Topic: The Labour Party (*)

[So… Howard Philips]

But without the Blairite word "New" in the title. National is a good socialist word.

Careful now.

[TepidT2O]

Corbyn has fucked up again.

Falsely claiming 500000 primary school kids are in class sizes of 36 or over.

He's got his figures mixed up, and that's the number for kids in classes between 31 and 34 kids.

None of this makes anyone more confident that he's competent.  He needs to be briefed properly and prepare properly.

He should be talking about labours record.  He should be talking about their commitment to classes not being over 30.  He should be talking about labours success in education.

Why does he not talk about their record here ?

Bizarre.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39662598

[Banquo's Ghost]

He should be talking about labours record.  He should be talking about their commitment to classes not being over 30.  He should be talking about labours success in education.

Why does he not talk about their record here ?

You mean Tony Blair's record? The one we achieved in government?

In its 1997 election manifesto, the Labour Party pledged to cut class sizes to 30 or under for 5, 6 and 7 year-olds. This was one of the five key pledges that featured on Labour's "pledge cards". After its election the Government put this requirement on a statutory footing: Clause 1 of the Schools Standards and Framework Act 1998 placed a duty on Local Education Authorities (LEAs) and schools to restrict class sizes to 30 in Key Stage One classes from September 2002.

This date was subsequently brought forward to September 2001, when it was clear that it would be met. During the 2001 general election campaign, the Liberal Democrats pledged to cut primary school classes to 25 or less, but the success of the class size initiative to that time was widely viewed to Labour's credit, with clear public demands for more action limited.

http://www.politics.co.uk/reference/class-sizes

[TepidT2O]

Yep.

The party's proud record on class sizes.  The one that Tory cuts have damaaged.

Why doesn't he talk about it?!

[Alan_X]

Corbyn has fucked up again.

Falsely claiming 500000 primary school kids are in class sizes of 36 or over.

He's got his figures mixed up, and that's the number for kids in classes between 31 and 34 kids.

None of this makes anyone more confident that he's competent.  He needs to be briefed properly and prepare properly.

He should be talking about labours record.  He should be talking about their commitment to classes not being over 30.  He should be talking about labours success in education.

Why does he not talk about their record here ?

Bizarre.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39662598

These are the figures:

Exceptional circumstances

Government rules say no infant school child should be taught in a class size greater than 30 - that's children in Key Stage 1 who are aged five to seven.

That rule can be waived in exceptional circumstances - usually if twins or siblings are admitted to the school, or a child in care has to be given a place.

The official school census for 2016 shows that more than half of Key Stage 1 classes with one teacher have either 29 or 30 pupils in them. Of the infant classes with more than 30 pupils, roughly 95% have 31 or 32 pupils. Classes with more than 32 children in them are uncommon.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-39666686

I just don't understand the point. Be honest, be a party of hope for fucks sake. 'Crammed like sardines' is evocative but when it doesn't match reality it makes you look unreliable at best or a liar at worst.

[Banquo's Ghost]

Yep.

The party's proud record on class sizes.  The one that Tory cuts have damaaged.

Why doesn't he talk about it?!

I'm really not the person to answer that. Considering a lot of the schools initiative was also paid for by the £5bn windfall tax I referenced earlier, I would have thought successfully redistributing the ill-gotten gains of corporate fat cats via taxation policy towards the education of the young thus enhancing their life opportunities might, just might, pass muster with even a far left socialist. But apparently not because Blair something something.

[TepidT2O]

Worth noting that for academies and free schools these rules don't apply, that's now a lot of schools.

[redmark]

Yep.

The party's proud record on class sizes.  The one that Tory cuts have damaaged.

Why doesn't he talk about it?!

Because it was implemented by a Labour leadership he didn't support, who he believes should be in prison for war crimes, and it's a subject he showed virtually no interest in for the first 30-odd years of his political career so might not even be aware of it unless some researcher puts the figures in front of him.

[redmark]

Very similar to new deal then?

Very similar to 'Lifelong Learning' programmes under the old Training and Enterprise Councils Major's government setup (out of the older Manpower Services Commission). Underfunded and ineffective certainly, but the idea has been there for a very long time.

[Banquo's Ghost]

I should add that I think it's a very good attack vector. Most parents outside the independent sector have been worried about under-resourcing in their schools under these Tories. It's a really vulnerable spot for the government.

But you have to get the attack spot on correct, make the message laser sharp, and ideally, highlight how much a Labour government did to remove all those worries parents suffer under now. Should be an open goal, education.

[redmark]

I should add that I think it's a very good attack vector. Most parents outside the independent sector have been worried about under-resourcing in their schools under these Tories. It's a really vulnerable spot for the government.

But you have to get the attack spot on correct, make the message laser sharp, and ideally, highlight how much a Labour government did to remove all those worries parents suffer under now. Should be an open goal, education.

There doesn't seem to be the widespread concern over education that there was before 1997, which made 'Education, Education, Education' such a powerful message.

I'm not sure there's sufficient public awareness on any of the issues that naturally play well for Labour; unless the party itself can generate it with a really energetic, effective campaign. And that's been the real concern about Corbyn for two years now. There's still no broad, coherent narrative.

[Alan_X]

I should add that I think it's a very good attack vector. Most parents outside the independent sector have been worried about under-resourcing in their schools under these Tories. It's a really vulnerable spot for the government.

But you have to get the attack spot on correct, make the message laser sharp, and ideally, highlight how much a Labour government did to remove all those worries parents suffer under now. Should be an open goal, education.

You'd think Labour of all parties would be wary of accuracy:

http://newhistories.group.shef.ac.uk/wordpress/wordpress/the-1992-election-the-nhs-and-the-%E2%80%98war-of-jennifer%E2%80%99s-ear%E2%80%99/

[redmark]

You'd think Labour of all parties would be wary of accuracy:

http://newhistories.group.shef.ac.uk/wordpress/wordpress/the-1992-election-the-nhs-and-the-%E2%80%98war-of-jennifer%E2%80%99s-ear%E2%80%99/

And that's when the party employed real researchers. Now some student mates of Jezza pick up on reports from the Canary.

[TepidT2O]

This should make everyone laugh

[filopastry]

I fully agree Labour need to go after the Tories on education, but on the class size issue they need to be slightly careful it doesn't turn into the argument that classes are getting bigger because of immigration, which handily loops back into Brexit again for the Tories.

In the mind of a more simplistic voter, remove freedom of movement, remove the problem.

[Banquo's Ghost]

I fully agree Labour need to go after the Tories on education, but on the class size issue they need to be slightly careful it doesn't turn into the argument that classes are getting bigger because of immigration, which handily loops back into Brexit again for the Tories.

In the mind of a more simplistic voter, remove freedom of movement, remove the problem.

Perhaps, but we need to stop being afraid of the issue. Labour needs to change the narrative - it''s not immigration (which Prime Minister, you and the Tory party have signally failed to control anyway) but the massive cuts you keep making to all the public services. And what for? Austerity has failed. Let's invest in all our people, and make education, the NHS and public services fit for purpose. It's not hard-working immigrants that make our public services fail, it's the Tory cuts.

We need to stop fighting on their ground and apologising for things. Tell the voter how much better it can be for all, if we all hang together rather than letting the Tories scare us into hanging separately. There most certainly is something called society.

Oh, and then cost it properly, showing how tax revenues rise when investment drives a better economy etc. Perhaps have a shadow chancellor that looks like they can count past twenty without taking their shoes and socks off.

[oldfordie]

The Torys record over the last 7 yrs has been abysmal. the NHS, welfare and education are very important but if you want to beat the Torys then a more important message has to be hammered home..
The Torys will once again say vote Tory for stability, you can trust the Torys with the economy, Labour will bring chaos. rightly or wrongly, voters believe it as Labour don't take a unified stand fighting this.
 Corbyn has a habit of rambling on, important points are made in a couple of words and he moves on  to other issues and the most important point of all is lost in a long speech. this is the time to hammer the Torys handling of the economy, their pathetic record on debt, hammer the debt, hammer the difference between the deficit and the national debt, 7yrs of crippling cuts and all they've done is reduce this months credit card bill while the debt itself has grown into a monster.  the Torys have no right to claim voters can to trust them with the economy. their record speaks for itself,  they've put the country into underrepresented debt over the last 7yrs, no other government has been worse with the economy than this government. he cant make this point in one sentence, he has to educate the public, hammer it till people start questioning the fallacy of the Torys safe pair of hands argument.
A vote for the Torys is a vote for 7 more yrs of chaos and a out of control crippling debt.

[Alan_X]

I don't see how that works as a simple message when Labour's key economic proposal is 350bn of public borrowing for infrastructure projects.

Edit - and I'd be wary if overdoing the hyperbole. Corbyn is a big fan of hyperbole but it loses effectiveness if it's overused. The economy has stagnated but it's not in 'chaos' and the debt isn't 'crippling'. 

I've said before that catastrophising everything doesn't work. If your argument is that Tory governments are a disaster and neo-liberal Blairism is just as bad, that accounts for the last 50-odd years of recent political history. And like it or not we're one of the largest economies in the world with a high standard of living. The problem is unfairness and the 'sink-or-swim' c*ntishness of the Thatcherite Tory Party.

Some people's lives are shit but it's no good telling everyone their lives are shit.

[oldfordie]

I don't see how that works as a simple message when Labour's key economic proposal is 350bn of public borrowing for infrastructure projects.

Edit - and I'd be wary if overdoing the hyperbole. Corbyn is a big fan of hyperbole but it loses effectiveness if it's overused. The economy has stagnated but it's not in 'chaos' and the debt isn't 'crippling'. 

I've said before that catastrophising everything doesn't work. If your argument is that Tory governments are a disaster and neo-liberal Blairism is just as bad, that accounts for the last 50-odd years of recent political history. And like it or not we're one of the largest economies in the world with a high standard of living. The problem is unfairness and the 'sink-or-swim' c*ntishness of the Thatcherite Tory Party.

Some people's lives are shit but it's no good telling everyone their lives are shit.

Right or wrong doesnt come into it. your trying to win over the voters who say, "if I haven't got a pound in my pocket to buy a pint" it's the image Labour have with the electorate that makes some voters vote Tory. they Trust the Torys with the economy.
I dont know how you can say the debt is not crippling if Labour lost a GE over creating a debt of £750 bill when the Torys have nearly trebled that debt to £1.9 trillion. if voters thought it was a crippling debt in 2010 then they will believe it's a monster now.
We know the Torys tactics will be the same as always, they win the votes that decide elections by scaring voters into not voting Labour,  Corbyn will have to justify his policys not matter what, the Torys will throw the same points at him as they do at all Labour leaders. you want to spend spend your way out of trouble. take a stand on the issue and open voters eyes. it really doesn't matter who is leader, now is the time to hit back as their record over the last 7 yrs is a fact that can be shown to the country.
It's about turning this debt issue on it's head.
This is about destroying the Torys credibility. Labours policys are another matter. how that works out is a matter of opinion with voters. the Torys record on debt is a fact.

[filopastry]

I don't see how that works as a simple message when Labour's key economic proposal is 350bn of public borrowing for infrastructure projects.

Edit - and I'd be wary if overdoing the hyperbole. Corbyn is a big fan of hyperbole but it loses effectiveness if it's overused. The economy has stagnated but it's not in 'chaos' and the debt isn't 'crippling'. 

I've said before that catastrophising everything doesn't work. If your argument is that Tory governments are a disaster and neo-liberal Blairism is just as bad, that accounts for the last 50-odd years of recent political history. And like it or not we're one of the largest economies in the world with a high standard of living. The problem is unfairness and the 'sink-or-swim' c*ntishness of the Thatcherite Tory Party.

Some people's lives are shit but it's no good telling everyone their lives are shit.

Very true with regards to hyperbole, on areas like the NHS Labour has often tended to be guilty of it.

Every election we seem to get the call that we have to have a Labour government to save the NHS, and yet while I think we all know the Tories are truly shit for the NHS, as far as Joe Public is concerned it hasn't disappeared any previous time the Tories have been in power, and they've been in power quite a bit.

[filopastry]

An interesting piece on the manifesto from the FT

https://www.ft.com/content/9b58c4f4-277e-11e7-8995-c35d0a61e61a

Andrew Fisher certainly seems an odd choice to put it together.

[TepidT2O]

An interesting piece on the manifesto from the FT

https://www.ft.com/content/9b58c4f4-277e-11e7-8995-c35d0a61e61a

Andrew Fisher certainly seems an odd choice to put it together.

I remember him!  My god, he's writing the manifesto..

God help us.

[classycarra]

I remember him!  My god, he's writing the manifesto..

God help us.

Well at least using the tag line "The Tories are the real extremists" was ruled out at NEC.

The suggestion of which is consistent with Alan's point about how prone they are to hyperbole and exaggeration.

That's without mentioning how ridiculously stupid and unprofessional it is to emphasise and affirm Corbyn's support of both extremism and extremists, while campaigning (supposedly) for him to become PM. Can't believe these idiots get public funding, that's a joke really.

[CornerFlag]

Eeeeeeeeeh.  I'm fine with it, doesn't push me to go vote Team Corbyn though.



From David Prescott's Twitter.

[classycarra]

Eeeeeeeeeh.  I'm fine with it, doesn't push me to go vote Team Corbyn though.



From David Prescott's Twitter.

Why are Corbyn's media team comparing our public holiday's with EU members? They wanted us to leave that group, strange for them to now hold them up as an example.

Also, who cares how many public holidays other countries have - I'm fine with France celebrating Bastille Day, while we work - what matters more is statutory holiday entitlement. We don't lack compared to others (worldwide, and even EU) on that front, as I recall

P.S. bit worried seeing Corbyn's media team are setting an aim to 'bring our four nations together'. More concerned for the Union than ever now

[filopastry]

I think I'm right in saying that in most EU countries if your bank holiday falls on a weekend then the benefit doesn't get moved to the nearest weekday, so they aren't quite as generous as they appear.

[killer-heels]

What a shit idea.

[classycarra]

What a shit idea.

Could have been jumbled together in a pub last night by Seumus and Jeremy.

'What platitudes can we offer? What does everyone like?'
'Well Seumus, I like weekday lie ins and to take days off when I've had to spend a few hours working on a Sunday - anything in there?'
'Well they've called last orders so fuck it. Let's just promise more public holidays, and tell people they deserve it'
'Yeah fine, whatever. Just make sure you refer to people as 'workers''

[Danny55]

Eeeeeeeeeh.  I'm fine with it, doesn't push me to go vote Team Corbyn though.



From David Prescott's Twitter.

The far right have been wanting St George's Day off for years. Votes in the bag.

[SP]

March, April and November are shit months for Bank Holidays. The weather is likely to be shite.

We would end up with 5 public holidays in March and April when you add in Easter.

Either this comes out of annual leave, so the net effect is that many workers lose flexibility on 4 days off, or it is additional time off.

260 working  days in the year. Less 20 days leave. Less 8 bank holidays. 232 days. 4 days off is nearly 2% of time. Who pays for that? 

[The Gulleysucker]

Could have been jumbled together in a pub last night by Seumus and Jeremy.

Unlikely, Seumus was photographed drinking champagne in a bar with Len last night.

[classycarra]

Unlikely, Seumus was photographed drinking champagne in a bar with Len last night.

My mistake! Good to know the man responsible for Labour's anti-establishment 'we're all poor pathetic outsider puppy dogs' messaging tactics was making himself busy drinking thousands of pounds worth of (minimum £50) bottles of champagne celebrating his colleague's partners victory

[killer-heels]

Unsurprisingly Owen Jones thinks its a good idea. Normally the rule is if Owen Jones endorses it, you stay well clear.

[Zeb]

Went round the People's History Museum yesterday. Just looking at the posters from previous elections. "Britain Deserves Better", "You Know Labour Government Works", "And Now - Win The Peace". I'm not sure that wordy memes next to a picture of Jeremy's head are going to do the heavy lifting required.

[Banquo's Ghost]

I didn't think I could despair much further, but really.

The first Sunday of the campaign, with the opportunity to get into the papers that people actually read, and get a headline to set the tone of next couple of weeks, maybe change the narrative and inspire the fight, and Labour announces: four new bank holidays.

Jesus wept.

[Red-Soldier]

That promise is really going to improve their credibility

 

[classycarra]

Unsurprisingly Owen Jones thinks its a good idea. Normally the rule is if Owen Jones endorses it, you stay well clear.

His credibility as a commentator is completely gone these days. He invested too much cheerleading Corbyn, he's now permanently stuck in rationalisation mode.

He thinks the bank holiday proposal is "really good", because "it's patriotic and pro worker". For me, that's an almost perfect illustration of a feature of a lot of people on the left wing - a total lack of understanding of people, coupled with an overconfidence and an over eagerness to speak for them.

As SP points out above, the proposal would most likely just mean that people lost the flexibility to be able to allocate four of their holiday days. That is not good for 'workers'. But they're so reticent to actually think up decent policies, or even research evidence bases. Couple that with misplaced arrogance that because they're left wing they understand 'the workers' and you get stupidity like this. It's simply that they are just the most eager to generalise large swathes of people, and contemptuous enough to think they speak for 'te workers' or the ' working class' without bothering to consult any of them.

Most 'workers' are capable of thinking things through and making rational decisions of their own - few people would think 'it's great that I now have to take St George's day off because patriotism'. That he thinks it being patriotic and therefore good enough to pull the wool over the eyes of the masses, distracting that it leaves them in a worse position holiday-wise, makes it even more contemptuous.

[killer-heels]

Normally I find that when Easter falls in March that the last thing I want is more bank holidays as its usually a distraction from a busy period at work as well as the weather normally being shite. I know having mire time off could help lots of people of different circumstances but its silly to say this policy is good for workers.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

Unsurprisingly Owen Jones thinks its a good idea. Normally the rule is if Owen Jones endorses it, you stay well clear.

owen jones is an arse faced weasel. or a weasel faced arse.

260 working  days in the year. Less 20 days leave. Less 8 bank holidays. 232 days. 4 days off is nearly 2% of time. Who pays for that? 

the nasty people who make all the money that's who!

I think pissing off the private sector is part of his plan, hopefully long term this won't be stuck to the labour party's reputation as being totally idiotic to the business sector

Normally I find that when Easter falls in March that the last thing I want is more bank holidays as its usually a distraction from a busy period at work as well as the weather normally being shite. I know having mire time off could help lots of people of different circumstances but its silly to say this policy is good for workers.

At my work we can choose to work a bank holiday or get lieu time, if this comes out of the regular entitlement this would have zero impact on anyone at my place. But if it's extra it's pretty good for me as I get to take more time off in the summer

[killer-heels]

Corbyn has one interview with Marr and the next headline to come through on my news feed is 'Corbyn would not authorise the killing of ISIS leader'.

To be fair to say he said it would be helpful that the ISIS leader wasnt around but its a shite way to answer the question. Just emphasise that you would authorise a strike on the ISIS leader, dont get on your soap box over the pros and cons of drone strikes.