OutByEaster? Posted July 26, 2021 Moderator Share Posted July 26, 2021 It's a step in the right direction I think, or at the very least it's a step in a direction, or at least it's a signal of an intent to step in a direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted July 26, 2021 Moderator Share Posted July 26, 2021 3 hours ago, OutByEaster? said: It's an interesting one that, I work in hospitality, an industry that employs thousands of young people on a temporary and hourly paid basis, I think you'd be surprised how many big companies now pay the full adult NMW to under 18's simply because it's cheaper to process everyone at the same rate than try to run two payrolls and having to move people between bands as they hit eighteen. Yep, even an SME like the one I work for doesn't discriminate on age, it's too much of a pain in the arse. If a shift is worth X amount, its worth that whoever does it. Our call centre staff payscales are based on a price per hour over three bands depending on the unsocial nature of that hour. The daytime staff earn just over min wage, then there's an evening rate and a night rate. The evening and the night rates are well above min wage up to about £12/hr I think 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrenm Posted July 27, 2021 Share Posted July 27, 2021 Pretty in depth and seemingly well researched piece about what happened behind the scenes around Corbyn's suspension https://novaramedia.com/2021/07/27/heres-what-really-happened-when-starmer-suspended-corbyn/ Quote As it happened, nothing in the content of the EHRC report gave Starmer cause to escalate his purge. It retrospectively identified various problems with Labour’s disciplinary process, but responsibility for these faults lay with two rightwing former officials – general secretary Iain McNicol and head of disputes Sam Matthews – whereas Corbyn’s allies had largely fixed them. The EHRC also noted that, under Corbyn, the leader of the opposition’s office (LOTO) had “interfered” in a small number of antisemitism complaints cases; but it conceded that the aim of such interference was to speed up processing times and hand down harsher penalties. The pretext for Corbyn’s suspension would therefore have to be his reaction to the EHRC’s findings. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jareth Posted July 30, 2021 Share Posted July 30, 2021 MPs enjoy free tickets worth £100k during Covid large event pilots Exclusive: two ministers and Keir Starmer among those accepting gifts from gambling, drinks and sports firms https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jul/30/mps-enjoy-free-tickets-worth-100k-during-covid-large-event-pilots Jonathan Ashworth also getting involved. Why exactly do they accept these things? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted July 30, 2021 Moderator Share Posted July 30, 2021 54 minutes ago, Jareth said: MPs enjoy free tickets worth £100k during Covid large event pilots Exclusive: two ministers and Keir Starmer among those accepting gifts from gambling, drinks and sports firms https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jul/30/mps-enjoy-free-tickets-worth-100k-during-covid-large-event-pilots Jonathan Ashworth also getting involved. Why exactly do they accept these things? So are you saying Starmer and Ashworth shouldn’t accept these tickets? Is the Fa and the PL considered evil then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted July 30, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted July 30, 2021 Love this thread, brings back memories of a decent opposition party. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted July 30, 2021 Share Posted July 30, 2021 On 22/07/2021 at 07:33, TreeVillan said: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-mp-used-connections-jump-24585975?utm_source=linkCopy&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar Labour MP used her connections to 'jump the queue' and get a studio flat, court hears Jurors were told the MP for Poplar and Limehouse Apsana Begum, 31, defrauded Tower Hamlets council for housing benefit and allege it cost £63,928 between the three periods. Begum has been found not guilty on all counts in regards to this case today. I have to say, I do have some questions about this case, in particular: the case was not brought by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) but by the London Borough of Tower Hamlets (LBTH). This is not in itself that unusual; other statutory bodies can bring prosecutions. But I want to know whether there is some conflict of interest here. Note this from her statement after the verdict (https://twitter.com/ApsanaBegumMP/status/1421117482102890508 ) : 'As a survivor of domestic abuse facing these vexatious charges, the last 18 months of false accusations, online sexist, racist and Islamophobic abuse, and threats to my safety, have been exceedingly difficult.' (emphasis in all quotes mine) So she reports being a survivor of domestic abuse. But who are the alleged abusers? 'Ms. Begum states that she has reported two different cases of domestic violence to the police. The first time was in May 2013 when she reported her brother’s “controlling behaviour”. In November 2016 she reported to the police that her ex-husband, Cllr. Haque, had been following her from work in his car after “constantly calling and texting saying he loved her and missed her”.' (from: https://www.eastendenquirer.org/2021/07/fraud-trial-of-poplar-and-limehouse-labour-mp-apsana-begum-begins/) Her ex-husband, Councillor Haque, is one of those accused. What does he do? 'Councillor Ehtasham Haque [...] Committee appointments Council (Member)Blackwall & Cubitt Town Ward Housing & Regeneration Scrutiny Sub Committee (Chair)Blackwall & Cubitt Town Ward Overview & Scrutiny Committee (Member)Scrutiny Lead for Housing and Regeneration' (from: https://democracy.towerhamlets.gov.uk/mgUserInfo.aspx?UID=4122) So he's the chair of the housing subcommittee of LBTH council. Is there a conflict of interest here? Because it's not like the angry ex-husband's family are irrelevant to the story: 'The court was told that allegations of housing fraud against Ms. Begum were first made by her ex-husband’s brother-in-law in 2019 and this led to the prosecution.' (back to: https://www.eastendenquirer.org/2021/07/fraud-trial-of-poplar-and-limehouse-labour-mp-apsana-begum-begins/) Seems to me like this should have been a CPS case. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted July 30, 2021 Share Posted July 30, 2021 22 minutes ago, bickster said: So are you saying Starmer and Ashworth shouldn’t accept these tickets? Is the Fa and the PL considered evil then? I don't think this is a massive story, really, but the issue is obviously not that the events are 'considered evil' but that the companies paying for the tickets may want or expect support on matters in the future from those who attend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted July 30, 2021 Moderator Share Posted July 30, 2021 4 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: I don't think this is a massive story, really, but the issue is obviously not that the events are 'considered evil' but that the companies paying for the tickets may want or expect support on matters in the future from those who attend. The “companies” were the FA and the PL in the cases of Starmer and Ashworth. Its not a story at all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted July 30, 2021 Share Posted July 30, 2021 2 minutes ago, bickster said: The “companies” were the FA and the PL in the cases of Starmer and Ashworth. Its not a story at all A thing that has happened in the last year is that you, me, and pretty much everyone else on both the left and centre of British politics has (correctly) pointed out 'Tory corruption'. If we imagine a politics in which we accuse the Tories of corruption not just becuase it's useful, or because it's particularly blatant, but because corruption is really bad and we don't want it in public life, what role does the corporate freebie for Labour politicians play in that world? If they support a regulatory or legislative change that benefits the PL in the future, people can and will accuse them of corruptly accepting these freebies in exchange for those changes. Or, alternatively, they may be presented by a sensible change that would benefit the PL that they may feel they need not to support, in order to avoid the perception of corruption. Basically, no good comes of accepting these freebies except their fleeting enjoyment that they could have paid for themselves; on the other hand, the downsides are more significant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jareth Posted July 30, 2021 Share Posted July 30, 2021 (edited) 45 minutes ago, bickster said: So are you saying Starmer and Ashworth shouldn’t accept these tickets? Is the Fa and the PL considered evil then? I've changed my answer. Yes they should not accept the tickets - why should they be offered them? Why should they be having a VIP great time Vs everyone else? Who do they represent? Edited July 30, 2021 by Jareth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jareth Posted July 31, 2021 Share Posted July 31, 2021 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dAVe80 Posted August 3, 2021 Share Posted August 3, 2021 A Labour MP giving interviews to The S*n? Sorry but I'll never buy the "we need to speak to people who don't support us" as an excuse for speaking to that rag. There are other ways to do it. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted August 3, 2021 Share Posted August 3, 2021 I really think that the fudged, compromise 2017 position on crime - 'we oppose Tory austerity, part of austerity has been cuts to police budgets, we would reverse those cuts and many others and part of that would be hiring more police officers' - is about as good as any Labour policy on crime can be. The options to the left and right of that both end up dividing the party's supporters. It might seem that that was a policy stance that only worked in 2017, but I note that at least one of the big policing bodies voted no confidence in the Home Secretary due to her pay freezes just a couple of weeks ago, so . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted August 5, 2021 Share Posted August 5, 2021 Starmer confirming again on camera yesterday that Labour will not be entering in to any coalitions before or after the next General Election. Meanwhile… with a poll showing the majority of people think the current government is incompetent… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted August 6, 2021 Moderator Share Posted August 6, 2021 Regular readers of my rubbish in here will realise I'm not a fan of my local MP and here's a prime example of why. Much more important to say something on Twitter rather than you know, actually call 999 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted August 14, 2021 Moderator Share Posted August 14, 2021 Ken Loach has been expelled from the Party. Starmer might at least have the honesty to change the name of the party so as not to confuse voters into thinking they're voting Labour. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted August 14, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted August 14, 2021 Meanwhile The wrong type of Jews, of course. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted August 14, 2021 Moderator Share Posted August 14, 2021 26 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: Starmer might at least have the honesty to change the name of the party so as not to confuse voters into thinking they're voting Labour. The Labour Party under the previous leader was not the Labour Party of at least the last 50 years, in that sense Starmer is actually returning the party to its traditional position. Loach's comments on the matter are pure cliche. The only word that's missing from what he said was Stalinism We do however have the words purge, clique, expulsion, witch hunt, solidarity, victim, comrades.... What he hasn't said was that it was the obvious consequence of a decision he was forced to make I'm presuming this is about Loach being a member / supporter of one or more of the 4 orgs that Labour recently decided were not compatible with the Party. He was therefore presumably asked to disassociate himself from those orgs and refused. He knew when he made that decision what the consequences of that choice were. That is obviously his choice and the correct decision for him, if those orgs are more important to him than the party itself, he's made the right decision. Given that though, it is rather that he expelled himself and his comments are wholly disengenuous. Bloke walks into a shop with 50p, he can only afford either a Mars Bar or a Marathon, he chose Mars Bar then moaned to everyone the shop keeper wouldn't give him the Marathon too 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted August 14, 2021 Share Posted August 14, 2021 I hate him so **** much 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts