up. Did you read the information on page 26 that I referred to ? IF the so called lack of regulation in this country was the problem how did that cause problems that affected most of the world ? The international financial meltdown was not predicted by anyone. Prove me wrong and I will apologise, fail to prove me wrong and I will, because of the period for hindsight, think of you as an outright bigoted liar. The fact that I post in an attempt to fight Tory lies proves that I'm an honest objective individual making an effort to be honest and objective.
Again you are deliberately conflating two separate issues to muddy the waters. From your initial post.
---- "Not when you preside over a lack of regulation over the financial markets which causes a crash that results in much more than 1.6 million going back into poverty". ---- __________________
To my knowledge any regulation, if any existed on the INTERNATIONAL financial markets, were kicked into touch when the American produced Toxic Debts were slipped into the system via Wall Street. A problem for many countries, many of whom might claim to have had tighter regulations than the UK.
The crash was very clearly NOT caused by UK Banking regulations.
|
|
|
| |
|
C-too
|
Aug 22 2015, 05:53 AM
Post #938
|
- Posts:
- 17,666
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #49
- Joined:
- Jul 12, 2014
|
- Rich
- Aug 21 2015, 08:10 PM
- Steve K
- Aug 21 2015, 07:00 PM
- Pro Veritas
- Aug 21 2015, 06:24 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deepWell doneAND) if Labour win the next General Election then the principles of democracy, such as they are in the FPTP system, have been followed. And here is where I will call you out on your quite obvious disingenuity. It really isn't Corbyn or his supporters' fault that Labour was not seen as a viable alternative to the Tories at the last General Election; that fault lies solely with Blairites who insist that Labour needs to be a centre-right party. If the choice is a Centre-Right party that is dysfunctional, lacks principles and screwed the economy when last in power (Labour) or a slightly different Right-Of-Centre party that is less dysfunctional, has stuck to its principles (even if you disagree with those principles) and had started to turn the economy around (Tory), it is not too hard to see why Labour lost. And they did lose. The ONLY reason the Tories won was because there was no viable alternative. The only other option for a voter with enough conscience to not want to help the Tories directly, but who was uncomfortable with the prevalent "Austerity" narrative, was to vote for a third option knowing that in our FPTP system that third option is, in effect, a "lost" vote. All The Best
You what? Clearly you can spell disingenuity but you seem to disingenuously use it. How hypocritical There is nothing clear about why Labour lost the last election. You think it was because they were too centrist, I think they were leaderless and there are other views. Only an arrogant disingenuous poster (or outright liar - you choose) would say their view has to be so obviously true that any other posted view has to be dishonest
IMO, Milliband and a non attainable manifesto lost the election for Labour. Ed Milliband also lacked charisma. He had nothing to offer the Labour party. I wonder if those that gave him the union vote learnt anything from his debacle. Somehow I doubt it.
|
|
|
| |
|
Cymru
|
Aug 22 2015, 06:14 AM
Post #939
|
- Posts:
- 3,504
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #3
- Joined:
- Jun 26, 2014
|
- C-too
- Aug 22 2015, 05:41 AM
- Cymru
- Aug 21 2015, 09:00 PM
- C-too
- Aug 21 2015, 06:03 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deeppredicted by anyone. Prove me wrong and I will apologise, fail to prove me wrong and I will, because of the period for hindsight, think of you as an outright bigoted liar.
The fact that I post in an attempt to fight Tory lies proves that I'm an honest objective individual making an effort to be honest and objective.
Again you are deliberately conflating two separate issues to muddy the waters.
From your initial post. ---- "Not when you preside over a lack of regulation over the financial markets which causes a crash that results in much more than 1.6 million going back into poverty". ---- __________________ To my knowledge any regulation, if any existed on the INTERNATIONAL financial markets, were kicked into touch when the American produced Toxic Debts were slipped into the system via Wall Street. A problem for many countries, many of whom might claim to have had tighter regulations than the UK. The crash was very clearly NOT caused by UK Banking regulations. No one is saying it was.
The crash was always going to happen whatever anyone did, the issue I am highlighting is how we should have been preparing for that crash beforehand so that when it came it would not be as hard a blow as it was.
Edited by Cymru, Aug 22 2015, 06:21 AM.
|
|
|
| |
|
Cymru
|
Aug 22 2015, 06:15 AM
Post #940
|
- Posts:
- 3,504
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #3
- Joined:
- Jun 26, 2014
|
Kate Hoey speaks out after former Lambeth Council Labour Leader purged from voting in leadership election
http://www.brixtonbuzz.com/2015/08/kate-hoey-speaks-out-after-former-lambeth-council-labour-leader-purged-from-voting-in-leadership-election/
The Blairite dirty tricks against democracy in the Labour Party continues unabated.
It's funny, when Miliband introduced the new voting reforms a few years back Blair was enthusiastically behind the move.
I guess seeing the reality of what the Labour Party members actually want, as opposed to what the elitist Blairite Labour MPs tell them they want, must be behind the Blairite's sudden reversal of stance of supporting Labour Party democracy to now actively undermining it because they don't like the results it gives.
Edited by Cymru, Aug 22 2015, 06:20 AM.
|
|
|
| |
|
Heinrich
|
Aug 22 2015, 06:25 AM
Post #941
|
- Posts:
- 2,920
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #51
- Joined:
- Jul 22, 2014
|
- Cymru
- Aug 22 2015, 06:15 AM
Kate Hoey speaks out after former Lambeth Council Labour Leader purged from voting in leadership electionhttp://www.brixtonbuzz.com/2015/08/kate-hoey-speaks-out-after-former-lambeth-council-labour-leader-purged-from-voting-in-leadership-election/The Blairite dirty tricks against democracy in the Labour Party continues unabated. It's funny, when Miliband introduced the new voting reforms a few years back Blair was enthusiastically behind the move. I guess seeing the reality of what the Labour Party members actually want, as opposed to what the elitist Blairite Labour MPs tell them they want, must be behind the Blairite's sudden reversal of stance of supporting Labour Party democracy to now actively undermining it because they don't like the results it gives. The more traditional Labour voters see who is badmouthing Jeremy Corbyn, the more they are persuaded that Corbyn is their man.
|
|
|
| |
|
C-too
|
Aug 22 2015, 06:57 AM
Post #942
|
- Posts:
- 17,666
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #49
- Joined:
- Jul 12, 2014
|
- Cymru
- Aug 22 2015, 06:14 AM
- C-too
- Aug 22 2015, 05:41 AM
- Cymru
- Aug 21 2015, 09:00 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deeppredicted
From your initial post. ---- "Not when you preside over a lack of regulation over the financial markets which causes a crash that results in much more than 1.6 million going back into poverty". ---- __________________ To my knowledge any regulation, if any existed on the INTERNATIONAL financial markets, were kicked into touch when the American produced Toxic Debts were slipped into the system via Wall Street. A problem for many countries, many of whom might claim to have had tighter regulations than the UK. The crash was very clearly NOT caused by UK Banking regulations.
No one is saying it was. The crash was always going to happen whatever anyone did, the issue I am highlighting is how we should have been preparing for that crash beforehand so that when it came it would not be as hard a blow as it was. Your words, my highlight.
---- "Not when you preside over a lack of regulation over the financial markets which causes a crash". ----
|
|
|
| |
|
C-too
|
Aug 22 2015, 07:00 AM
Post #943
|
- Posts:
- 17,666
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #49
- Joined:
- Jul 12, 2014
|
- Heinrich
- Aug 22 2015, 06:25 AM
- Cymru
- Aug 22 2015, 06:15 AM
Kate Hoey speaks out after former Lambeth Council Labour Leader purged from voting in leadership electionhttp://www.brixtonbuzz.com/2015/08/kate-hoey-speaks-out-after-former-lambeth-council-labour-leader-purged-from-voting-in-leadership-election/The Blairite dirty tricks against democracy in the Labour Party continues unabated. It's funny, when Miliband introduced the new voting reforms a few years back Blair was enthusiastically behind the move. I guess seeing the reality of what the Labour Party members actually want, as opposed to what the elitist Blairite Labour MPs tell them they want, must be behind the Blairite's sudden reversal of stance of supporting Labour Party democracy to now actively undermining it because they don't like the results it gives.
The more traditional Labour voters see who is badmouthing Jeremy Corbyn, the more they are persuaded that Corbyn is their man.
|
|
|
| |
|
disgruntled porker
|
Aug 22 2015, 07:09 AM
Post #944
|
Older than most people think I am.
- Posts:
- 1,945
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #31
- Joined:
- Jun 28, 2014
|
- Cymru
- Aug 21 2015, 04:54 PM
- C-too
- Aug 21 2015, 08:01 AM
- Cymru
- Aug 21 2015, 07:44 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Nonsense, please stop reproducing the lies and the insinuated lies of the Tory party. The international financial meltdown was the problem and no government was prepared for it. For further education see post 1024 page 26, on this thread.
You are deliberately conflating two separate issues to muddy the waters. Labour's lack of regulation of the financial sector was a problem in and of itself which, left unresolved, ended up making the predicted crash, when it came, that much more harder to deal with. If the roof had been fixed whilst the sun was shining we wouldn't have ended up wet when the rain came. The fact that you barely go a post without mentioning the Tories merely exposes your bias. Lets not forget that at the time, The Tories wanted even less regulation, coming out with the old claptrap that the market would self regulate to provide the most efficiency. Not that this takes anything away from the fact that labour should have ignored what others thought and regulated more. If they had regulated more, everyone would have been wailing about the nanny state and how they should keep their nose out of private business. It really was a no win situation.
|
|
|
| |
|
Steve K
|
Aug 22 2015, 10:40 AM
Post #945
|
- Posts:
- 33,941
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- Cymru
- Aug 22 2015, 06:15 AM
Kate Hoey speaks out after former Lambeth Council Labour Leader purged from voting in leadership electionhttp://www.brixtonbuzz.com/2015/08/kate-hoey-speaks-out-after-former-lambeth-council-labour-leader-purged-from-voting-in-leadership-election/The Blairite dirty tricks against democracy in the Labour Party continues unabated. It's funny, when Miliband introduced the new voting reforms a few years back Blair was enthusiastically behind the move. I guess seeing the reality of what the Labour Party members actually want, as opposed to what the elitist Blairite Labour MPs tell them they want, must be behind the Blairite's sudden reversal of stance of supporting Labour Party democracy to now actively undermining it because they don't like the results it gives. Sadly it seems Kate Hoey is suffering from the early signs of dementia
Even a brief dabble in Google would have reminded her (and informed you) just why Joan Twelves and Jason Cobb are not allowed to vote. They have both actively campaigned against the Labour party. End of right to vote in Labour party matters, ever. Seemples.
|
|
|
| |
|
Cymru
|
Aug 22 2015, 05:31 PM
Post #946
|
- Posts:
- 3,504
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #3
- Joined:
- Jun 26, 2014
|
- C-too
- Aug 22 2015, 06:57 AM
- Cymru
- Aug 22 2015, 06:14 AM
- C-too
- Aug 22 2015, 05:41 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deeppredicted
No one is saying it was. The crash was always going to happen whatever anyone did, the issue I am highlighting is how we should have been preparing for that crash beforehand so that when it came it would not be as hard a blow as it was.
Your words, my highlight. ---- "Not when you preside over a lack of regulation over the financial markets which causes a crash". ---- Yep a lack of regulation of the financial markets in the US caused the crash.
Labour's lack of regulation in Britain meant that when the contagion spread here we were powerless to stop it.
|
|
|
| |
|
Steve K
|
Aug 22 2015, 05:44 PM
Post #947
|
- Posts:
- 33,941
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- Cymru
- Aug 22 2015, 05:31 PM
- C-too
- Aug 22 2015, 06:57 AM
- Cymru
- Aug 22 2015, 06:14 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deeppredicted
Your words, my highlight. ---- "Not when you preside over a lack of regulation over the financial markets which causes a crash". ----
Yep a lack of regulation of the financial markets in the US caused the crash. Labour's lack of regulation in Britain meant that when the contagion spread here we were powerless to stop it. Labour's lack of regulation in Britain meant that we were always going to have a crash no matter what the rest of the world did
|
|
|
| |
|
Pro Veritas
|
Aug 22 2015, 06:58 PM
Post #948
|
- Posts:
- 7,014
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #19
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- Cymru
- Aug 22 2015, 06:15 AM
Kate Hoey speaks out after former Lambeth Council Labour Leader purged from voting in leadership electionhttp://www.brixtonbuzz.com/2015/08/kate-hoey-speaks-out-after-former-lambeth-council-labour-leader-purged-from-voting-in-leadership-election/The Blairite dirty tricks against democracy in the Labour Party continues unabated. It's funny, when Miliband introduced the new voting reforms a few years back Blair was enthusiastically behind the move. I guess seeing the reality of what the Labour Party members actually want, as opposed to what the elitist Blairite Labour MPs tell them they want, must be behind the Blairite's sudden reversal of stance of supporting Labour Party democracy to now actively undermining it because they don't like the results it gives. Neo-liberal economic policies. And abandonment of socialism. And now a McCarthyesque witch-hunt.
NuLab's reinvention as a Right-Of-Centre Tory-Lite anti-democratic party is complete.
All The Best
|
|
|
| |
|
Steve K
|
Aug 22 2015, 07:19 PM
Post #949
|
- Posts:
- 33,941
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- Pro Veritas
- Aug 22 2015, 06:58 PM
- Cymru
- Aug 22 2015, 06:15 AM
Kate Hoey speaks out after former Lambeth Council Labour Leader purged from voting in leadership electionhttp://www.brixtonbuzz.com/2015/08/kate-hoey-speaks-out-after-former-lambeth-council-labour-leader-purged-from-voting-in-leadership-election/The Blairite dirty tricks against democracy in the Labour Party continues unabated. It's funny, when Miliband introduced the new voting reforms a few years back Blair was enthusiastically behind the move. I guess seeing the reality of what the Labour Party members actually want, as opposed to what the elitist Blairite Labour MPs tell them they want, must be behind the Blairite's sudden reversal of stance of supporting Labour Party democracy to now actively undermining it because they don't like the results it gives.
Neo-liberal economic policies. And abandonment of socialism. And now a McCarthyesque witch-hunt. NuLab's reinvention as a Right-Of-Centre Tory-Lite anti-democratic party is complete. All The Best
See earlier reply that explained exactly why Hoey's anti Labour chums were stopped from voting
|
|
|
| |
|
Rich
|
Aug 22 2015, 07:28 PM
Post #950
|
- Posts:
- 14,458
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #30
- Joined:
- Jun 28, 2014
|
- C-too
- Aug 22 2015, 05:41 AM
- Cymru
- Aug 21 2015, 09:00 PM
- C-too
- Aug 21 2015, 06:03 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deeppredicted by anyone. Prove me wrong and I will apologise, fail to prove me wrong and I will, because of the period for hindsight, think of you as an outright bigoted liar.
The fact that I post in an attempt to fight Tory lies proves that I'm an honest objective individual making an effort to be honest and objective.
Again you are deliberately conflating two separate issues to muddy the waters.
From your initial post. ---- "Not when you preside over a lack of regulation over the financial markets which causes a crash that results in much more than 1.6 million going back into poverty". ---- __________________ To my knowledge any regulation, if any existed on the INTERNATIONAL financial markets, were kicked into touch when the American produced Toxic Debts were slipped into the system via Wall Street. A problem for many countries, many of whom might claim to have had tighter regulations than the UK. The crash was very clearly NOT caused by UK Banking regulations. ENOUGH.....Please show me any post on this forum concerning the global meltdown/financial crash that blames the British government.
|
|
|
| |
|
Phoenix One UK
|
Aug 22 2015, 08:55 PM
Post #951
|
- Posts:
- 1,902
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #146
- Joined:
- Aug 8, 2015
|
Jeremy Corbyn CAN lead Labour to victory in 2020, say bosses of the biggest unions
In a joint open letter, shown to the Mirror, the six general secretaries said it was time for Labour to “move on” from the Blair-Brown years
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jeremy-corbyn-can-lead-labour-6296552
Unquote:===========================
The Mirror includes a poll asking if readers if Labour can win the 2020 election with Jeremy Corbyn as leader. I did not contribute to poll, as I do not know. I seriously doubt if anyone does. However, the probability of his becoming the next labour leader is seperate issue, and from what I am seeing out there I suspect he will achieve that. especially as some bookies like Paddy Power are already paying out to punters prior to vote even being cast.
|
|
|
| |
|
Pro Veritas
|
Aug 22 2015, 10:36 PM
Post #952
|
- Posts:
- 7,014
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #19
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- Steve K
- Aug 22 2015, 10:40 AM
Even a brief dabble in Google would have reminded her (and informed you) just why Joan Twelves and Jason Cobb are not allowed to vote. They have both actively campaigned against the Labour party. End of right to vote in Labour party matters, ever. Seemples.
Well surely campaigning against your party when it does things you oppose is EXACTLY how the parliamentary party system is supposed to work.
If not how is change in policy ever going to come about?
All The Best
|
|
|
| |
|
Rich
|
Aug 22 2015, 11:42 PM
Post #953
|
- Posts:
- 14,458
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #30
- Joined:
- Jun 28, 2014
|
- Pro Veritas
- Aug 22 2015, 10:36 PM
- Steve K
- Aug 22 2015, 10:40 AM
Even a brief dabble in Google would have reminded her (and informed you) just why Joan Twelves and Jason Cobb are not allowed to vote. They have both actively campaigned against the Labour party. End of right to vote in Labour party matters, ever. Seemples.
Well surely campaigning against your party when it does things you oppose is EXACTLY how the parliamentary party system is supposed to work. If not how is change in policy ever going to come about? All The Best That is why Mr Corbyn is not a "sheep" he speaks for himself.
|
|
|
| |
|
Heinrich
|
Aug 22 2015, 11:45 PM
Post #954
|
- Posts:
- 2,920
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #51
- Joined:
- Jul 22, 2014
|
- Phoenix One UK
- Aug 22 2015, 08:55 PM
Jeremy Corbyn CAN lead Labour to victory in 2020, say bosses of the biggest unions In a joint open letter, shown to the Mirror, the six general secretaries said it was time for Labour to “move on” from the Blair-Brown years http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jeremy-corbyn-can-lead-labour-6296552Unquote:=========================== The Mirror includes a poll asking if readers if Labour can win the 2020 election with Jeremy Corbyn as leader. I did not contribute to poll, as I do not know. I seriously doubt if anyone does. However, the probability of his becoming the next labour leader is seperate issue, and from what I am seeing out there I suspect he will achieve that. especially as some bookies like Paddy Power are already paying out to punters prior to vote even being cast. I can see Jeremy Corbyn winning the leadership election to reestablish the Labour Party and deal a coup de grace to New Labour. Winning the general election is different. With the first-past-the-post system and the conservative nature of the English electorate, a socialist victory as soon as 2020 is not in the cards.
|
|
|
| |
|
johnofgwent
|
Aug 23 2015, 12:42 AM
Post #955
|
- Posts:
- 7,075
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- Jun 26, 2014
|
- papasmurf
- Aug 21 2015, 05:54 PM
Rule Three breach and untrue statement removed by moderator. I am indebted to SteveK for pointing me here
http://www.theguardian.com/voluntary-sector-network/community-action-blog/2012/jun/20/community-food-banks
The Trussell Trust, which fed 128,000 people last year, mostly works with churches or other local community groups. Those groups will typically approach the trust if they feel there is a need for a food bank in their area. They pay a fee and in return they are provided with a whole package of support to get their franchise off the ground.
"Each project is an independent charity," says Jeremy Ravn, foodbank network director at the trust. "But their relationship with us is a loose franchise contract. We provide a manual, branded publicity materials, artwork, data collection systems, and an online support platform."
And then I went off to check here
http://www.trusselltrust.org/start-a-foodbank
- Quote:
-
When you join The Trussell Trust Foodbank Network we will provide:
full training an operating manual ongoing support from national staff team and a regional development officer template website tailored to your foodbank with your own content management system branding materials including leaflets, banners etc PR advice and template press releases as well as opportunities to talk to national press an online forum an online stock control system annual audits and quality assurance process corporate relationships - discounts and services e.g. Trussell Trust foodbanks are able to hold supermarket collections in local Tesco stores and receive a 'top-up' of 30% on what is donated national and regional conferences access to the foodbank network’s shared ideas and experience.
Foodbanks are asked to make a £1500 donation towards these costs
So is it, or isn't it ?
Well the Trussel Trust don't use the word on their site but they clearly use it when talking to the press and as I posted earlier they refer to a piece of Labour Social franchise Legislation. They say the fee is a donation which suggests they don't press you for it ... Now, unlike eweMove and Utility Warehouse to name but two franchise operations I know about there does not seem to be an ONGOING financial commitment for a trussel trust foodbank to send a yearly (or otherwise) bung upwars to the mother ship but then again I have not seen any accounts .. maybe I might take an interest in some now ...
|
|
|
| |
|
Ewill
|
Aug 23 2015, 01:39 AM
Post #956
|
- Posts:
- 4,381
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #62
- Joined:
- Jul 27, 2014
|
- johnofgwent
- Aug 23 2015, 12:42 AM
- papasmurf
- Aug 21 2015, 05:54 PM
Rule Three Breach and Untrue Statement removed By Moderator.
I am indebted to SteveK for pointing me here http://www.theguardian.com/voluntary-sector-network/community-action-blog/2012/jun/20/community-food-banksThe Trussell Trust, which fed 128,000 people last year, mostly works with churches or other local community groups. Those groups will typically approach the trust if they feel there is a need for a food bank in their area. They pay a fee and in return they are provided with a whole package of support to get their franchise off the ground. "Each project is an independent charity," says Jeremy Ravn, foodbank network director at the trust. "But their relationship with us is a loose franchise contract. We provide a manual, branded publicity materials, artwork, data collection systems, and an online support platform." And then I went off to check here http://www.trusselltrust.org/start-a-foodbank- Quote:
-
When you join The Trussell Trust Foodbank Network we will provide:
full training an operating manual ongoing support from national staff team and a regional development officer template website tailored to your foodbank with your own content management system branding materials including leaflets, banners etc PR advice and template press releases as well as opportunities to talk to national press an online forum an online stock control system annual audits and quality assurance process corporate relationships - discounts and services e.g. Trussell Trust foodbanks are able to hold supermarket collections in local Tesco stores and receive a 'top-up' of 30% on what is donated national and regional conferences access to the foodbank network’s shared ideas and experience.
Foodbanks are asked to make a £1500 donation towards these costs
So is it, or isn't it ? Well the Trussel Trust don't use the word on their site but they clearly use it when talking to the press and as I posted earlier they refer to a piece of Labour Social franchise Legislation. They say the fee is a donation which suggests they don't press you for it ... Now, unlike eweMove and Utility Warehouse to name but two franchise operations I know about there does not seem to be an ONGOING financial commitment for a trussel trust foodbank to send a yearly (or otherwise) bung upwars to the mother ship but then again I have not seen any accounts .. maybe I might take an interest in some now ... My posts at 1078 and 1100 have dealt with this
There is an annual charge of £360 per annum to run a foodbank franchise as well as the initial fee of £1500
http://www.cloresocialleadership.org.uk/userfiles/documents/Research%20reports/2011/Research,%20Dan%20Berelowitz,%20FINAL.pdf p15 onwards explains set up
. >Having an established network of churches makes it relatively easy for the Trussell Trust to find a ready supply of franchisees with little need for advertising. The franchisee agreement is made with the church group or a number of churches, rather than with an individual as is typical in the commercial sector. Finances are also an issue in the selection process, as it is important that franchisees understand the value of the pre-existing knowledge and infrastructure that the Trussell Trust has built up, rather than expecting it ‘for free’ because they are starting a charity. ...........In addition, it is important that the franchisee group setting up a Foodbank has enough money to cover operational costs and franchise maintenance, which includes training and on-going support. Each franchisee makes a one-off donation of £1,500 at start up stage, followed by an ongoing ‘donation’ of £360 per year.....As well as making this financial commitment, franchisees are also required to monitor their activities and collect data, make appropriate use of the Foodbank logo, and participate in an annual audit. The Trussell Trust then requires them to complete a business plan for their franchise to ensure that they really understand how it will operate, particularly the financial and operational elements.>>>
|
|
|
| |
|
johnofgwent
|
Aug 23 2015, 07:45 AM
Post #957
|
- Posts:
- 7,075
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- Jun 26, 2014
|
- Ewill
- Aug 21 2015, 03:45 PM
- marybrown
- Aug 21 2015, 03:09 PM
- Ewill
- Aug 21 2015, 03:05 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
So who pays them? And how do they get money distributing ''free food?'' When they pay a franchise?
Trussell is the franchisor and a charity , they have paid staff vacancies are advertised on their website-last time I looked they were advertising for f/t van drivers at £8.20 an hour and full and p/t retail staff for their charity shops - think I've read that senior management is on £40k a year (need to check that ) I doubt most volunteers would realise that they can be dealing with paid staff, I know someone who is an area manager for a household name charity, salary £38k-they liaise between HQ and volunteer groups in West London - I have asked if the volunteer groups know that she is salaried and was told that being employed was an irrelevance to the relationship I rather doubt the volunteers are unaware that some of the staff are paid.
I would point to barnardos as a case in point. Every one of their charity shops has a manager and one or more additional supervisors who are paid, albeit at the supervisor level the rate of pay is the NMW and the Manager little more than that. I know this to be so because my youngest worked in that capacity on a part time basis throughout most of her second and half of her final undergraduate year, a job that has provided PRICELESS experience in retail management and keyholding and the downsides such reponsibilities bring, INCLUDING the 3am wakeup calls from the police needing to verify the building is secure after the break in attempt at the adjacent shop, or the bang on the house front door from the fire investigations officer (admittedly a neighbour who lives a few doors away) who has himself been hauled out of bed to attend the electrical fire in the adjacent property on the other side, and needs jennifer to come with him and let him into their shop to verify the electrical supply there is safe and the fire has not penetrated ... Now while such things are hardly the make and break of most office workers, to anyone intending as jennifer does to set up her own retail service sector business operated from a shopfront, getting this on your CV now before it's your store and your stock is absolutely priceless ...
|
|
|
| |
|
RJD
|
Aug 23 2015, 07:59 AM
Post #958
|
- Posts:
- 12,499
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #9
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
Why the indignation? It has been custom and practice for the Directors of major UK Charities to pay themselves PM level salaries our of donations for decades. I see no harm in such a Charity using donations to pay for the professional services of staff if they cannot find sufficient resources that will do the same free of charges. Surely their objectives must be satisfied in some manner?
The commercialisation of the "Pantry" Charity in Germany requires them to pay for vehicles and drivers to haul discarded food stuffs from Supermarkets to distribution outlets.
Remember that the demand for such free foods, funded by charities, will be supply driven. As we have seen in Germany the more food stuff you put on the table then the demand for such grows in parallel.
|
|
|
| |
|
johnofgwent
|
Aug 23 2015, 08:19 AM
Post #959
|
- Posts:
- 7,075
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- Jun 26, 2014
|
- RJD
- Aug 23 2015, 07:59 AM
Why the indignation?
Well, the government has chosen to abdicate responsibility for social programmes many believe should be the sole responsibility of government. It has instead chosen to delagate all responsibility for providing such services to the charity sector, and provides means for those taking up this call to apply directly for government funding for those service provisions
If you cannot see that this is a matter of concern to the public in that there is a clear question of the "value for money" aspect of these operations then there is clearly a problem and we are no part of it.
|
|
|
| |
|
C-too
|
Aug 23 2015, 08:43 AM
Post #960
|
- Posts:
- 17,666
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #49
- Joined:
- Jul 12, 2014
|
- Cymru
- Aug 22 2015, 05:31 PM
- C-too
- Aug 22 2015, 06:57 AM
- Cymru
- Aug 22 2015, 06:14 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deeppredicted
Your words, my highlight. ---- "Not when you preside over a lack of regulation over the financial markets which causes a crash". ----
Yep a lack of regulation of the financial markets in the US caused the crash. Labour's lack of regulation in Britain meant that when the contagion spread here we were powerless to stop it. You are stooping low with that attempted, out of context, get out. Brown/NL had no influence on American regulations.
Wriggle all you want, but you know that no chancellors in the West was prepared, or regulated in such a way to avoid that meltdown.
Edited by C-too, Aug 23 2015, 08:46 AM.
|
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|