Jeremy Corbyn & Tom Watson elected leader and deputy leader of the Labour Party

[fowler9]

Well no one is free not to be offended in my opinion either. They are free to comment on what they were offended by though and say why they are offended. Obviously somewhere such as this there are forum rules which must be abided by. I accept that.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The 'National Tribute' being discussed does not take place for nearly another two months. That is plenty of time for a leader of the opposition to make arrangements for what he will be doing on the day. It sounds like you are implying it's somehow not acceptable for him to have not made those arrangements on basically his first day as leader of the opposition, which seems absurd to me. Is that really what you intend to suggest?

Not at all. The date for that particular occasion is known to all and sundry so it could have been immediately pencilled in his arrangements diary as a matter of course.

 

[fowler9]

Not at all. The date for that particular occasion is known to all and sundry so it could have been immediately pencilled in his arrangements diary as a matter of course.

I'm just winging it hear because I don't know what was actually said, or meant, as indeed the press probably didn't. Did Corbyn, assuming he said "I don't know my plans", and assuming he was asked "What are you doing on that day?" mean "I'm not sure if I will turn up at the cenotaph" or "I'm not sure what my plans are for that day". I can, have and will tell people in the future that I don't know what my plans are for a given event whilst still fully intending to attend. It doesn't mean I might go the pub and watch the footy instead.

 

[me123]

Yet there are those on this thread who for some reason have chosen to post parts of newspaper article examples that seem to upset them.

If you're talking about me, I'm not in the least bit upset. I wasn't even remotely offended by it. How could anyone be offended? It's pathetic journalism. I suppose the only people who could be offended by this are good journalists, as the quality of the Daily Mail's coverage (in general) is so low that it puts their profession into disrepute.

Of course the Daily Mail are free to publish whatever they want. I have no objection to newspapers publishing opinion and true news. However, as part of free speech, I also have the right to critique the media and, in instances where the quality of journalism is poor, I'm more than happy to mock it.

 

[Gathursty]

Corbyn paid his respect by attending. It is a point that he gave journalists an open goal but I don't sing hymns either. I just open mouth because I don't like singing. Not singing is not disrespectful but poor provision for veterans is.

I know we have also taken pieces out of David Cameron by calling him shiny, too polished and is told what to say by focus groups and Lynton Crosby so I guess I need to not kick off too much when people go on at Corbyn.

Unfortunately it is the modern era where people will over-analyse and take soundbites over paragraphs. Even worse, university-educated and older people are increasingly guilty of this.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Not at all. The date for that particular occasion is known to all and sundry so it could have been immediately pencilled in his arrangements diary as a matter of course.

When Jeremy Corbyn became leader, he would have immediately been presented with a large number of very important and urgent tasks that needed to be done immediately. Stuff like sorting out his shadow cabinet, making sure people were in place for Monday's proceedings in Parliament, and doubtless various other organizational and staffing tasks, as well as stuff like working out what events he should be attending over the coming few days.

You appear to be suggesting that he should have postponed these tasks in order to first prioritize planning out attending an event two months in the future, which is clearly very important and equally clearly not remotely urgent.

Given that you've claimed many times in these threads to have had experience of management, I'm rather surprised that you would advocate such an obviously inappropriate way to prioritize tasks.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I assume you didn't vote for Corbyn.

You would be correct there
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I know we have also taken pieces out of David Cameron by calling him shiny, too polished and is told what to say by focus groups and Lynton Crosby so I guess I need to not kick off too much when people go on at Corbyn.

lol! However, for my part, I have never, to my knowledge, criticized David Cameron by calling him shiny, too polished, or anything comparable, and indeed, I find it rather sad when others criticize him (or other politicians of whatever party) on such obviously irrelevant things. So I guess I can kick off when people have a go at Corbyn all I want

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Given that you've claimed many times in these threads to have had experience of management, I'm rather surprised that you would advocate such an obviously inappropriate way to prioritize tasks.

What do you mean by "claimed" to have had experience of management...hock:

Do you think that all those thirty-odd years in the role of top senior management were spent in a world where delegation to suitably qualified sub-ordinates, some of which were of senior managerial status, just not as senior as I was, was not a known managerial technique. Do not try to "teach your grandmother to suck managerial eggs"

Corbyn would have staff ready and willing to fulfil those essential supporting roles. It is not the role of the top official to perform such mundane tasks. Of course, I felt no need to make that point in my earlier postings as this was so utterly obvious to me, but unfortunately not to those who appear not to have the first inkling of how "life at the top" in the field of senior management actually works.

 

[Busaholic]

Anyone trying to compare Corbyn to Michael Foot as leader of the Labour Party is being facile. Foot was an intellectual and a very good orator (perhaps too many pauses to be considered great) and never sided with the Bennites, which included people like Corbyn and Livingstone, for which he was reviled by many in that grouping. Despite his CND membership he was never a pacifist: indeed, his hero was Lord Beaverbrook of the Daily Express who was instrumental in ensuring that the policy of appeasing Hitler, advocated by Lord Rothermere's Daily Mail among others of influence, was overturned. Foot also supported the Falklands War, to the chagrin of many Labour MPs, and late in life became most insistent that 'the West' had to intervene in Bosnia to avert any further genocide. On this he received virtually no backing from the Labour Party, but I think he was absolutely right.
Also, Foot wore neither a dufflecoat nor a donkey jacket to the Remembrance Sunday Cenotaph. He was just someone who never looked well-dressed, partly in his case because of his gait, but neither did Roy Jenkins or does Boris Johnson. Personally, as an ill-dressed person myself, I'm always suspicious of the well-primped, particularly those in public life.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Anyone trying to compare Corbyn to Michael Foot as leader of the Labour Party is being facile. Foot was an intellectual and a very good orator (perhaps too many pauses to be considered great) and never sided with the Bennites, which included people like Corbyn and Livingstone, for which he was reviled by many in that grouping.

Michael Foot was indeed an intellectual and there was never any doubt whatsoever that in his capacity as the leader of the Labour Party, he would not have attended the ceremony at the Cenotaph. He would have been both insulted and deeply hurt had that comment had ever been made about him.

I am pleased to see those comments that you make in the final part of your posting extract above.

 

[Busaholic]

Michael Foot was indeed an intellectual and there was never any doubt whatsoever that in his capacity as the leader of the Labour Party, he would not have attended the ceremony at the Cenotaph. He would have been both insulted and deeply hurt had that comment had ever been made about him.

I am pleased to see those comments that you make in the final part of your posting extract above.

On a personal level, my wife worked for a mining finance house and met many politicians at dinners,etc. Some Labour people would run a mile when they realised what her job was (Neil Kinnock, for instance) but the couple of times she met Foot he was very friendly and gracious and she was very struck by him. in a way no other politician of any of the three parties ever achieved.

 

[DarloRich]

I love the way that for the Tory types the big news this week is someone not singing the national anthem while in realty they have spent the week attacking workers rights (party of working people my rse!) and making poor people poorer by cutting tax credits.

but that bloody trot not singing the national anthem is what exorcises them most. :roll:

 

[meridian2]

I think the point is that whatever your personal opinion of the anthem/the monarchy, this is all about respecting what happened 70 years ago and if singing the anthem is expected then Corbyn should realise that.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

but that bloody trot didn't not singing the national anthem is what exorcises them most. :roll:

As long as they remembered to bring a bell, book and candle...

 

[Johnuk123]

I love the way that for the Tory types the big news this week is someone not singing the national anthem while in realty they have spent the week attacking workers rights (party of working people my rse!) and making poor people poorer by cutting tax credits.

but that bloody trot didn't not singing the national anthem is what exorcises them most. :roll:

He is naive beyond belief if he hadn't thought that his trades union speech would be completely overlooked because he intended to display his contempt for the Queen yesterday.

He is entitled to that opinion but anybody with a bit of nous would have guessed what would happen, so if his speech was passed without comment it's his fault.

He might have been at home sniping from the back-benches for 30 years but I wonder if his elevation to party leader may be beyond him.

Some people are born leaders and some are better staying in the back-ground, he doesn't come across as a leader.

 

[NSEFAN]

I love the way that for the Tory types the big news this week is someone not singing the national anthem while in realty they have spent the week attacking workers rights (party of working people my rse!) and making poor people poorer by cutting tax credits.

but that bloody trot didn't not singing the national anthem is what exorcises them most

This is politics, though. What used are good leadership skills or good ideas when you can just make your opponent look like a fool? Invite Murdoch round for a party and the rest will be taken care of.

 

[me123]

Corbyn paid his respect by attending. It is a point that he gave journalists an open goal but I don't sing hymns either. I just open mouth because I don't like singing. Not singing is not disrespectful but poor provision for veterans is.

I agree. I don't understand how a man not singing the national anthem (FWIW, the only national anthem in the world to celebrate an unelected leader, aside from North Korea's anthem, but I digress...) could be considered to have insulted veterans and the war dead? He did not sing the national anthem, presumably because he doesn't agree with the words and sentiment of said anthem. He is absolutely entitled to that opinion, and in some regards I do admire him for not "selling out" and singing along just to please some corners of the media.

FWIW, I refuse to sing that national anthem, perhaps partly for the same reason as Mr Corbyn, and also it's an anthem that I do not recognise as being my own, with my identity being Scottish and not British (I'm not trying to derail the topic here, just explaining my personal views on the anthem). I also refuse to sing hymns, as I am not religious. Furthermore, I recognise the importance that hymns have for many religious people, and I do not wish to dilute their significance by half-heartedly participating.

It shows disrespect for the monarchy, but Mr Corbyn has made his views on that clear. His actions yesterday It does not show any disrespect for the war veterans or the war dead. The song is not even remotely about them. His attendance and other participation at the service has shown his respect without compromising his own beliefs.

It's quite depressing that this is considered the most news-worthy event of the week so far. Is there really nothing more important happening to report on? Are all the world's problems solved, aside from a 66 year old man not singing a song?

 

[muz379]

He is naive beyond belief if he hadn't thought that his trades union speech would be completely overlooked because he intended to display his contempt for the Queen yesterday.

He is entitled to that opinion but anybody with a bit of nous would have guessed what would happen, so if his speech was passed without comment it's his fault.

If that is the case i'm personally surprised that the press have only just found out about his "contempt" for the queen because as a committed republican he has been quite open about his feelings for the queen in the past .

I am personally more of the opinion that his trade union address was overlooked because he did not particularly say anything new and he was addressing a home crowd so there would really be nothing notable for the press to say about it

 

[PHILIPE]

All the people who changed their allegiance to Jeremy Corbyn have 5 years to think things through instead of rushing in bull headed because they like his policies. No thought given to effects or cost. Mind you, I think that the present Government's austerity measures have driven people into his direction.

 

[AM9]

FWIW, I refuse to sing that national anthem, perhaps partly for the same reason as Mr Corbyn, and also it's an anthem that I do not recognise as being my own, with my identity being Scottish and not British (I'm not trying to derail the topic here, just explaining my personal views on the anthem). I also refuse to sing hymns, as I am not religious. Furthermore, I recognise the importance that hymns have for many religious people, and I do not wish to dilute their significance by half-heartedly participating.

I would agree with that. Now what justification do those criticising him from or on behalf of the Conservative party have when John Redwood, their once Welsh minister, pretended to sing the Welsh National anthem:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIwBvjoLyZc

That was far more insulting than just politely standing whilst an anthem that was irrelevant to the occasion was chanted by those that wanted to.

 

[asylumxl]

All the people who changed their allegiance to Jeremy Corbyn have 5 years to think things through instead of rushing in bull headed because they like his policies. No thought given to effects or cost. Mind you, I think that the present Government's austerity measures have driven people into his direction.

Well, his economic policies have been endorsed by over 40 econmists:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/22/jeremy-corbyn-economists-backing-anti-austerity-policies-corbynomics

I'm more inclined to trust their judgement on such matters, rather than politicians.

 

[northwichcat]

Well, his economic policies have been endorsed by over 40 econmists:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...s-backing-anti-austerity-policies-corbynomics

I'm more inclined to trust their judgement on such matters, rather than politicians.

Prior to the last election the economists were saying the Lib Dems were the only party who had a complete viable economic policy and saying the Labour and Tory plans were incomplete, so if Corbyn's getting praise from economists then it sounds like he has a more complete plan than Milliband had.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Prior to the last election the economists were saying the Lib Dems were the only party who had a complete viable economic policy and saying the Labour and Tory plans were incomplete, so if Corbyn's getting praise from economists then it sounds like he has a more complete plan than Milliband had.

But like Milliband, he is in opposition and not in a position to put his economic policies in motion.

 

[asylumxl]

But like Milliband, he is in opposition and not in a position to put his economic policies in motion.

He nay not remain the opposition though. Time will tell, anything else is just speculation.

 

[northwichcat]

But like Milliband, he is in opposition and not in a position to put his economic policies in motion.

Well the Tories decided to put Milliband's plan for a living wage in to their recent budget, as well as the Lib Dem's plan for an end to free carriage bags. As the party in power they can implement whatever they want as long as it get's voted through.

Although, today Mr Osborne forgot that a minimum wage was already introduced in 1998

:roll:

 

[Domh245]

Don't forget that his first PMQs is in 19 minutes for anyone able to watch it. May well be interesting to see what Corbyn says, and also how Cameron responds

 

[Senex]

I agree. I don't understand how a man not singing the national anthem (FWIW, the only national anthem in the world to celebrate an unelected leader, aside from North Korea's anthem, but I digress...) could be considered to have insulted veterans and the war dead? He did not sing the national anthem, presumably because he doesn't agree with the words and sentiment of said anthem. He is absolutely entitled to that opinion, and in some regards I do admire him for not "selling out" and singing along just to please some corners of the media.

FWIW, I refuse to sing that national anthem, perhaps partly for the same reason as Mr Corbyn, and also it's an anthem that I do not recognise as being my own, with my identity being Scottish and not British (I'm not trying to derail the topic here, just explaining my personal views on the anthem).

Me too. I'm no admirer of Corbyn or his politics but on this issue I admire his sticking to his principles despite the inevitable royalist media stoked-up fuss. I too do not sing this royal -- not national -- anthem and do not recognise it as my own, though from the point of view of one who sees himself as English and not British.

 

[Domh245]

Although, today Mr Osborne forgot that a minimum wage was already introduced in 1998

"New national minimum wage"
not
"national minimum wage"

What you are saying is similar to dismissing the 377/6s as being not new trains because the 375/3s came out in 2001

 

[northwichcat]

"New national minimum wage"
not
"national minimum wage"

I'm sure it was supposed to say new national living wage.

What you are saying is similar to dismissing the 377/6s as being not new trains because the 375/3s came out in 2001

No it's similar to dismissing a 3 car 172 being a different train to a 2 car 172. The minimum wage has been increased most if not all years since being introduced.

 

[Domh245]

Fairly sure he did mean minimum wage, it just so happens that the new minimum wage is going to be set as the living wage. A minimum wage is exactly that, a minimum. The living wage isn't a legally enforceable minimum, more a reflection of the price of living.

I'll give you that analogy though, I've always sucked at analogies!

As for Corbyn's performance in PMQs, I thought he did quite well, but as the BBC correspondent pointed out, he didn't pressure Cameron as much as he could have, but he has got a few years yet to polish up this performance.

 

[northwichcat]

As for Corbyn's performance in PMQs, I thought he did quite well, but as the BBC correspondent pointed out, he didn't pressure Cameron as much as he could have, but he has got a few years yet to polish up this performance.

There was a clever seating arrangement by Cameron today when the camera was focused on him it picked up 16 other MPs- 6 male and 1 female on the front row and 7 female and 3 male on the second row to give a roughly equal male/female mix.